#and when that happens he will be his worst obstacle yet like in most alt routes | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

teovy · 5 years

Text

Laurance in Void Paradox, the significance and reasons

A/N: An old theory of mine about Laurance and his development during VP, as a character and a shadow knight. I wrote this around the time VP had just came out back in November, last year.

Void Paradox is the first return of a Diaries character on screen in a long time, and a main difference is that the character is a version of himself two seasons prior to canon events which we see taking place. This is season one Laurance, right after the battle of Scaleswind, freshly betrayed by Garroth, and not yet had experienced the events of season two, or the Irene Dimension. Laurance in Void Paradox doesn’t show any signs of being a shadow knight (he’s just a bit hot headed but he’s always been), and he is compared to a warrior who has been killed by their alternative self. Laurance’s whole mission in the season is to fight his alt. and stop the void from consuming the dimension. But I think there’s a reason for this happening right now.

Laurance recalls that this happens right after Garroth, his brother, the man he trusted with all his heart, betrayed him in the worst way imaginable and he has failed Aphmau in protecting the amulet from Zane. This is a turning point for Laurance, because from then on, we see a rapid decline in his behaviour and self-control, acting very uncharacteristic of himself and succumbing into becoming a shadow knight.

What if this betrayal, this complete and utter blow to his trust and mission, was what caused him to finally confront his shadow knight self? The alt. In the season can be shadow knight Laurance’s mind attempting to kill of what’s left of Laurance that still has his humanity. The void paradox could be taken that it’s Laurance’s humanity having its final battle and finally becoming a shadow knight, since there’s no winning against his alt. Jason (one of the writers for all series) also recalls on his Twitter with a diagram which has been decided to basically show pre-season 2 Laurance and his alt. Combining to make season 2 Laurance. What if this rift in dimension is just Laurance completing his transformation which was triggered by Garroth’s betrayal and Laurance’s inability to stop it? Modzilla recalls that Laurance is “fated for death”, which I don’t think is just a throw in joke. It’s literally fore*shadow*ing what will happen to Laurance’s last shreds of humanity. This isn’t just a fight against the void. This is Laurance’s humanity, his true self, having its final battle with the shadow knight inside of him, which, if we go by events of season 2(where he goes ballistic) and Jason’s chart of them two combining, he loses. Void paradox shows us why Laurance lost himself. But the key difference is that his humanity wasn’t killed off, it was simply merged with that alt. Another clue which hints to Garroth’s betrayal being the cause is the fact that the alt. Could have taken the face and position of anyone he loved or knew, hell Cadenza would be for starters a good way to finally kill Laurance off, but instead it chooses Zane. Why? Because Zane is key to Laurance giving in. Zane is the reason Garroth betrayed him. Zane is the reason he failed Aphmau because Zane gets the amulet. The alt. weirdly enough doesn’t want to kill him, it’s taunting him. It’s ripping him apart slowly, not fully yet taking advantage of its abilities but choosing to target Laurance’s biggest insecurities, not as a person through Cadenza, but rather as a guard. The alt. Wants Laurance to confront and slowly get ripped apart and finally understand that he failed as a guard, and without the strength of a shadow knight, he will never remedy this. He will never be strong enough to defeat Zane. It’s also interesting how quickly it takes possession of Aphmau too, someone who Laurance adores deeply. The alt. is not trying to kill him. It’s trying to make Laurance realize his inability to act and protect without his shadow knight abilities.

In season 2 and 1, it’s mentioned that most shadow knights are like “zombies” or “slaves” to Shad, the shadow lord. In Void Paradox, what does Laurance’s alt. Act like? A zombie. Hell bent on destruction and thriving off fear, but not making a simple response. Not a shred of humanity is present. This is really highlighted in the last speech between Laurance and his alt. At the end of void paradox, which is quite one sided as the alt. Doesn’t reply. Laurance taunts the alt. screaming at him to say something, to stop wearing his face, and that he has people behind him. But the alt says nothing. It’s silent, and it tears Laurance apart even more. It’s his humanity arguing with his shadow knight self. His humanity is growing desperate to stay a part of Laurance, as Vylad even mentions in season 2, and Sasha comments on it, calling Laurance a “nuisance” because of it.

From Modzilla’s story, we can gather that the warrior which came to his world had his humanity defeated, and the world became corrupted and consumed, which could show that warriors humanity itself was taken from him, leaving him an empty shell, much like most shadow knight are in season 1, except for a few (e.g. Zenix, Sasha who is seen to have her own agenda in season 2 as she runs from the nether to save herself from Zenix). Jason’s tweet implies that Laurence’s humanity and his shadow self do not kill each other off, but rather become one, which is EXACTLY the reason why Laurance acts the way he does in season 2. It’s no longer Laurance, or at least, Laurance has lost the battle LONG before season 2 where he loses control. The shadow consumed him in void paradox, and used his humanity as a vessel for itself, and as Laurance lost more and more around him, it finally was able to overcome the obstacle of how strong Laurance’s morals were. The calling didn’t happen at the end of season 2, at least not in the way we choose to believe. It happened in void paradox, when Laurance and the shadow knight become one. His calling was completed in the void paradox where the shadow became a part of him, and he went back to the world of MCD where he warned Aphmau. Laurance was gone from the minute that Garroth betrayed him.

The reason why Laurance gets his humanity back in season 3 and leads a rebellion. At the end of season 2 he says he’s been seeing things and has been tricked by his own head. What if the alt was losing control and had to assert itself but this time Laurance fought back more? That’s why Laurance asked Aphmau if she wasn’t another trick. The alt. took the appearance of Aphmau and attempted to take full control after Laurance didn’t kill Aphmau on his own volition.

#aphmau #laurance #this is really old meta from over half a year ago #but its still a theory im really proud of!!#my writing

44 notes · View notes

lightsandlostbells · 5 years

Text

Druck season 2, episode 4 reaction

I want to thank turtleneck boy because I truly miss the fandom running wild with every detail and coming up with theories, I mean that sincerely. God bless you, sweater man.

Episode 4

Clip 1 - Motto selection

We have the graduating class looking at mottos. Amira and Leonie are leading the meeting. Leonie sure likes to lead school activities. We also have Mia, Hanna, Jonas, and Matteo in attendance. I really like seeing more school activities, especially since the hero party thing wrapped up last season, and this seems like a particularly German tradition from what I can tell, so it’s a cool thing to include.

Jonas is wearing a fedora today and like, he’s rocking it and twirling it around and stuff, but baby, you gotta be aware of the implications.

They’re picking out a motto, but as Leonie emphasizes with finger quotes, these are “the best” and Amira says none of them are great. “Photoshop-Philipp” put together some examples of the logos. His name is Markus. He’s the theater kid from the first season, with his hair tied back and I never would have recognized him if fandom hadn’t pointed him out.

That dude in the black turtleneck sent us all into conspiracy mode. Initially he was giving me German Even vibes, too. Was this their version of kosegruppa? He smiles when Matteo starts laughing at Photoshop Philipp, and his body language is angled toward Matteo, kinda, could that be a clue??? Why would they give us a random close-up of that guy when Jonas starts talking about CannABIs, when he doesn’t have a line at that moment or anything? Why was he tying his shoe for so long? Surely Druck is trying to tell us something!

