#anyway if this turns out to be fake i apologize for nothing because spreading misinformation about the royals is funny | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

ramblings-of-a-mad-cat · 3 years

Note

Okay. I passed Y6CHR45, and... I want to say that this is very bad. I mean, that... This plot twist with Merula is very illogical and obvious. I'm not a fan of Merula, but. First, why it's obvious. Because in the storyline, Merula is our rival, not our friend. How many nasty things did she do MC, etc. Well, it's too obvious that in the future they will try to make her our enemy. Second, why it's illogical. Merula has very different goals. Don't be the same as your parents, take revenge on Rakepick and kill her, become stronger and more powerful. There is not a single point in being with 'R'. Why would she want to work with someone she wants to kill? I think it would be logical if Merula joined the Death Eaters. She and her aunt had been threatened by the Death Eaters. This is what Merula said in Y5CHR28. And Andre was talking about the mark on Merula's hand in year six, when Bill taught us the Barrier Spell. Still, I think Merula was framed by someone. Merula was still ready to drink the Truth Serum. And one more thing. Won't the MC say anything about it? Not to the professors, not to Ben, not to Jacob, not to anyone about what they saw in Knockturn Alley? Hey, JC, we have a Muggle Studies class on Y7, and there will be Merula. MC will just forget about it or what? It's just stupid. I apologize, I have nobody to express this misunderstanding of the JC logic. 🤨 And one more thing. I don't think Merula is a mole. In fact, I think the mole is Penny. Because it's very logical! 'R' could have threatening and blackmailed her, like... They could steal Beatrice, or threaten to kill her, if Penny didn't follow their instructions. Penny, in her fifth year, said she would work with anyone to save Beatrice. And if you add it up in this form... I mean, Penny is the most logical option. She's the most popular girl at Hogwarts. She knows every rumor, she knows the secrets of many students. No one will even think about it! How can you think of one who is very kind, helps everyone, understands Potions, etc? This is my theory, and honestly, I still stick to it. Knowing the character of penny, for the sake of Beatrice she would betray even MC.

I don’t know, I don’t think of it as being that illogical. I suppose it was rather obvious, but in a sense, those two ideas are in conflict with each other. If a plot twist is logical, it can be predicted. If it’s not, then it won’t be, but that’s a whole different problem. In any case, this got very long, so I’m putting it under a cut.

Was it obvious?

She has been our enemy from the start, but her character arc seemed to suggest that was changing. In a way, this actually made her a less obvious suspect. At least to me. She was the primary antagonist of Year 1, but we quickly got used to her nonsense. Stopped taking her seriously. Meanwhile, the story gave her depth. Many players grew to care for her, many pitied her, but even the ones who didn’t no longer saw her as a serious threat. At the same time, the scale was gradually increasing. By Year 5, Merula wasn’t the antagonist anymore, not just because she had been deconstructed, but because the story was darkening, and the times of a school bully being the villain were long over. Hell, by Year 2 we knew about R, and by Year 4 we had Rakepick to wonder about. Year 5 not only brought Merula’s character arc to the point where she became more of a friend (but no less prickly and combative) it also fleshed out the game’s Big Bad to the point where it became clear that this was much bigger than MC, or anyone in their year. Year 5 also exonerated Ben, and later unceremoniously killed the “Rowan is R” theory by having Rowan be imperius’d like Ben was.

No one took Merula seriously anymore, people felt sorry for her, and we felt as though we understood her completely. That nothing she did could surprise us. This was capped off by the betrayal of Rakepick, compounded with her using the Cruciatus Curse on Merula. Because MC was betrayed, but not by any of the students. But by their mentor, who was always shady in the first place. Merula was put in a horrible position where even her greatest Antis surely felt a twinge of pity for her. Anyone left who suspected her probably wouldn’t have after that night. What’s more, it played into the idea that we understood Merula perfectly. Because she reacted exactly as one would expect her to. She regressed. Year 6 depicted her as someone firmly on our side, but predictably not someone who would be nice about it. From her jabs about Rowan, to her fawning over Jacob, people were annoyed with her, but no one suspected her. The game practically taunts the player, in hindsight, with the veritaserum scene. Because that’s just it - no one thought she would betray MC. They were worried she would go rogue, but no one doubted her loyalty.

