Normalising brutality….. because of war

You have heard all of the comments defending Israeli government.

It is either the nonsensical self-defense argument, even though IDF clearly targets unarmed civilians and aid workers, or the belief that all Palestinians are animals who deserved to be wiped out from the face to earth. Yadda yadda yadda, they are disturbing as they are old and predictable.

On some occasions, people defend the brutality because they believe it is a wartime necessity, something which we won’t understand if we have never endured wars ourselves.

Now, for the sake of the argument, I am going to pretend there is no genocide and what is happening between Israel and Palestine is indeed a war, an armed conflict in which both sides are on an equal plane.

The argument still doesn’t make any sense. If anything, it makes zionists sound even more disturbed.

For mentally sound minds, the violent and dehumanising effects of armed conflicts genuinely terrify us; they compel us to avoid armed conflicts as much as possible, to not escalate already-existing conflicts.

But, not to those particular zionists. They think those tendencies should be justifiable in a wartime, as if they are already normal inside their heads.

They insinuate a wartime is a perfectly acceptable living condition, a living condition equals to peacetime. They insinuate hating on wars is the same as hating people for loving pineapple pizza. For them, it is just a matter of trivial differences.

No, I am not reaching with my observation.

Understanding why people behave the way they do is one thing. Supporting them is another.

If it is truly about understanding them, you would objectively enunciate the explanations, without trying to put a positive spin or argue for the moral necessity. You wouldn’t side with those bloodthirsty warmongers. You wouldn’t take offense when they get themselves rightfully condemned.

I shouldn’t be surprised by this. As a group, zionists – especially the non-Israeli ones – often overlap with neoconservatives. Ones I have interacted with are supportive of America’s violent and warmongering foreign policies.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Dumb reasons to have kids

Some people have kids because they want to experience the joy of raising fellow human beings, others have kids because they want to have human properties to exploit. A good reason and a vile reason to have kids.

Then, there are also the dumb reasons.

People believe having kids is good for our legacy, our country’s development and, most importantly, mankind’s survival. And yes, I think they are dumb reasons.

Let’s start with legacy. We have children, our children have children, their children have children…. and repeat until our genes outlive our children’s children. Okay, then what?

Does it improve our current quality of life? Does it improve our current physical and mental well-being? Obviously, the answer is to both is NO.

You are so enamored by the idea of legacy, you mistakenly see it as a basic human need; you mistakenly believe it is just as important as eating and breathing.

It also doesn’t make sense. If you are all about leaving legacy, why do you choose genes? Not only they won’t make people remember you, they will also be “diluted” with others’s anyway. Surely, being a historically significant individual leaves more visible and lasting legacy. You are going to be remembered for a long time, regardless whether you have passed your genes or not.

If that’s your goal, you should focus on being extremely highly accomplished. You can be a statesman, a mass murderer… or both.

As an Indonesian, I find the idea of having more people can help developing our society is laughably overtly-simplistic. Indonesia is an extremely populous country. The most populous in Southeast Asia and the Muslim world, the fourth most in the entire world.

But, while it does have progresses, no one thinks it is a highly-developed country; it is still a developing one. In fact, in this regard, Indonesia is defeated by Singapore, a country which population size is about 3% of Indonesia’s (I hope I get my math right), which area size is only slightly bigger than Jakarta’s. Even Malaysia and Brunei, other smaller Southeast Asian countries, are more developed. In fact, there are many other countries on earth which have less people than Indonesia and “somehow” are more developed than it.

That’s because it is a matter of quality, NOT just quantity. Those other countries have higher quality human resources. What’s the point of having lots of people when they are poorly-educated and poorly-skilled? If anything, such arrangement can be burdensome.

And that segues to the topic of humanity’s survival.

Because of our ability to transform and exploit nature to fulfill our needs, many of us forget or refuse to accept that we are a part of nature, NOT above it. If we hurt nature, we hurt ourselves.

Let pollution ravages and the water will be too dangerous to drink, the air will be too dangerous to breathe in. Destroy the biodiversity and we will make our food supply even more vulnerable, which can negatively impact our health.