Yet apparently it has been confirmed that he is not German Even, but is some random extra who’s been popping up in school scenes. That was a fun few days of speculation, though.

When the cannabis-themed logo pops up, Jonas says that there are some students in this school who are critical of the dangers of smoking weed, and he’s definitely directing that toward Hanna (he looks at her at the end, and Hanna looks over her shoulders and rolls her eyes). Nice bit of passive-aggressiveness there.

Another one is a parody of the alt-right Germany party (AFD) logo. Jonas likes that direction. Some random girl doesn’t like it and doesn’t want to give more attention to the party, but Amira and Mia think it’s funny. You know, kinda cool that these random students are getting a voice this season - like in the classroom debate, or the discussion here. It’s not just the main characters having all the dialogue in these scenes, it makes it feel a little more like an actual school, if that makes sense. (ETA: @randomfinny and @hyperfictional pointed out that she’s actually German Sara. Lol, I never would have recognized her, so thank you!)

I laughed at Jonas and Matteo being lazy in the back of the class. and them both putting their heads down. They’re in sync!

Suddenly there’s Axel walking in! Good thing Kiki isn’t part of this meeting. Did he join just to hang out with Mia?

I will say this, I am not complimentary toward Alex, but we’ve seen more of a personality from him thus far than with William, imo. He’s been shown to have some political opinions, and this shows a little bit of creativity/initiative on his part. He seems pretty pleased with his design/logo. He thinks it’s pretty gangster.

His logo is Abi Chaker Clan 2019, which is a reference to a family in Berlin with ties to organized crime? It doesn’t mean much to me as a non-German, but I’m going to take that it’s clever. Most of the group seems to like it. Jonas and Matteo approve. Markus doesn’t understand it. He’s like the only one other than Mia who’s not on board, lol. They take a vote, everyone puts their hands up except Mia. Hanna tells her that it’s better than others, so Mia reluctantly raises her hand. Even when she does so, she’s pointedly looking away from Alex.

As they leave, Jonas sticks his fedora on Matteo’s head. Be still my heart.

They’re going to have another meeting on Friday, Alex offers his place. Mia isn’t gonna be happy about that!

I will say this, this is what I wanted for Noorhelm remakes - give them something to work on that isn’t them dating, like a school project or whatever. Although now I’m like … they could have started with this stuff, the graduation committee, and not gotten into the whole renewed Kiki/Alex angle which makes this all messier and more complicated and harder to be on team Alex or team Winterberg. And I get that’s probably what they were going for, throwing more obstacles into the story so Mia still has doubts about being with Alex, but it also means I need that I need certain aspects addressed before I can fully get on board with this ship, and I’m afraid they won’t do that. Or I’m afraid that Mia’s flaws will be addressed but Alex’s will be excused.

That being said, I’m on team Amira with the decision to let Alex into the group. Sometimes you have to put personal feelings aside, and Alex’s involvement will benefit everyone else in the class by making the yearbooks cheaper. And tbh I don’t think it’s right to exclude someone from participating in a school group like this unless they’re actively disrupting the group itself, regardless of how much that person may have wronged me or my friends romantically.

When Mia starts to argue, Amira says that she knows the cost isn’t a big deal to Mia and some others, but other students came to her and said they couldn’t afford it. I wonder if Kiki was one of them… she probably wouldn’t tell that to Amira, though. Not in those words.

This isn’t Amira’s big secret, though, is it? Like Pawel isn’t some dude at the printing company, and she was just trying to keep it under wraps so Mia didn’t find out? I feel like her secret has to be bigger and more personal than that.

The question is, did Alex do this to get on Mia’s good side or to hang out with her? Or is he trying to engage and do something nice without expectations? Because I respect that second one more, obviously.

Amira is so lovely, I truly hope we get her season.

Clip 2 - Alex is hyped for Game of Thrones to return

Mia runs into Alex. She says they need to talk. He smirks and says, “Winter is coming,” and GOD FUCKING DAMMIT that made me laugh out loud. It’s so obvious but I laughed.

You know, Mia looks a tiny bit like Daenerys Targaryen.

There’s a shot of them walking down the path thing with the divider in the middle, oooo, ~symbolic. They meet at the end.

Mia tells him to stop grinning, and he says yes, sergeant Winter, and salutes. FUCK OFF that’s the second time I’ve laughed in this clip at this dude. I hate myself.

She chews him out for becoming a “committing patron” and he’s all “??? I wanted to help??” And I will give this to him, he did actually help out the group regardless of intentions, so maybe let that one slide, Mia, in the spirit of utilitarianism. Then she mentions NYE and the midnight voice message, which he does deserve to be chewed out for.

SOMEONE IS WATCHING THEM. It’s Sam??? Oh shit, she saw them talking! Hopefully she assumes Mia is just yelling at Alex. But she’s going to know Mia and Alex are in cahoots. Will she end up using this against Mia, or will she go to Mia and offer her support when Mia feels like she can’t tell anyone what’s happening?

Clip 3 - Ironing soothes the soul

Mia checks her phone and sees a bunch of messages from people praising Alex’s motto and hyping him up as the man. She gets off the bed, puts on a Chopin record and we are treated to a slow-montage scene of Mia ironing her clothes, including stuff like pajamas and socks, things that do not really need to be ironed if you asked me.

But I like the purpose of this scene! Mia feels out of control and frustrated and helpless with Alex’s inclusion in the group and everybody praising him and talking him up, and on top of it she doesn’t feel in control of her own feelings, so she has this ritual where she puts on music and makes her clothes neat and orderly. She uses order as a coping mechanism. Even the way this is shot makes it feel very precise and serene, the way she goes about this ritual so calmly, the way she smooths down her ironed items, the way the camera moves upward at the end, like all Mia’s anxieties are just floating away. You can just sink into this moment and realize how Mia clears her head.

Also that it’s classical music - something that also feels very orderly. And as we learn later in the episode, Mia can play piano including classical pieces so perhaps she has a strong history with it.

This was something indicated with Noora - for example, she was throwing out and getting rid of stuff once William had left her, and tidying up her room before she was supposed to meet with William prior to him going to London. She was thrown out of balance when Eskild ate her fish cakes. So I like that they’re going into it with Mia, and as others have mentioned it might be another sign of Mia’s ED. (Perfectionism is a common trait in people with eating disorders, and excessive tidiness/need for order is a sign of perfectionism).

Ironing complete, Mia searches for Alexander Hardenberg online. She considers following Alex on IG - too far, girl, he’s gonna take that as a marriage proposal.

Mia’s phone background includes Hans, awww.

She finds various links including one talking about his sister Sophie, who was two years older than he was. There are theories that Sophie will take over the Niko role, but I don’t buy that. For one, Alexander got very defensive over people talking about his “sister” in the classroom debate, and I don’t think he’d care if his sister was a creep. Second, it would be in EXTREMELY poor taste to have the biggest wlw rep on this show be a woman preying on and assaulting another woman, especially as a counter to Mia and Alex’s heterosexual relationship that’s probably going to be True Love. Just. The worst. I wrote this speculation post, but I think Sophie’s probably dead or something bad happened to her. Björn is some dude who was involved in what happened to her.

I don’t know what song this is as Mia is falling into the Alex Hardenberg rabbit hole, but it sounds like classical to me, and it’s like her coping mechanism/mental safe space is getting conflated with this guy.