Why did she do it?

As for the logic of her decision, I likewise disagree. I believe Merula had every reason to join R. I don’t think that the Cabal and the Death Eaters are so different that one would make sense for her to join, and not the other, if that makes sense. She could have gone either way, but at a guess, Merula doesn’t think very highly of the Death Eaters. She refers to Voldemort by his name without a care in the world. If they really were threatening her, I feel like she wouldn’t want to cave in, but she might be attracted to joining a rival faction that could provide her (and her aunt?) with protection. If there’s one thing we know about R - it’s that they have a history of making enticing offers to children, provoking them to “prove” themselves to be accepted into the Cabal’s ranks. The description of them being her new “family” gives me cult vibes, and it really sheds some light on why Merula might have been drawn to them. She was lonely, she was angry, she wanted power...and R came along to offer her everything she wanted at the time. Whether she wants to leave now is uncertain, but if we assume that she’s been the mole since the very beginning, it’s probably way too late for her to just walk away. R would not allow that.

As to the sequence of Rakepick torturing her, we don’t yet know what was going on in that scene. Though I am feeling somewhat vindicated in the knowledge that there was more to that scene that meets the eye, just like I was sure there had to be. Perhaps Rakepick and Merula planned that whole thing, perhaps it was staged. Which would mean that Rakepick faked the spell, and Merula pretended to be tortured, and that her entire vendetta against Rakepick has been a facade. Or maybe the curse was real, but Merula agreed to it beforehand. Or maybe she knew the betrayal was coming, but Rakepick went off-script by turning her wand on Merula. Either way, if Merula’s vendetta was real, I don’t think it’s out of character for her to want revenge. Who cares if it’s someone on her side? This is Merula we’re talking about - I don’t think that would stop her. Now, if we assume she was not yet an R mole at the time (I think she was, but for the sake of argument) then perhaps R reached out to Merula, apologized for Rakepick’s torture and promised that they did not authorize it. Promised that there would be consequences, and Merula could be the one to inflict them, if she agreed to join them. It’s a longshot, but I guess it’s possible.

The Future.

The existence of this twist doesn’t really create any holes, I don’t think, and while it may put the writers in a tricky position moving forward, that’s not the same thing as them screwing up the continuity of the past. They’ll have to find a way to make this work, and until we see the ramifications, I’m willing to wait on judging how this arc plays out. MC will have a choice to make, certainly, in how they handle this. I can’t wait to see the dialogue. What they do next remains to be seen. Do they confront Merula? Turn her in? Or...if we want to be really sneaky, what we should do, in my opinion...is act as though nothing’s changed. Spread the word to people like Moody and Ben, but...do not let Merula catch on that we know. The way to salvage this situation, from a purely tactical perspective, is to let R believe they still have a spy at Hogwarts...but begin to feed her misinformation. Lead them astray. This is quite literally a war tactic, because hey...this is a war. Now, the issue with that is that Merula will likely face punishment once R figures out that she’s being misled...but hopefully we can save Merula before that point, and to the players who despise her - or even feel like she’d deserve it for her treachery...they probably wouldn’t care anyway.

I don’t think we can really judge based on the Muggles Studies classes, or anything that we know about Year 7. I also don’t expect Jam City to consider what we “know” and in all fairness...I mean, they don’t have to. That is unreleased content. Nothing in the data-mines is, strictly speaking, canon, or part the continuity. With the way that scene ended, it suggests that Merula won’t be returning for Year 7. Maybe. The data-mines contradict this, but data-mines don’t provide the full context. They aren’t released content, and anything could change. There were once data-mines that confirmed Skye as being in MC’s year, as well as suggesting that Murphy felt embittered about his disability. Both of these things were cut. So they’re not canon. In general, I think Jam City has a terrible approach to dealing with hackers, but one thing I will say in their defense is that they aren’t required to write their scenes based on what the fandom has discovered in the data-mines. If we’re confused, well, that’s kind of our own fault. But I’m sure everything will become clear eventually. I hope.

Penny.