Nature can exist without us. But, we cannot exist without it.

If we let our fellow human beings to be environmentally destructive apes, our populousness would actually threaten mankind’s survival. Once again, it is not just the quantity of the humans, it is also about their quality.

Unlike the people who procreate because they want to have children as assets, those with aforementioned reasons are not driven by malice.

But, because they think too highly of their overtly-simplistic “thinking”, they are still infuriating to deal with.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Some notes for my fellow non-Jewish critics of Israel

Let’s start with these questions:

Why do you hate the Israeli government?

Is it because of it commits human rights violations seemingly without repercussions and it just happens to be Jewish?

Is it because you believe it is the worst, if not only, human rights-violating government on earth?

Or is it simply because you hate anything Jewish?

.

.

For me, there is nothing wrong about being emotional attached to certain issues.

In the case of Israel-Palestine, you may be of Palestinian descent or know someone who is, you may be a Jewish person who is horrified by atrocities done under your name…. or you may be someone who is angered by Israel’s impunity on the world stage.

It becomes a problem when you start acting like this is the only issue that matters… or when you believe Israeli government and its allies are the only evil governments in existence…… or, this is unfortunately common among my fellow Muslims, when you believe your fellow believers are free from problems (and the ones that exist were created by Mossad).

Of course, those are bullshits.

Other issues are just as important (no, we cannot quantitatively measure importance), other governments have also committed evil… and yes, the Muslim world has problems, many of which are partially or entirely faults.

You use this opportunity to virtue signal on the world stage AND to avert the global attention from your degenerate fellow Muslims.

And now, about the Jewish people themselves.

We must remember two things: Israel is the only Jewish-majority country on earth and anti-semitism is a disturbingly global phenomenon.

While you can criticise zionist Jews for their uncritical and zealous support of the government, can you really blame them for having emotional attachments to the only country on earth where they are not a marginalised minority, vulnerable to discriminations and pogroms?

Unless your cultural and religious identities are as demonised and marginalised as the Jewish ones, it is so easy for you to dismiss zionist Jews’ emotional attachment to the world’s only Jewish state.

Like you, I am also infuriated by some zionists’ use of the anti-semitism card, who think humanisation of Palestinians is anti-semitic. They are psychotic virtue signalers who will do anything to smear people who dare to not loving their favourite country.

But, I am not going to pretend some of my fellow anti-zionists are any better.

You cannot hide forever. If your anti-Israel sentiment is driven by anti-semitism, you can only hide under the guise of human rights for a while. Sooner or later, your true colours will inevitably escape the facade and you will start spewing remarks like “Hitler was right after all”.

If you are not anti-semitic, you would never think Israel is what Jewishness and Judaism are all about….. and you would never think ALL Jews are responsible for the Israeli government’s action, not even for a second.

You would also acknowledge that many zionists are not Jewish… and many anti-zionists are Jewish.

And no, there is nothing logical about anti-semitism. If you think demonising all Jews helps fighting Israel, does that mean you accept the only way to fight Islamic extremism is to demonise all Muslims?

Considering many of you are my fellow Muslims….. of course not, you fucking dolts!

My point is, I want you to fuck off.

There are people who genuinely care about the Palestinian causes and we are continuously frustrated about getting slandered as terrorism-sympathising anti-semites by those virtue-signaling blood-thirsty cunts.

Because you claim to be one of us, you douse the most incendiary fuel onto their fire of fanaticism. You are making those cretins even more fanatical. You are giving them more excuses to slander us.

Palestinians are already having a hard time getting global support and, thanks to your selfish virtue signaling, you are making it even fucking harder for them.

In fact, I would not be surprised if any of you turn out to be zionists’ plants.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

“They live rent-free in your heads!”

There are times when supporters of certain politicians love to mock the detractors as obsessive haters who let those politicians living rent-free in their heads. It is interesting they choose such mockery because it doesn’t discredit us, the haters, it only discredit them, the supporters.

It shows how they know nothing about how life works.