Hans bursts into the room saying the Mia needs to look at his dick, because he thinks he has an STD, specifically tripper (gonorrhea) and he needs her to compare with some picture online. OK, I have to say, I have never ever heard that term for gonorrhea before. I’ve only heard it called the clap. Did Druck just teach me something? Yes, it did.

I have to praise Milena’s reactions here, they are restrained but suitably horrified.

Hans exposes his junk to Mia and she notes that yeah, it looks similar to the picture. He storms out and yells his fury to the heavens. When Mia asks if she should go to the pharmacy for him, he says he needs a chamomile tea first. LMAO. I feel like it was implied Mia would make the tea, right?

Clip 4 - Dingalings

Matteo’s just hanging with the girls as they talk about Hans’ clap, I guess. This child is not in a good state. He doesn’t seem very engaged in this conversation, but then again … would you want to hear about someone’s gonorrhea?

The girls are like HERE LOOK AT THESE GONORRHEA PICS and Matteo is just sitting there shooting them looks of WTF.

Sam calls it a “dingaling”. It’s nice to know she uses the same euphemism as my mom. She wants to know what a “gay penis” looks like, compared to a straight penis, I guess. Babe, you can go onto the Internet and find that out with a few clicks.

I laughed again at Matteo giving this side-eye to the girls while he looks at something on his phone. Or him nervously looking at them while they talk about what gay penis looks like.

Matteo picks up a banana as Sam asks about his dingaling. Druck going for that subtle symbolism, I see.

Sam asks Matteo how he measures dingalings, and he’s like, “...what?” There’s a nice moment where Hanna and Mia react and Mia tries to change the subject and divert attention from Matteo, in case this gets into uncomfortable territory for him. I liked that! Different from Eva and Noora having a fun time with Isak’s mysterious sexuality.

However, Sam really wants to know. Matteo mumbles that you do it with a ruler and Sam immediately gets out that ruler like she’s prepared to put this into practice. Not at the table, darling. Matteo isn’t even looking at them as he explains the rest.

Sam writes down “only when it’s hard” and underlines it, like she’s taking notes and this will be on the final exam for Dingalings 101.

Matteo sees Jonas walk in, and Matteo waves him over, probably thinking OH GOD SAVE ME, but Jonas just backtracks out of the room. NOOOOOO. I saw people think he was mad at Matteo, but I thought he was trying to avoid Hanna, which was confirmed in a text. If he and Matteo had a tiff, Matteo probably wouldn’t be waving him over so chill, unless he didn’t know Jonas was mad at him.

Matteo is not even looking at Hanna when she asks if Jonas has someone, just at his phone. What is he so engrossed with on his phone? Is it something specific or just generic sad teenage disengagement? Is it just him being one of The Youths?

Matteo waited until Sam left to tell Hanna that Jonas waits for her to post stuff on IG, IDK if there was a reason he waited. And there wasn’t any real reason Sam had to get up and leave during this scene, so is it at all important? Unless they just wanted the three sadsacks at the table together for the end of this clip, and Sam is not sufficiently angsty about her love life right now.

But Matteo tells Hanna that Jonas doesn’t have a new girl, he waits around for her to post new IG stories. Hanna is confused why, and Matteo is like, why does someone spend an entire evening stalking someone? Ohhh, damn. Mia is gonna feel that comment resonate uncomfortably.

Also, nice of Matteo to help out Hanna and Jonas’ relationship instead of snaking on her. As far as we know. (I think he’s being nice, not a snake this time.)

In case we didn’t get the connection, Axel texts Mia if she prefers wine or beer, for the yearbook meeting tomorrow, I guess. Checking in to see what she likes, her preferences.

We see Mia, Matteo, and Hanna at the table, all of them a little out of sorts. Mia thinking about Axel, Hanna thinking about Jonas, Matteo thinking about … something ... or someone … dude is very busy on his phone.

Clip 5 - After party at Axel’s

Mia brushes her teeth before going over to Alex’s - I guess that’s supposed to be her showing interest in him? A sign that she wants to be at her best? Or, you know, a sign that she practices good oral hygiene.

Hanna texts her and hopes she’s coming soon, because Hanna doesn’t want to be there alone because of Jonas. Damn, kids, you’re really tearing my heart out about this. Get back together already!

Axel texts Mia that she doesn’t need to bring a toothbrush because he has a new one ready for her. Well, that’s rather presumptuous. Mia seems a little amused, though.

She locks herself out of the apartment and texts Hans about it. Hans will be back at midnight to let Mia in. Also the tripper situation is still causing him pain and he stole money from his sick aunt to pay for medicine? Hans is so much more of a mess than Eskild was, like he’s going to have to evolve fast if he’s going to adopt Matteo.

This next part is beautiful, as we cut between Mia getting on the bus and traveling to Alex’s house, and shots of the characters looking into the camera as someone reads the comments about them. Isn’t this kinda like those character descriptions from pre-season? That promo stuff? So maybe it wasn’t just for promo, but an overall theme of the season, about the labels we stick on people or the shallow ways we perceive them.

Hanna - Gets bitch, red devil, arrogant. Who called Hanna a bitch?? Red devil?? Get the fuck out. Ex-BFF is from Leonie. Someone calls Hanna the “best decision of my life” and I think that was probably Jonas, please take that dagger out of my heart, oh my God.

Amira - Gets “hijab” like 8 times. So sad that this is all people know about her or think about her. They see the hijab and think that’s the sum total of who she is, rather than part of it. And it’s also othering, because the hijab stands out, it’s different from everyone else. I feel like Amira is used to it, too, like she probably expected that response. She also gets called ISIS. Man, fuck that edgy piece of shit person who wrote that. At least she gets some other comments like how she’s cool, like the people who actually know her and don’t stereotype her or judge her think she’s the best.

Matteo - Basically he’s a chill bro and fades into the background, although one person thinks he’s a good kisser. Hmmm, has he been going around smooching girls like Isak did?

Alex - gets almost all negative comments about how arrogant or jerkish he is, or his car compensating for his lack of dong size, except for some comments about how he’s hot. Look, if you want me to feel sorry about that, how people are just judging him unfairly, you’ve gotta show me more proof that he hasn’t been a major asshole throughout his high school career and this isn’t an accurate assessment of how he’s treated people or behaved this whole time, even if he’s supposed to be a nice guy underneath.

Mia - gets lots of comments on how hot she is, with some about her feminism or being boring. Habibi comes from Amira. Lesbian? Final one is “prettiest woman on earth” which probably was from Alex, honestly, and she seems kinda OK hearing him read that one out loud. (Although my kingdom for those “lesbian?” and “prettiest woman on earth” comments to have both come from like, Kiki.)

Matteo is once again lying on the couch on his phone, checked out. Someone send that kid an Even to bring him to life.

They talk about whether everyone should be able to cross out comments and that they don’t have time to chase everyone down, but I agree with Mia that everyone should be able to censor theirs, not just the committee. Alex agrees with Mia and gives a sensible option, that people have two weeks to contact the staff if they want to censor their comments. He says he doesn’t want to censor his comments because in twenty years he wants to remember what an arrogant ass he was, and everyone laughs, and you can take that as a sign of character growth that he wants to evolve past being an ass, or him thinking it was a fun time rather than something he regrets.

There’s turtleneck boy again. Who isn’t Even, but maybe could be German Julian Dahl.