For meta reasons, I don’t see them pulling a double twist and revealing a second character to be the “real” mole, but it’s not impossible. And I’ve said all along that the Year 1 characters were the real suspects. MC unknowingly being the mole was my theory, mostly because Moody is shady as all hell. But Ben is shady too, it’s just that he had a rock-solid alibi in the form of Rakepick trying to kill him, since she couldn’t have known that Rowan would intervene. Setting aside Merula, since I’ve also said from the start that she isn’t a good liar...that leaves Penny. I really don’t think Penny is shady. I’ve never thought that. I’ll admit that she does essentially approach MC out of the blue to befriend them, but I mean...so does Ben. This happens on a much larger scale later on with Alanza. I can believe Penny would go to the ends of the earth to protect Beatrice, and maybe when she was imprisoned in the Portrait, R contacted Penny and strong-armed her into this deal. The issue is, Beatrice is safe and sound as of sixth year. The Black Lake incident is still a bit spotty, and perhaps that was R going after her again...but I just don’t think there are enough hints for me to believe it, personally. If this were true, why was Ben the character who insisted on coming to the Portrait Vault instead of Penny? She could have demanded to come along too, and no one would have blamed her. Everyone would have understood. Not to mention, Penny has severe tells when she’s stressed. She does not act like herself. She’s mostly back to normal in Year 6, and her behavior reflects that Beatrice is safe now, just pulling away. If Beatrice was still on the hot-seat, I feel like Penny would not be keeping it together. Finally, that raises the question of how much Beatrice is aware of all this. Does she know about this deal? Because I find it hard to believe she wouldn’t tell anyone.

#Merula Snyde #HPHM Theory #HPHM Spoilers #Patricia Rakepick #HPHM Analysis #HPHM Cabal #Penny Haywood #HPHM R #Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery #HPHM Datamines

6 notes · View notes

voice-in-the-voids · 4 years

Video

youtube

Video: “Don't Judge Blacks Differently,” by PragerU.

A conservative relative of mine sent this video to me, and I wrote a critical analysis of it in response. I spent more time than I should on it, so I was like, what the heck-- might as well post it, right?

A) That lady... doesn’t sound like she’s legitimately invested in the issue. Normally this wouldn’t be too big a problem, but her dispassion on an issue like this that should pertain directly to her makes it feel like she’s reading a script. We live in an age of mass media; charisma is essential to getting the attention of the public. When the audience feels like you’re reading off a script, it undermines the point you’re trying to make. I’m sure you can think of some YouTubers who you watch who occasionally acknowledge the fact that they’re reading from a script, but they manage to read the script with excitement/passion/good acting because that’s how you catch the audience’s attention. Furthermore, talking like you’re invested in the issue will increase your credibility.

B) There are a LOT of nuances and relevant issues that they straight-up ignore, like the Poverty Cycle, drug/alcohol use, and they even try to sidestep the whole racially-charged aspect of the issue. Not addressing the nuances makes me think the writers (and, by extent, Prager) have neither a comprehensive grasp of the situation nor the compassion they should have towards others.

C) “in free, democratic America you have no other options?!” Yeah. Did you SEE 2016?! Russia played us like a piano with fake grassroots movements, leaving us with reason to question not only the political system currently in place but also who in the media we can trust. Because of all the misinformation that Trump’s presidency has wrought (Russia used misinformation to *try to* help him win, he’s denied climate change and loosened regulations on companies that were to help keep the environment clean, he spread misinformation on Covid, and he consistently slandered anyone who spoke out against his administration, like Romney and Yavanovitch)— flippantly blowing off the idea that there is no other option is another example of a failure to comprehend the nuances of the situation. It also puts Prager in a dangerous position from an argumentative standpoint; if someone is able to reasonably deny that statement, it invalidates the rest of their argument because their argument is built on the premise of there BEING other options to fight injustice. Such a flimsy, flippant excuse for an argument as “we a democracy” is unacceptable.

D) their message boils down to “we’re not racist... YOU’RE racist!!!” And that annoys me. Part of the reason that I’m staying out of this whole issue is because there’s too many variants to the stance; there’s too much to research with not enough information available. Furthermore, if I DO try to voice my opinion or participate in activism, there’s a strong possibility that what I have to say will be misinterpreted by a paranoid audience looking for enemies. The message of this video embodies that very thing— someone looking for enemies.