Here’s the thing about the life: it is all about interconnectedness and nothing lives in a vacuum. You influence other people’s lives and they influence yours; depending on your statuses, there may be power imbalances.

If you are a public figure, whether it is intentional or not, you will always exert influences to the masses. Being one means there will always be people who look up to you as sources of inspirations.

If you are a politician, you exert even more influences. Not only you can establish the unwritten rules, you can also establish the written ones.

Unlike the unwritten ones, the written rules are official and the existence of the alternatives are strictly prohibited; unless you are wealthy, powerful and/or well-connected, you can never evade them.

Basically, not only “letting politicians live-rent free in our heads” is very much reasonable, using that insult is an admission of what kind person you are: a personality so childish, you still think politics is just a harmless and fun game.

If that is not the case, you insinuate your idols’ ability to exert influences is almost non-existent, to the point where they are just as influential as Z-list celebrities, if not less.

You insinuate they are nobodies, too irrelevant to have “haters”.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

How you – a member of the privileged majority – should treat the minorities

*puts on a mask*

First thing first, simply refuting extreme claims about bigotry in your country is not enough. You should completely deny that it ever exists!

Why? Because, if you want something to come true, all you have to do is to believe! The more you believe your country is bigotry-free, the more likely it will be so! It is the secret!

A country is full of bigotry because we don’t enough have positive thinking!

Second, you should listen to everything what minorities have to say. But, that does not mean you should consider all of their experiences valid.

You should pick them apart, categorise them by how much they appease you. If they dare to say anything negative about your beloved country, they are the bad ones.

You can also test them and there are two ways of doing it. You can do it “nicely” by asking mean-spirited questions; they can be questions that frame them as perpetual foreigners (e.g. “where are you really from?”) or questions that perpetuate guilty by association (e.g. “why don’t you condemn Islamic extremism/Chinese Communist Party/etc.?”).

If sounding polite is too much work for you, you can test them aggressively by explicitly hurl slurs and violent threats at them.

If they react negatively towards the former, accuse them of being snowflakes who cannot handle legitimately curious questions (even though the questions are clearly made out of ill intent). With the latter, accuse them of trying to taking away your freedom of speech (even though their responses is them practicing their freedom of speech).

If they rebuke you calmly, rebuke them back for being too emotional. If they give you witty comebacks, rebuke them for being mean-spirited and even bigoted against you.

Overall, gaslight the hell out of them. Make them feel like they are the aggressors simply because they demand to be treated like human beings.

If you haven’t guessed, good minorities are those who willingly become our lap dogs, who willingly accept their fate as second-class citizens. They are willing to endure any abuse we hurl at them because they know deserve it.

It is their fault for choosing the wrong religions, ethnicities, sexualities, genders and races. It is their fault for not choosing the right ones.

You – the privileged majority – are the ones with the right labels. Therefore, not only you should feel good about your identities, you must actively tout them as the only morally upright ones.

If you have self-respect, you must behave like a supremacist.

*takes off the mask*

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Jiří Trnka’s The Hand: not falling for the other side

If it wasn’t for my Intro to Animation class, I would have never heard of this stop-motion animated masterpiece.

To summarise the plot, it tells the story of a harlequin whose impoverished yet contented life of flower pot-making is disrupted by a literal and seemingly-omnipresent hand who demands him to make hand sculptures instead, compelling him to constantly fight for his freedom. Unfortunately, near the end of the story, he dies when one of his pots accidentally fell on his head (seemingly foreshadowed by the recurring accidental pot-breaking). He is given a lavish funeral by the hand.

One can guess why I love this short film.

It is an allegory of censorship enforced under authoritarianism. It sublimely evokes the terror of living as an artist and entertainer in such condition, amplified by the fantastical elements and the atmospheric percussion-oriented soundtracks. In fact, both Wikipedia and IMDB categorise this film as horror.

Unsurprisingly, I picked The Hand as one of the animated shorts I analysed for the final essay. My writings were even abysmal then. Thankfully, I lost it. But, I remember having a great time analysing every single one of them.

While analysing it, I found two peculiarities.