Alex ordered pizza and beer, and the meeting gets more like a party. Hanna and Matteo throw pizza at each other and Hanna gives him the finger, cute! Alex arm wrestles Markus the theater photoshop kid. All throughout the evening, Mia seems attuned to Alex’s presence and keeps looking his way. I know that kind of feeling, I’ve been to parties where I was Mia and someone’s presence was like a magnet.

Hanna and Matteo talk in the kitchen about Jonas. Hanna asks where Jonas is, seeing as he’s not at the meeting, and Matteo says he doesn’t know, Jonas wanted to come. Which is a lie seeing as Jonas told Matteo he wasn’t going in a text message that we saw. At least Matteo is trying to spare Hanna’s feelings.

Mia is in Alex’s bathroom, looking at the stuff on the counter. I guess she’s just inspecting his stuff? She opens a jar and it’s overflowing with condoms, lol. I guess Alex got over his “latex allergy” at some point or learned his lesson about not wrapping it up. Maybe he had his own adventure with tripper. (I’m imagining him in his own version of the scene with Hans, wailing and opening his robe to a befuddled Toilet Sam.)

Hans texts her that now he won’t be home until 1. When Mia comes out of the bathroom, everyone else is leaving. Now Mia’s first option is that she could totally leave with her friends and chill with them, and if she’s locked out, she could crash at Hanna’s. But Amira has to study, Leonie has a date, and Hanna is going to the cinema with her dad. (What if Hanna was going to Jonas’ instead ... no, I won’t get entertain that happy delusion.) Anyway, Hanna suggests that Mia just kill time at Alex’s until she can go home.

Mia and Alex look at each other across the room. There is some nice nonverbal tension. The toilet flushes and Markus comes out of the bathroom. Now there are three of them, I like this shot of them in a triangle. Lol, Markus is so drunk he doesn’t know if he puked on himself. He doesn’t know how he broke up the Mia/Alex staring contest.

Alex and Mia look at each other and laugh after Markus leaves, which is a genuinely nice moment. Mia explains her situation and says she’ll go to the cinema or hang out in the park until then. Alex says she could stay and he’ll drive her home later. There’s a funny bit where Mia says he’s not allowed to drive, and Alex says he’ll call his chauffeur, and then does an imitation of Mia’s inner monologue - “Is he that rich? No … or maybe he is?” I do like that they’ve given Alex so much more of a sense of humor.

Lmao, Alex jumping on the random skateboard and gliding across the floor, I have to say if I lived in a big empty place like that, I’d be doing shit like that a lot. Speaking of, that is one big, spacious apartment, like there’s some art on the walls and stuff but it still gives off that cold lonely rich kid vibe.

I like Mia walking around examining the place as he makes her rosehip tea. Alex mentions that his sister used to live here - again, we don’t get more details than that, like whether she moved or died, what happened to her. It seems like he might have cut off that line of inquiry when he asks Mia if she wants honey in her tea - either a coincidence or a deliberate attempt to change the subject.

However, that does throw into context Björn’s appearance in the next clip, because Björn was showing up to the sister’s old apartment. Why was he messing around in there? I think that dude might be the sister’s boyfriend or ex.

There’s a piano. In that same room are a lot of moving boxes; either because Alex was moving in, or because the sister was moving out. Or maybe they were packing up Sophie’s things because she died?

Mia asks him whether he plays or whether it’s there to impress girls. Alex says no, so I’m betting it was the sister’s piano. He also asked whether they should go sit in the other room to drink the tea, I think that he didn’t want to answer questions about the piano or be near it, like it probably reminds him of whatever happened to the sister.

Gold star to Mia for not playing without payment and for not negotiating. I love her.

Was that the theme music from Titanic she was playing and acting like she was really into?? Lmao.

Finally, she plays something legit, “Montagues and Capulets” (or “Dance of the Knights”) from the ballet Romeo and Juliet by Prokofiev. HMMM could there be any connection to star-crossed lovers with this subject matter? Hey, it’s subtler than a banana.

At first I was wondering why her playing seemed out of sync and was like ... did they get a body double to play for her or something? Because I think Milena can really play. But then we see that it’s intentionally out of sync, as we see them eating and talking over the music. Perhaps to symbolize things being out of sorts; earlier this clip we had Mia using classical music as a way to restore order in her life, and here that order is rapidly dissolving, so the music isn’t really soothing, and the images aren’t neatly in line with it.

When Alex asks what song that was, Mia says it’s Drake. L M A O I adore her.

Hans texts Mia that he’s not coming home tonight as he’s met some other dude with gonorrhea and they’re going to hook up. Er, have fun with that, Mr. Currently Peeing Shards of Glass. Anyway, he asks if she can stay at Hanna’s. Alex says Mia can just stay there, she can take the bed and he’ll take the sleeping mat. Mia asks why doesn’t he just sleep on the couch and he says the fridge is too loud. We are treated to the sounds of the thunderous fridge. Actually, it is pretty loud for a fridge, if you’re sensitive to that kind of thing I can see it being a problem.

He says she can rent his bed for the night, like in a hotel. Which is what seems to convince her, him framing it not like a benevolent gesture but a transaction. So Alexander sets up the bed for Mia. He gives the new toothbrush that he had mentioned, and she pays him back what he gave her.

Mia climbs into bed and smells the fresh linen. She checks her phone and Hans says that Emilio finished fast so he’s coming home, and Hanna says Mia can come over. But Mia pulls an Isak, telling Hanna that Hans is home and Hans that she’s with Hanna. Wow, there is no chance of that backfiring, not with these two people who appear to be on friendly terms.

They don’t share a bed as Noorhelm did; true to his word, Alex sleeps on the floor, and she gets the bed. I think that’s indicative of where they’re at with each other right now; they still have distance between them, but they’ve developed a state of comfort and can let down their guard to a degree.

They wish each other good night, and she calls him Axel. That makes him smile. And then he asks that that wasn’t really Drake, was it? Which makes her smile. Let him go to his grave thinking it was Drake, Mia.

Social Media/General Comments

I’ll say this, Chris Veres is doing well as Alex, performance-wise. Previously he was my least favorite William, and I thought he was very flat in S1, which I guess was intentional, since I heard he tried to play Alex as very cold and unfeeling. Now we’ve seen him showing more personality and especially glimpses of humor and levity. So regardless on my thoughts of the character overall, I think the actor is doing a fine job.

A lot of people seem to have hopped on board with Alex after this episode, even people who hated William, and I think that largely has to do with the performance. I’m not sure I would say I’m completely on board with Alex as a character - he still has a lot of stuff to account for, and there are things that I really need Druck to redeem about him in order for me to like him. I especially need apologies - or at least some sense of regret and humility over his specific mistakes, rather than him trying to defend himself and Mia falling for it. But I get why fandom is starting to like him, he’s showing more charisma here. There are things I certainly like about him compared to William, for instance that he seems to have more interests and opinions on things that don’t have to do with his love interest. He had some genuinely funny lines in this episode.

Also, I’ve said it before, but I wasn’t sold on Mia entirely in S1, but Milena Tscharntke is really winning me over this season. Mia feels like her own character, certainly one with traits in common as Noora, but also not a Noora clone.

