So I tried posting this in a default sub, it was removed, I guess it was a little too true. So I'll copy and paste it here. It's about the Suffragettes of WW1
edit: to those downvoting this, I'm curious as to why. What do you think is untrue in this post, and why? Be specific if you can, what do you disagree with?
Note, this was a repost, I initially got a name wrong.
It should be noted that there is a darker history behind the Suffragettes then the media gives attention too. SOME of them- not all- were quite evil people who strongly supported WW1 and would shame men, even if underage, into joining the war. It was called the White Feather Campaign
this website is literally called Suffrajitsu
This was going on as late as 1916, when the true horrors of the war were already known. They did this to teenagers, wounded soldiers, soldiers on leave, etc.
The leading Suffragette was a disgusting POS named Emmeline Pankhurst. She strongly campaigned for total war in 1914, writi. She continued to fervently support the war, mass conscription, and the white feather campaign.
It got so bad the government has to issue special pins for soldiers on leave.
And their "ju jitsu" was a joke, female privilege/entitlement was protecting them, not the mythical "suffrajitsu". Men wouldn't hit a woman in public, especially back then. But by 1918 they were being physically confronted and scared off, by crowds of both men and women. In WW2 there was a brief resurgence, but it was quickly put out as people would violent attack them in the streets.
So keep that in mind. There's a very good reason why the suffragettes were hated, even by women who of course supported women's rights to vote. There were independent movements to support the female vote, separate from and opposed to the suffragette movement.
The book opens with this party and the kids steal a painting from the party house and burn it and it turns out it was really expensive but no one knows who did it
And at some point this girl who hates her mom burns down or bombs (or something) her mom's fancy boutique store
At the end of the story, the main character or someone close to him goes off the rails and plans a bombing for a fancy picnic, but someone stops him and prevents the disaster.
And the whole thing takes place in a beach town and the teenagers in the story are all from rich families
i think it was a fairly recent book that I read in 2017 or 2018? So probably written around 2015 or so?
Admittedly my knowledge is limited about the dissolution of Yugoslavia. I understand a fair bit about Titoism and pan-slavic socialism. I tend not to trust anything NATO does, so I'm looking for perspectives on this event - which is still going on in the present day. What's your take on it?
WHAT IS POLITICS? Episode 8: Social Change, Consciousness and Material Conditions
Human beings have free will, but our actions are constrained by material realities. Understanding how material and practical conditions shape human behaviour can make all the difference between success and catastrophic failure when it comes to the whole spectrum of political action, from private sector negotiation, to crafting legislation and making revolution.
This episode looks at:
How we can synthesize the seemingly contradictory ideas that people have free will with the idea that social structures are the result of material conditions.
The relationship between economic activity and the high status of women in traditional Haudenosaunee / Iroquois society
How World War I helped women win the right to vote in Europe and North America
How World War II catalyzed the Black civil rights movement in the United States (the Double V Campaign).
How the English Peasant’s Revolt of 1381 almost overthrew feudalism and established a christian libertarian socialist society, and why it failed.
The implications of the Anarchist Revolution in Spain in 1936-1939 for the future of industrial civilization
Erica Barnett, a journalist, was at the SPD press conference today and said this: https://twitter.com/ericacbarnett/status/1270847364903788544
>The press conference was 7 minutes long, so I only got to ask one question (about the credibility of threats to set the precinct on fire, which the chief called "incredibly credible" based on fires and looting downtown on the first day of protests in May.)
So SPD, like many of us assumed, completley fabricated these "incredibly credible" arson threats. There was not one, single, specific, threat made. Their "justification" for the threat was based on "fires and looting" that occured on the first day of protests......over a week ago.
It's very obvious that SPD had planned for us to destroy the precinct in an attempt to shift the narrative.
That brings us to the disinformation campaign.
This thread by Spekulation lays it all out: https://twitter.com/spekulation/status/1270900664822951936
I'll try and sum it up below but I recommend reading it.
-
SPD used public police scanner frequencies to make it appear as if 30 armed proud boys were on their way to Cap Hill, same thing happened last night. - we now know that this was completely made up as for 2 days in a row now they were nowhere to be seen.
-
The protesters in the CHAZ held their ground, protected one another, and ultimately it ended up galvanizing the community even further.
-
In a press conference this morning, presumably to counter the peaceful pictures from the night before, Seattle Police claimed, without evidence, that protesters had fortified CHAZ and were conducting "citizen checkpoints". This is nonsense, verified by countless visitors today.
-
They claimed they had "credible" reports of businesses being extorted for money while in the Autonomous Zone. Also nonsense, confirmed by several businesses, many of who said they were happy to have protesters in their community. But that didn't stop the story spreading.
-
Now, right-wing media and propagandists like KOMO, Andy Ngo, twitter trolls, /r/SeattleWA and more, have been running with this all day long about these made up instances. This is why we're suddenly seeing these "claims" around here lately.
-
The answer is simple: the people of this city. Every single one of us. Not just the protesters, but every single person who reads the news, who votes, who engages their friends and neighbors in dialog, and who are being fed deliberate li