E) they say they want “the facts” but they don’t cite a single source in the whole video— at least, not that I’m catching. This makes me extremely dubious about the credibility of their argument. Analytics are fine, sure— but if you don’t have empirics to back them up, that usually indicates a flaw in the viability of the argument, since a lack of evidence leads me to believe the argument doesn’t work in the real world.

F) They call white supremacists “honest” and “open” 🙄 I don’t think I need to elaborate on why that was a bad move, but I will anyway. White supremacy is a philosophy. Just because people don’t practice it in the open or say they’re white supremacists doesn’t mean they’re not. To say that white supremacists are honest and open is to underestimate their potential for wrongdoing-- or, to put it simpler, to underestimate their sneakiness-- and to try to minimize their assessment of the White supremacist threat is to side Prager with the white supremacists, at least in the audience’s perception.

G) Their assessment of the “condescenders” gets on my nerves. It demonizes people like me who are refraining from judging a situation we know nothing about, constructing a false dichotomy that ultimately fuels the fundamental flaws in our political system of the status quo— polarization, a self-imposed flaw that in the past has led to civil war.

H) They say something along the lines of “black people want treated the SAME as everyone else!!” without addressing the fact that police are held to a lower standard of behavior than the general public, or at the very least acknowledging people’s perception that this is the case even if you personally don’t agree with that perception. You CANNOT make the argument that everyone should be treated equally without addressing this issue. Police have little specialized training compared to other fields like doctors in which someone holds other people’s lives in their hand— and too little knowledge of the law itself. A police only has to *think* someone is breaking a law— they don’t have to actually break any laws— for them to justify their actions in court. In spur-of-the-moment, life-or-death situations, this would make sense... if we could be confident that they know the law reasonably well. Also, police are trained for preemptive action; they’re trained to see everyone as an enemy, basically. (I watched a video on this topic once, like half a year ago; it was intriguing. They have this exercise where you have to pull out a finger gun before the other person or you lose.) This mindset that justifies NOT ONLY looting and lack of compassion, but also straight-up murder. Ignoring the existence of this mindset during an argument where you’re trying to say everyone should be held to equal standards completely decimated that argument AND makes you look like you’re racist, approving of one group’s demonstratively lower standards while openly attacking another’s less-demonstratively lower standards. The argument consequently collapses under the obvious double standard.

I) This goes along with C; the whole “there’s no other options” thing. The law FAILED them, failed us. Every single time a while police officer gets off the hook for killing a black person, it’s another failure on the part of the law. It doesn’t matter if there was a legitimate reason; without an apology or publishing the details so that people can make their own judgments, public perception will be that the legal channel that’s the “appropriate” way to get justice is corrupt and will fail them. When the law fails to execute justice, people lose faith in it. So what else is there to turn to? I already covered the fact that elections are in question. Again, a flippant answer to these concerns is UNACCEPTABLE. You can’t just get away with saying “we live in a democracy” and “condescenders will say there’s no other option” as the sum total of your argument. A demonization of a legitimate viewpoint with NO regard to the “fact” or empirical evidence not only renders their point ineffective, but it also suggests that Prager doesn’t have anything better to go off of. They’re grasping at straws to cobble together a half-baked argument based totally on emotion— ironic, considering their insistence that facts are important. (And they are! See, this is what we would call a “turn” in debate, or a situation where the opposition uses the debaters’ own argument against them.)

---

Like I said earlier, this analysis was for a relative (who unironically sent me this video)-- it’s not intended to sound professional.

Sources on either extreme of the political spectrum often have similar flaws to the ones I elaborated on in this analysis. Next time you see a political opinion that differs from yours, don’t hate on it-- dissect it. Don’t just say it’s wrong, say WHY it’s wrong.

If an idea can be picked apart in 280 characters, you’re probably just being lazy.

Stay aware,

-Voice in the Void

#politics #voice in the void #use the media don't let the media use you #critical analysis #it was for a relative so iT DOESNT HAVE TO BE PROFESSIONAL OKAY

0 notes