Kiki was totally absent this episode, and I wonder if that was to lull us into forgetting the Kiki/Alex drama so we, like Mia, could start to fall for him. In putting Kiki aside for an episode, it’s kind of like we don’t have this reminder of what Alex and Mia have done to her, something that I’m sure will come crashing back and causing conflict in the next episode. It also makes you wonder what Kiki has been doing since we last saw her. How is she coping? Breaking more hearts?

The music needs to be used more sparingly. This episode had some good selections but basically it’s falling into a pattern that’s plagued some of the remakes, where the music always gets used the same way: a song at the start of the clip, a song at the end of it, so that it starts to lessen the impact of the music because we can predict when it will appear. I think it happens in some remakes, like Skam France or Druck, because they run some previews/production credits at the end, and they want music to go over it instead of silence. But last season I think they did have some clips that ended with silence over the credits, or things like Hanna sighing, or random banter, and that didn’t bother me, that helped to retain the atmosphere of the clip.

There’s a theory that S3 and/or S4 have been running in the background of this season, and while I can see evidence for that, I really hope it’s not the case. Especially after this last clip - I thought it was great, the pacing worked and there were some inspired directing choices, so imagine what we could get with Matteo or Amira’s seasons with that kind of style. It would work so well with one of the long Evak or Yousana clips, something like Mekke øl or The Best of Islam.

Mia is like, “Won’t we get in copyright trouble for this?” as a feeble attempt in the committee chat not to pick Alex’s motto, lol. Give her credit for fighting a losing battle to the end.

Hans had like three text messages about his clap. First he accuses a dude of infecting him with the clap, while the dude is like, nah, just went to the doctor yesterday, I’m good, and Hans is like … oops … embarrassing. Then he goes after the next dude he banged, who reciprocates his electronic shouting match. Finally messages Michi, who’s like, thank God, I thought you were breaking up with me again. Dude. Hans. I know you find Michi a bore, I guess, but some dude whose reaction to hearing he has the clap is “at least you didn’t break up with me” to the dude who gave it to him, is someone you might wanna hang on to. And not in a boomerang way, in a “this is a keeper” way.

Matteo and Jonas text and apparently Jonas planned to skip the yearbook meeting/party because of Hanna. So that’s probably why he ran away in the dingaling clip, because he saw Hanna there. I’m wondering if they’re going to get back together this season or if they’ll string us along for a few more.

According to Matteo’s IG stories, that was the first time Photoshop Philipp/Markus got drunk, and Matteo made sure to document the highs, followed by the inevitable lows.

I’m not German, so feel free to correct me if I missed anything.

If you got this far, thank you for reading!

#druck reactions #druck

29 notes · View notes

toneelspeler · 7 years

Photo

Being who you are has taken you a long time. It is not like you had the worst time doing so; your family is remarkably kind and their acceptance was never a true obstacle to overcome. Your own self-acceptance was a different story.

You know what denying yourself the chance to be who you are can do to a person. It infects, it invades, it isolates. You violate yourself the most.

It is through careful observation of others like you that you found some peace; seeing the teacher you adore walking around the marketplace with her hand closely linked with her wife’s hand. Seeing the side character in a horribly cliché teenage show catch the eye of the boy he has been staring at. Going to bars where people become people; not only men nor women with all kinds of sexualities and genders – they become an extension of themselves; a part of a group that expresses themselves freely and told you that you were finally home. You belong.

So when you see that curly-haired boy drunk in one of your favourite establishments looking at an older couple of men, who are old enough to be his father, one of whom is brushing his boyfriend’s cheekbone with his thumb and kissing his other cheek – you know.

It is time to take the care you have received and share it.

He arrives with only a back bag of belongings -- like he is expecting to have to run away again soon.

He’s very skittish in your apartment, begging you to not tell anyone in the house that he is there. And you agree to, since no one has the right to know everyone’s deepest secrets.

You had actually spoken to him before. The girls had asked you to. They had asked if you would talk to him to find out whether he was actually gay or not, like it is a game. Later, you had told them that you do not think he is.

You lied.

Once he becomes an official member of Kollektivet, you try to get through his walls by just being your very nosy self. You implement yourself into his room as if he was your brother, you joke and you complain; and slowly but surely he seems to accept your presence in his room.

You know that if you are too obvious with your attempts he would scare away again, not letting you even getting an inch of the person behind the persona he has created for himself. For every attempt to make him realise that it is okay to say that a boy is handsome, you get a grumpy huff. But you also get a seemingly unassuming question about how to know if handsome boys are gay. Your answer silences him. It is all in the small victories.

You are trying to be an example, someone to observe, like so many others have done for you.

The shoes in the hallway are a bigger size than all of the other residents’ of the apartment. You have heard laughter coming from his bedroom, of multiple people, smelling the faint scent of weed that creeps under the door. He has not left his room for hours, so you try to give him a nudge. He tells you that he is sleeping.

It seems like it is going well.

When you meet an excruciatingly handsome boy in the bathroom the next morning, you know it is going well, even if he cannot tell you yet.

It won’t be long now.

Halfway through that week, he seems more chipper than he has ever been since you have known him; the tension in his shoulders is gone, he smiles more easily and he even pays the rent you have been begging him for.

You decide on a final nudge; making it clear to him that it is really okay for him to talk about what is happening. It starts off so well, and you are so very proud of the amount of progress he has made.

Then it all takes a turn for the worse. These people are your heroes, you wish you had the courage they had, you have wondered if you would be able to do the same if you were in their shoes. You try to remain calm and composed, try to make reason, try to not make it too personal.

Still, when you leave his room, you feel like you have failed him.

He keeps on sending apologies via text messages because you try to keep out of his way for a few days.

You feel your anger subdue, and you do understand where he came from. It is an insidious enemy, internalised homophobia; it can creep into you over the years and it is hard to get rid of that voice inside your head feeding you lies that make you hate yourself and others like you.

So you answer him; tell him that you two are alright. You have just been busy with your own life, for once.

But you cannot help but notice the growing darkness of the bags under his eyes.

Running therapy sessions for all of the residents of the apartment was not necessarily what you had imagined you would be doing when you left your parents’ home, but it is a nice perk. You have a lot of love to give.

After months of inability to talk about his feelings, he finally comes to you. It is a bit of a surprise, you had almost given up ever getting to know the person beyond his walls. The bags under his eyes seemed to have lightened up immensely. It is hard to guess whether he wants your opinion or wants some comfort. So what you do is honesty. You are honest in your advice, something that hurts a little too much, you can see it in his eyes.

He is in way deeper with this Even than you had initially thought.

It turns out that you needn’t have worried, because Even suddenly shows up in your apartment once again. Your excitement is through the roof; you want to congratulate them personally on their ability to get their shit together. You silently curse the heavens, like a good friend would, because damn. The boy can cook, smells nice, is interested and is so very thoughtful.

When your grumpy roommate finally arrives, Even kisses him resolutely, and you do not know if he was entirely ready for it but you admire Even’s guts. Noora, however, sees that you guys need to leave them alone, to let them be.

You would have rather stayed and eaten those delicious eggs. But alas, the world is entirely unfair for good-looking people with great personalities, like yourself.

Sacrifices for the greater good must be made.

After an hour at the bar where you met him for the first time, while talking to the men he was staring at in envy, you receive a message.

And you know him. If he asks you for help, instead of his friends... it is not a game. It is an emergency. You leave immediately.