First thing first, the funeral. Why would the hand hold a state funeral to a rebel? Surely, shouldn’t he be demonised as an enemy of the state in the end?

Well, I found an article (forget which one, cannot find it again) about how the USSR and its satellite states honoured their artists posthumously, regardless of how obedient or disobedient they were; the writer said even Trnka himself was given a state funeral.

As I am too lazy to do more research, I cannot confirm or debunk the article’s factual validity. But, as the hand symbolises an authoritarian government (I cannot think of any other interpretations), what the article is saying makes too much sense for me to dismiss.

This reminds me of the legendary and ideologically-dissenting director Andrei Tarkovsky (can’t stop referencing him). After his death, the Soviet authorities regretted that he died in exile. Yes, linking Trnka, a Czechoslovakian puppeteer and animator with, to Tarkovsky, a live-action Russian director who loved exploring the metaphysical aspect of humanity, is far-fetched. But, I can’t help myself.

Oh, and the hand.

At first, I noticed the hand was a left one. I assumed it represented the far-left government of Czechoslovakia. But, when I took a greater look, the hand was not always left.

Sometimes, it appears as a right one. In fact, the first hand sculpture to appear in the video depicts a right hand.  So, I quickly dumped the interpretation, dismissed it as reading too much into things. But then, I remembered the funeral scene, where the hand can be seen making a salute eerily similar to the Nazi one; I could hear my classmates’ shock.

I was more baffled than shocked, as Czechoslovakia was a communist country, not a fascist one. Due to my slowness, it took me days to realise the film criticises authoritarianism in general, not just the communist Czechoslovakian government.

The film also subtly warns us to not fall for any forms of extremism. Your suffering under a far-left government cannot morally justify your support of a far-right government… and vice versa. One form of  zealotry does not justify the other.

I write as if I grasped the thematic depth immediately. I didn’t. Back then, my mind only thought about the Far-Left vs Far-Right.  It took me years to realise how the message is also applicable to any kinds of extreme dichotomies.

Yes, I know I seem to be reading too much into things again. The nazi salute may not be one after all and I don’t know enough about different types of salutes. I also cannot prove that extreme dichotomies in general were what Trnka had in mind.

But, you have to admit: the film does not target a specific ideology. My interpretation fits really well into the narrative.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

The overtly-polished Casey Neistat style

I call it the Casey Neistat style because that’s how others call it (even though some people think the style predated him) and I don’t have an alternative name for it.

From the title, you can easily tell I am not a fan.

Okay, I am not saying I hate the aesthetic. I actually think it looks beautiful and proves every image can look pretty when captured by the right person. But, that’s also my problem with it: it looks TOO beautiful.

Before I was immersed in Youtube cultures, I had already watched arthouse films like Andrei Tarkovsky’s and Ingmar Bergman’s. They are visually stunning and narratively compelling (for me), exposing me to cinematic art works.

Also resulting in my high expectations of vloggers like Neistat.

It is already ingrained in my mind that good cinematography HAS to be accompanied by compelling stories. But, vlogs don’t tell ‘profound’ stories (mind the quotation marks), even when they showcase out of the ordinary events or the lives of perpetual travellers.

If anything, those vlogs feel pretentious. The polished cinematography seems to do nothing but overcompensating the passable narratives.

Oh, and when I said that vlogs are not narratively profound, I meant it as a compliment. Because they are supposed to narrate Youtubers’ semi-personal lives, I always expect raw and mundane storytellings; that is what I find attractive about vlogs in the first place!

I actually do enjoy some Neistat-esque vlogs, like the ones of Evan Edinger, Terry Song and Adam Neely. The difference is theirs are more stylistically restrained, allowing a greater presence of rawness and mundanity.

Thanks to its participatory nature, Youtube has opposites for almost everything. For Casey Neistat style and the likes, there are content described by Nerd City as post-ironic.

I cannot make myself enjoy the works of Youtubers like Filthy Frank, MaxMoeFoe and IDubbz (his Content Cop videos are an exception). Apart from the crassness which I find extreme (even for a relatively crass person like me), I am also anxious about the blurred lines between irony and sincerity.

But still, despite my inability to relish such content, I cannot help but respecting those creators for their unsuppressed mockery of the insincere and synthetic charm endorsed by the establishment. While I admittedly do embrace some of the establishment’s ideals, I also despise the idea of venerating them.

Thankfully, despite the increasing pressure of uniformity, the platform still has a sizeable freedom to dissent, something those employed in the ‘traditional’ media can only dream of. Therefore, almost every imaginable type of content has a place on Youtube*.

Whether it is aesthetically and thematically extreme** or middle-of-the-road, you will definitely find it.

.

.

*Obviously, there are restrictions to what can and cannot be uploaded. But, it is no secret Youtube content policing is both ineffective and misguided. ‘Lawful’ videos can get taken down and ‘unlawful’ ones stay. Supposedly, people have found porn on the site; while I do have found softcore films, I have yet found hardcore ones.

**Post-irony is extreme due to its depictions of life as an inherently ugly entity. But, I would argue overtly-polished aesthetic is also extreme for its overtly beautiful depictions of life; once one is accustomed to it, acknowledgement of the ugly reality feels taboo.

A bit of tangent here:

Andrei Tarkovsky said he utilised both colour and monochrome scenes in his films because those shot entirely in colour felt like animated paintings for him and therefore, felt ‘too beautiful’ to be realistic.

I never thought that I would reference Tarkovsky’s philosophy while discussing Youtube.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Literacy increased, thanks to the internet

Media literacy, not literacy literacy. I cannot help but noticing how prevalent it is among Millennials and Gen Z, who are arguably the biggest internet consumers.

Okay, I am not saying that we are one hundred percent literate in the media. We are not. But, compared to the older generations -who consume the internet a lot less-, we are far less easily duped by internet content.

We are more reactive to clickbaits and we have great eyes for photoshopped images. We also can get belittling and even hostile towards ‘fakeness’.

Yes, my words are anecdotal. But, the generational disparity is hard to ignore and I had been noticing this for quite a while; I was even more convinced of its existence after watching a Danny Gonzalez video, in which he doctored his own photo to make himself look like someone else and his Instagram followers immediately knew it was photoshopped. He succeeded only after an impressively-meticulous planning.

(Note: I have to mention that the much younger internet consumers are also relatively gullible. But then, it has less about their internet experiences and more about having less developed brains.)

Personally I credit our relatively high media literacy to four factors:

1. The participatory nature of internet cultures

Unlike ‘traditional’ media, the digital one allows its consumers to be its content creators as well and many embrace the opportunity.

Inevitably, many internet consumers know the behind-the-scenes process of content creation; they have learned how to doctor images, edit videos, do sound design and write scripts and/or blogs.

2. The unintentionally educational nature of certain content

Some Youtubers I have watched love to make videos about having fun with photoshopping. Those who make commentaries constantly call out deceptiveness of online content creators; sometimes, even ‘traditional’ media is not free from their ‘wrath’.

Consequentially, many of their viewers will end up becoming more vigilant for doctored images and overtly-manipulative choices of words, video editing and sound design, even without any prior experiences in said activities.

If you are a Twosetviolin viewer (or one of a similar channel), you would probably be able to detect fake musical performances in films and TV shows, even without any prior experiences in musical performances.

3. The awareness about public personas

Youtube fans are becoming more cognisant about public personas.

They know how Youtubers behave on camera do not always represent their true selves and they have learned to differentiate the masks from the true faces. The fact that some Youtubers constantly switch personas in the same videos force viewers to be attentive of the behavioural changes.

Yes, idiots who easily fall for personas still exist. But, I notice their presence has waned for the past few years.

4. The embrace of irony and post-irony

I previously said that internet consumers can be hostile towards ‘fakeness’. Well, that is not entirely accurate.

‘Enjoying things ironically’ is a thing and online, it is very widespread. It is socially acceptable to enjoy things because they are aesthetically-bad and, consequentially, some content creators love making content that is meant to be enjoyed ironically.