When you meet him at home, you push him towards his room to get a change of clothes, while you take the time to get a glass of water from the kitchen. You take a very deep breath before moving towards his room again. He is sitting on his bed, looking lost in every sense of the word. When you ask him what happens, he just tells you that it was all a lie.

Although his eyes are red-rimmed, he is not crying anymore. He breathes very quickly. You sit next to him, putting your arm around his shoulders; you tell him to breathe. His head slumps down onto your shoulder.

You had imagined hugging him for the first time in very different circumstances.

The only thing you can do is tell him you’ll be there if you need him. You keep reaching out, you keep talking to him.

You know what it feels like to have your heart broken. But even though you are three years older than him, you realise.

It never felt like this.

When you see Even’s shoes in the hallway again, you are relieved and hesitant at the same time. You send him a message to see how he reacts. You need an answer. Alt er ok is the best thing you have read in a while.

He tells you about Even’s mental illness; how it had impacted them getting together and how it might look going forward. He tells you that they agreed to take it as slowly as they need to; a minute at a time if need be.

You tell him you have never been so proud of him like you are right then. He looks down and blushes, muttering a small thank you.

The week after is tough, and you come to see Even in a very different light. He’s strong and brave, and he’s utterly devoted to the happiness of people that he loves. If anything, you are glad that they’ve found each other.

You have always felt like you had to set an example for Isak.

Turns out behind the walls of the grumpiest teenage boy there ever was is the biggest heart you have ever seen.

After Isak moves in with Even and Noora gets back together with her... questionable... boyfriend, you feel like everyone is moving on from the apartment except for you and Linn.

You take it harder than you were expecting to. The Kollektivet feels like family to you; a family within the myriad of families you have gathered over the years. You are a person who nurtures, who loves, who cares for people.

At a party where you are introduced to so many different kinds of people and cultures, you keep wondering where your place is going to be, and with whom. Whilst stuffing your face with delicious potatoes to keep the emotions inside, Isak sits down next to you and asks if you are alright.

For once, you fall silent. You decide to tell him the truth; that you feel out of place and sort of lost.

Then he responds in a way you had never expected to hear from the curly-haired boy you met in the gay bar just over a year ago.

You are family, Eskild. I will never be able to thank or… repay you for what you have meant to me. But you know – I would like to try.

That is what families do.

#mine #my words #skam #eskild tryggvason #isak valtersen #1800 words of feelings on eskild's perspective of isak's story

187 notes · View notes

crimethinc · 7 years

Text

Not Your Grandfather’s Antifascism: Anti-Fascism Has Arrived. Here’s Where It Needs to Go.

Following the clashes in Charlottesville and the massive anti-fascist demonstrations afterwards in Durham, Boston, and the Bay Area, the struggle against fascism has arrived in the consciousness of the general public. Tens of thousands of people are realizing that the fight against fascism didn’t end in 1945—that today, as increasingly authoritarian governments collude with ascendant fascist movements, this battle is more pressing than ever.

It’s worth taking a moment to review what anti-fascists have accomplished since Trump was elected. Despite harassment and attacks from fascists and law enforcement, what was initially a few hundred people without financial resources or sponsors has grown into the foundation for a massive social movement. On April 15, fascists rampaged through Berkeley, recording video footage of themselves beating people to use for recruiting purposes. On Sunday, August 27, the same fascists attempted to hold another rally in Berkeley. In response to the murder of Heather Heyer during a fascist rally in Charlottesville two weeks prior, thousands of people converged to make the fascist demonstration impossible.

Imagine if the “Unite the Right” rally had taken place without resistance, and a thousand white supremacists had been able to march around Charlottesville unopposed. In that scenario, emboldened fascists could have presented themselves as a legitimate part of political spectrum, while preparing the way for more murders like the ones in Charleston and Portland. In that case, the government with Trump at the helm would be able to present itself as the only possible solution to fascist violence, and the general public would be forced to seek assistance from the very authorities that are already implementing most of the white supremacist agenda. We should be grateful that long before Charlottesville, forward-thinking anti-fascists were doing the thankless work of monitoring fascists and mobilizing against them.

But now that the struggle against fascism has arrived on a massive scale, it’s time to come to grips with the limitations the movement faces today. Every victory generates new challenges. Let’s explore the obstacles that the anti-fascist movement will have to overcome to succeed in creating a world free of authoritarianism.

Not your grandfather’s anti-fascism.

Corporate Media Back the Fascists

The Washington Post titled their coverage of Sunday’s demonstration “Black-clad antifa members attack peaceful right-wing demonstrators in Berkeley.” It is not surprising when Fox News publishes barefaced propaganda describing the organizer of far-right demonstrations that have included at least one fascist murderer as a “prayer activist,” but it is more unsettling to see fascist talking points parroted by supposedly liberal outlets.

Scaremongering from the corporate media.

The image at the top of the Washington Post article shows a right-wing demonstrator apparently being shoved by an anti-fascist with a shield. Yet several videos show the same far-right demonstrator pepper-spraying anti-fascist demonstrators without provocation and then pepper-spraying people at random immediately before the photo was taken. If you look close, the attacker is wearing a shirt that celebrates Chilean military dictator Augusto Pinochet for murdering dissidents by dropping them out of helicopters. If you look closer, you can see that the anti-fascist in the picture has a stick, but is choosing not to use it, instead simply using a shield to block the fascist with the pepper-spray from carrying out further attacks. In fact, the Washington Post chose to use a photo in which the assailant’s right hand is not visible, so readers would not see the pepper spray he holds in it.

Take a closer look.

When the Washington Post portray such fascists as “peaceful,” suggesting that they are victims even as they attack people and glorify mass murder, this gives them legitimacy, securing space for them to recruit and to promote and organize further attacks. Why would liberal media outlets do this?

Journalists often determine the substance of their story in advance, and it appears that media outlets across the spectrum had determined in advance to report the anti-fascist demonstration in Berkeley as an expression of violent excess even before it happened. In the event, the demonstration was largely peaceful; even the worst clashes were considerably less violent than the fighting on April 15. Despite this, corporate media outlets that had ignored April 15 altogether devoted considerable space to a few isolated incidents in which anti-fascists scuffled with fascists or other Trump supporters.

The intention was clearly to impose a limit on the amount of popular legitimacy anti-fascists would be permitted to accrue after the events in Charlottesville. Two weeks of positive coverage of anti-fascists, during which various members of the clergy came forward to praise their efforts, were deemed to be too much. Heather Heyer’s murder had taken corporate media by surprise, interrupting their conventional narratives and proving that the threat anti-fascists had supposedly been blowing out of proportion was all to real. It took corporate editors two weeks to regain control of the discourse. As soon as they did, they reimposed their old stereotypes as if Heather had never been killed.

This should put an end to any illusions we might have had that corporate media could side with anti-fascists. Outlets like the Washington Post aspire to position themselves against both Trump and his adversaries in the streets—to occupy what some call “the extreme center.” They are gambling that the current polarization of society is temporary, that they can be the beneficiaries of disillusionment with both sides.

Anti-fascists have to strategize about how to organize and legitimize our efforts to the general public without the benefit of positive media coverage. This is no easy task. At the minimum, it will demand our own grassroots media, at the same time that this media is under systematic assault from right-wing trolls.

This challenge is symptomatic of the larger phenomenon of polarization, which is worth examining separately.

The Swinging Pendulum of Polarization

US society has been splintering and polarizing for years now, since the recession of 2008 if not before. The movement against police and white supremacy that burst onto the national stage in Ferguson in 2014 as Black Lives Matter generated a far-right backlash, which inspired a resurgence of anti-fascist organizing. In response, fascists gave angry liberals and anti-fascists a central place in their strategy, seeking to provoke them into reactive behavior that could be used to further mobilize the right-wing base. Milo Yiannopoulos used this strategy until it blew up in his face last February, when a black bloc of hundreds shut down his event in Berkeley.

Various fascist and fascist-friendly organizers also used this approach, baiting leftists and anti-fascists with a series of “free speech” rallies in Berkeley, Portland, and elsewhere around the country that won the nascent fascist movement notoriety and momentum. This movement appeared fully formed for the first time in Charlottesville—but the shockwaves of that debut drew many more people into the movement against fascism, changing the balance of power once again. The “free speech” rallies scheduled afterwards in Boston and the Bay Area were total washouts for the fascists.

In each of these cases, when the pendulum of polarization swung to one side, the opposing side was able to use the specter of that victory to draw more sympathizers into action. With the media narrative coming out about Berkeley, the pendulum has again swung away from anti-fascists to benefit the right-wing reaction.

So long as this pattern persists, every anti-fascist victory will produce an even greater threat from the far-right and the government. To break out of the pattern, anti-fascists have to figure out how to strike blows without equipping fascists to cash in on the resulting fear among right-wingers, or else to find a way to draw in large swathes of the population more rapidly than their competition on the right. We can offer a few hypotheses about how to accomplish this.

Anti-fascists in Dallas, Texas.

The Myth of Symmetry

The allegation that fascists and anti-fascists are equally bad has been advanced most famously by Donald Trump himself in his response to the events in Charlottesville. He suggested that the problem was an “egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence on many sides,” refusing to say a word about the fascists who murdered Heather Heyer. This should tell us something about those who describe fascists and anti-fascists as symmetrical.

To equate those who fight for freedom and equality with those who want an autocratic state to enforce hierarchies is to reserve all legitimacy for the state alone—which is itself an autocratic position. It means celebrating the legalism of passive spectators over the heroes who fought the rise of dictatorships in Italy, Germany, Spain, Chile, Greece, and a hundred other nations. It means congratulating those who keep their hands clean while their neighbors are rounded up and imprisoned, deported, or killed.

We have to become adept at spelling out the ethical differences between fascism and anti-fascism, and all the justifications for forms of direct action that can actually be effective in this struggle. We need allies from many different walks of life who can help us make this case to the public at large.

Unfortunately, we can’t count on everyone on the Left to behave responsibly. In “How ‘Antifa’ Mirrors the ‘Alt-Right,’” the same Chris Hedges who assisted the state in dividing and repressing the Occupy movement reappears to perform the same service in relation to the movements against fascism and the Trump administration.

The irony of a war journalist perennially accusing others of being driven by a lust for adrenaline should not be lost on anyone. It is worse still that Hedges, as a journalist, arrogates himself the right to pass judgment on the events in Charlottesville from a distance rather than deferring to people like Cornel West who were actually there putting their bodies on the line. But the true irony here is that Hedges purports to be warning against precisely the problem that he himself is creating. “By brawling in the streets,” Hedges alleges, “antifa allows the corporate state… to use the false argument of moral equivalency to criminalize the work of all anti-capitalists.” Actually, it is Hedges who is equipping the state to do this, by attributing “the same lust for violence” to anti-fascists that he believes motivates fascists. He could just as easily use his soapbox to debunk this moral equivalency, but he lacks the moral courage—he simply cannot resist performing the same kind of “self-advertisement for moral purity” that he accuses others of.

In 2012, when the authorities needed a narrative with which to isolate the ungovernable elements of the Occupy movement, Hedges provided that narrative, and the FBI subsequently parroted it verbatim in their efforts to justify a series of entrapment cases. Now Hedges is providing Trump’s government exactly the same service, equipping them to declare “antifa” a terrorist organization, as many on the far right have already been demanding. Already, the mayor of Berkeley is calling for “antifa” to be designated as a gang—imagine if everyone who opposes the rise of fascism is classified as a gang member, or a terrorist!

Hedges needs to understand that it is not anti-fascists gaining ground that brings about fascist attacks and government crackdowns. If anti-fascists were not gaining power in the streets, fascists would still be taking advantage of the despair and resentment of poor whites, and the government would still be developing more means of repression—there would simply be no social movement to protect us from them. It is fundamentally paranoid, disempowering, and ahistorical to understand these developments as the result of anti-fascist activity. On the contrary, it is imperative that we build the capacity to act effectively in the streets before the fascists outstrip us and the government is able to centralize enough power to establish tyranny once and for all.

All that said, we also need to avoid offering our enemies on the Left and Right alike the opportunity to present us as a mirror image of our fascist adversaries. Let’s explore some ways we can go about this.

Identity and Containment

On one hand, it has been extremely useful for people in the US to learn from anti-fascist movements in other parts of the world. At the same time, the wholesale uncritical introduction of European models has created problems, chief of which is the containment of the struggle against fascism within a discrete identity, “antifa.” It has been a tremendous boon to the far right that they can describe anti-fascists without having to spell out the entire word “fascist”—it helps them to avoid the question of why anyone would oppose resisting fascism.

In German, abbreviations are common: national socialist becomes Nazi, anti-fascist becomes antifa. But in English, especially to those not familiar with the history of German anti-fascist struggles, the word antifa can appear alien and off-putting. At its worst, the German antifa movement has tended towards subcultural insularity; this is the last thing we need in the US, locked in a massive struggle with fascists and the government itself—a struggle we can only hope to win if ever-wider segments of the population are drawn into our side of the barricades.

Identity is fundamentally about distinguishing oneself from others. Anti-fascism, however, is for everybody. We should be careful not to insulate it within a particular demographic with a specific dress code and lingo. This is paramount because the far right are scrambling to depict antifa as a monolithic, hostile, alien organization. Our task is not just to build a network of groups, but to create an anti-fascist momentum that will spread contagiously throughout society at large, along with the critiques and tactics necessary for this fight. Specific antifa groups and the cultural cache of “antifa” itself can be useful in that project, as can black bloc tactics, provided we evaluate them as tools for achieving particular objectives rather than expressions of identity or belonging.

One of countless European solidarity demonstrations in memory of Heather Heyer, who was murdered in Charlottesville.

The Tendency to Militarize

As the conflict between fascists and anti-fascists intensifies, we are seeing more and more guns in the streets. Some people who were in Charlottesville reported that it was good that there were guns on both sides: it discouraged fascists from escalating physical conflicts past a certain point. Others report that most of the anti-fascists openly bearing arms were located some distance from the clashes. Some people who were in Ferguson at the birth of the Black Lives Matter movement say that without the treat of gunfire from the locals, the police would never have permitted the demonstrations happen. Others who experienced the trauma of having their loved ones shot before them counsel that the consequences of bringing guns into street conflict are weightier than most people can imagine.