Scripted vlogs are one of those ironically enjoyable things.

Vlogs are meant to be unscripted accounts of the Youtubers’ lives and any scripted moments easily stand out, thanks to their glaringly plastic quality. But, as long as the creators do not claim their works to be factual, the viewers will be able to enjoy the artificiality.

Post-ironic content is as popular as the ironic one, if not more. While it still involves irony, it also thrives to blur the lines between it and sincerity, forcing the viewers to work harder to separate the two.

I was introduced to the concept of post-irony by Youtuber Nerd City, who asserted that post-ironic aesthetic on Youtube was meant to defy the saccharine and overtly-manufactured one approved by the Youtube establishment. While I was never a fan of creators like Filthy Frank due to the borderline transgressive nature of their works, I cannot help myself from holding their rebellious intent in high esteem.

So…?

Obviously, you don’t have to turn future generations into internet addicts. Schools can simply start teaching basic communication and media skills.

The problem is I don’t know which specific skills that should be taught and how they can be integrated into existing curricula. I am also unsure about the necessity of theoretical media studies in this case.

Oh, and I doubt many will acknowledge the importance of media literacy. Persuasion is also an issue.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

I support monarchism because…

*puts on a mask*

Being a monarch is a hard-earned job!

If you have to compare between a person who gets his/her high-earning and high-ranking job by working all the way from the bottom and a person who gets her/his because of his/her lineage, it is obvious the latter is hardworking one!

It is just common sense that the former is a sign of laziness and the latter is extremely hard to achieve! Most of us have never made any efforts to be born into the right families and monarchs are the only ones who have achieved such high accomplishment!

It is frustrating how this thing needs to be said in the first place!

The monarchs make me feel happy!

Who cares about the education, healthcare, economy and political stability?

The only things that matter are my feelings! The purpose of human existence is to make ME happy!

And the only ones who can make ME happy are the monarchs!

They make ME feel extremely good about the world we live in, making ME forget about how fucking shitty the world we live in!

They are literally Gods!

Nepotism is everywhere!

It has been established that the ethical and moral legitimacy of an action is determined by its popularity among the masses. Appeal to popularity is literally a principal accepted in logic and ethics!

That’s the reason why logicians and ethicists support monarchism: because it is based on nepotism and nepotism is literally everywhere!

I mean, literally every person has settled that murder and rape are ethically and morally-acceptable because of how their societal prevalence!

If we have settled that, why can’t we listen to the experts and settle that monarchism is not only acceptable but also good for our political establishments?

*takes off the mask*

 

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

How to condemn the Hong Kong protesters?

*puts on a mask*

Instead of condemning them for violence and vandalism, condemn them for the followings:

Condemn them for hating prosperity

Hong Kongers would never know how it feels to be wealthy if it wasn’t for their generous and clearly-more civilised cousins from the mainland. I mean, literally every person in the world knows Hong Kong transformed into a rich city literally after the handover. Literally!

Literally the morning after the handover, money started literally raining on Hong Kong, high-rises literally started appearing out of nowhere and foreign investors started flocking in, seemingly for no reasons.

LOL! Seemingly! We all know China told them to!

The footage that supposedly shows olden days Hong Kong is literally fake. The cars and high-rises were not real, they were CGI created by the CIA!

How do I know? Uncle Xi and the internet said so!

Condemn them for disrespecting China’s sovereignty

Contrary to popular belief, sovereignty is not arbitrary. It is something that has been decided by the universe since long before earth’s creation!

It has been decided that the People’s Republic of China will always be the highest ruler of the people of Macau, Taiwan and yes, even Hong Kong! Hong Kongers don’t have the right to make decisions for themselves!

Condemn them for pissing on humanity

Seriously, do I even fucking need to explain this?

Do I really need to explain that only monsters love liberty? Do I really need to explain that real humans love it when any or all of their freedoms? Do I really need to explain that literally every human is destined to be slaves of the emotionally-fragile establishments?

If you really are a human being, you would love being abused 24/7.

Trust me. My methods are waaaay more effective!

*takes off the mask*

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.