Participants in the Syrian revolution report that for the first several months, the revolt created an open space of debate and possibility in which many people of different walks of life participated. Later, after the conflict escalated, power among the rebels accrued in the hands of religious fundamentalists, as they were the only ones who were able to consistently acquire military supplies—and from that point on, the horizon of liberation and transformation was closed. Sometimes, such escalation is inescapable, even if it closes the door to future possibilities; in any case, it is better to prepare for it now than to be suddenly caught flatfooted. But if our goal is to carry out a revolution rather than to fight in a civil war, we should not hurry the process of escalation—we should drag it out as long as we can. Most of the social changes we want to see cannot be brought about by guns.

Likewise, we should not imagine that coercive force can solve everything, nor permit fascists and state repression to put us so on edge that we see enemies everywhere we look and begin to attack people when it is not strategic. In the words of an elder anti-fascist veteran from Germany, fascist violence aims to exterminate, while anti-fascist violence aims to educate. We should not hurry to put fascist martyrs in the ground next to Heather Heyer. We must never risk coming across as bullies. It must always be clear that we are here to protect the public at large, not to assert our own authority or masculinity. When we are compelled to use coercive force, we must make sure that the ways we do so don’t centralize power or legitimacy within our own movement.

Antif-fascists in Berkeley on Sunday behind a banner reading “Avenge Charlottesville / Defend your community.”

The Language of Terrorism

In the wake of Heather Heyer’s murder, signs appeared at vigils and rallies reading “White Supremacy is Terrorism.” While it is understandable that people wish to condemn her murder in the strongest possible terms, it is dangerous to use the language of terrorism to do so.

The framework of terrorism is constructed by the state to define who has the right to employ violence and who doesn’t. When we denounce white supremacists as terrorists, we mimic the verbiage of Senator Cory Gardner, chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and Paul Ryan, Republican Speaker of the House.

Terrorist is used to designate those who are beyond the state’s control and cannot be brought into political alignment with the state. This explains why Heather’s murderer has not been charged with terrorism, while many anarchists who did not so much as scratch someone have received terrorism charges over the past decade and a half.

Using the rhetoric of the state reinforces frameworks and narratives that the authorities will ultimately use against us. This is dangerous to our movements and constitutes a betrayal of comrades engaged in struggles we’re often aligned with. Palestinians are labeled terrorists to delegitimize their struggle against the Israeli state. Like the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front, the YPG and YPJ in Rojava have been labeled terrorists. The language and ideology of the “war on terror” were carefully introduced into US political discourse in order to prepare the ground for the catastrophic invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq.

The word terrorism comes to us from the Jacobin government’s brutal and merciless rule in France in the 1790’s—the term was invented to describe their “reign of terror” during which thousands were executed. Even though the word was coined for the Jacobins and that they wore it proudly as a badge, some historians today argue that the Jacobins weren’t terrorists because they were a state entity with legitimate power. This should give us a sense of the extent to which the discourse of terrorism serves to give the state carte blanche while delegitimizing all who stand against it.

There Is No Good Authoritarianism

Sunday’s far-right rally in Berkeley was promoted under the slogan “No to Marxism in America.” As with the far-right “March against Sharia,” there is no danger of the United States coming under a Marxist government any time soon. Like all totalitarians, fascists desperately need enemies even more oppressive than themselves to point to in order to convince people to join their ranks. There is an ominous symmetry between groups like ISIS and Western fascists, some of whom openly fantasize about a “White Sharia.” This explains their obsession with authoritarian Marxism.

In fact, the fiercest opposition to contemporary fascist organizing has not come from authoritarian Marxists, but from anarchists who oppose state power itself. This is inconvenient for many fascists in the US, who still need to present themselves as enemies of “big government” in order to appeal to US Libertarians and traditional conservatives.

If fascists are eager to paint all their domestic opponents with the broad brush of Marxism, we should not hasten to assist them. Yes, authoritarian Marxists have historically played a role in the fight against fascism, but they have hardly played it honorably. They began by betraying and undermining other social movements as early as 1871. If Stalin hadn’t sabotaged anti-fascist participants in the Spanish Civil War and other movements around Europe and then concluded a pact with Hitler, the Second World War would have unfolded much differently, and it might not have taken decades afterwards for grassroots liberation movements to recover.

If both fascism and authoritarian Marxism are experiencing a resurgence today, this is partly because the Millennial generation grew up after the fall of the Berlin Wall and too young to have grandfathers who fought in the Second World War. For many in the United States, totalitarianism is abstract, something to joke about on the internet. Some young people on the Left see the hammer and sickle the way many young right-wingers see the swastika: as a provocative meme rather than a blood-drenched symbol of oppression. Yet Stalin, too, carried out ethnic cleansing, as have many other authoritarian Marxist regimes.

One cannot consistently oppose fascism without opposing all forms of authoritarian government. This is not to say that rank-and-file members of authoritarian communist organizations can never be comrades in this struggle. Many of them are sincere people with the best of intentions—and clearly we need all the comrades we can get when we are facing down Nazis with guns. The point is that anti-fascists should oppose the leadership of authoritarian Marxist parties for many of the same reasons that we oppose fascists and other authoritarians. If you care about a member of an organization like the Bolshevik Party, you can express that care by making sure that his organization never comes to power—for if history is any guide, he will be the next up against the wall after you.

We must make it clear to the general public that we do not intend to impose a new dictatorship, but only to open and preserve spaces of freedom. There is no statist solution for tyranny.

Martyrdom

Unfortunately, Heather Heyer is not the first person to be taken from us by fascist violence, and she will not be the last. In addition to being wary of the discourse of terrorism and the tendency to militarize our struggles, we should wary of the discourse of martyrdom and tendency to celebrate death in battle. We need to find ways to remember people above all for who they were, for what their lives gave to the world, not for how they died or what their deaths meant to the struggle. We should not begin to regard ourselves or each other as playing pieces to be exchanged for strategic gains.

We live in a society in which aging and death are concealed from most of us. If this struggle continues to intensify, more and more of us will be forced to learn what it is like to spend hard weeks in the hospital, to meet at funerals as well as outside jails and courtrooms. We should approach this as another opportunity to come to know ourselves and each other better, to recognize what is beautiful and worthwhile in life—the things for which we are fighting in the first place. We should not subordinate ourselves to the struggle, but recognize it as one of the ways that life pours forth abundantly within us.

Cutting to the Roots

The vast majority of the anti-fascist struggle does not take place in street confrontations. It takes place in how we raise our children; it takes place in the hard conversations at workplaces and family dinners; it takes place in the ways we relate to our neighbors, the ways we understand togetherness and belonging. To triumph, we have to make it possible for people of all genders and ethnicities and religions to work together to survive the ordeals of capitalism; we have to create movements that can offer everybody more than the fascists ever could.

Ultimately, a thoroughgoing anti-fascist movement should not focus on targeting fascist groups that so marginal as to stick out from the rest of the political spectrum, but the infrastructure through which any authoritarian program will be enacted. That is to say, it should focus on the state itself. If we simply fight defensive battles, the fascists will eventually gain the initiative. We should take the experiences of fighting together that we can experience in anti-fascist struggle as use those as points of departure to work together to solve all of the problems that we have. This is the way to take the offensive and move on to confronting the fundamental sources of oppression.

Some believe that life will go back to normal soon enough, and fascism and anti-fascism will once more be things of the past. But we fear that we have yet to see how far these conflicts will go, and that we have to invest ourselves in confronting them head on. The only way out is through. Double or nothing.

35 notes · View notes