FazzTheMan, The Novelist
Solidarity Forever by Ralph Chaplin
When the union's inspiration through the workers' blood shall run,
There can be no power greater anywhere beneath the sun;
Yet what force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one,
But the union makes us strong.
For the union makes us strong.
Is there aught we hold in common with the greedy parasite,
Who would lash us into serfdom and would crush us with his might?
Is there anything left to us but to organize and fight?
For the union makes us strong.
For the union makes us strong.
It is we who plowed the prairies; built the cities where they trade;
Dug the mines and built the workshops, endless miles of railroad laid;
Now we stand outcast and starving midst the wonders we have made;
But the union makes us strong.
For the union makes us strong.
All the world that's owned by idle drones is ours and ours alone.
We have laid the wide foundations; built it skyward stone by stone.
It is ours, not to slave in, but to master and to own.
While the union makes us strong.
For the union makes us strong.
They have taken untold millions that they never toiled to earn,
But without our brain and muscle not a single wheel can turn.
We can break their haughty power, gain our freedom when we learn
That the union makes us strong.
For the union makes us strong.
In our hands is placed a power greater than their hoarded gold,
Greater than the might of armies, multiplied a thousand-fold.
We can bring to birth a new world from the ashes of the old
For the union makes us strong.
Take control of a group of young and vexed African-Americans from Oakland, California, who sought to better their troubled community while simultaneously fighting against a racist and unjust system.
This is the story of the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, a story in which you will make the decisions and possibly alter history.
Expect crude language and 60's slang.
Written for the 2017 Summer Slam Contest.
HEP (re opened))
“[…] the Battle of Stalingrad, which was a major battle on the Eastern front of World War 2, wherein Nazi Germany fought the Soviet Union for control over the city of Stalingrad […] started on the 23rd of August, 1942 and ended on the same year, December 1st. […] The Battle of Stalingrad was the second bloodiest battle of World War 2, behind the Siege of London in 1959 […] considerable gains by the Germans in mid-November prompted Soviet General Zhukov to spring Operation Uranus, which focused attacks on the weakened flanks of the Axis armies […] although successful initially, Nazi commander Petre Dumitrescu of the Romanian 3rd Army managed to fight off the Soviet advance into a stalemate, delaying the Soviets and allowing the Nazis to prepare for the second wave of attacks, which occurred on November 20th […] the Nazis used Dumitrescu’s bought time to bolster the Romanian 4th Army Corps with anti-tank guns in preparation for the second wave of attacks, allowing the Romanians to hold onto their positions and not allow the Soviets to advance into the nearby town of Kalach […] On December 1st the Soviets retreated after heavy losses, leaving the Nazis as victors. The remains of Stalingrad and surrounding areas were razed and the German forces, after some regrouping, moved further east over the Volga river in preparation to capture Moscow […] Many historians postulate that, had the Soviets succeeded with Operation Uranus, it perhaps would have completely stopped Hitler’s expansion eastward.”
-- Excerpt taken from Canadian high school history textbook, circa 1970
“Entire squads were being punched through like cloth […] When we looked up at the hills towering the beach all we saw was steel […] it was the Landkreuzer P. 1000, a Kraut superweapon, the largest bloody tank known to mankind. Two hundred or so feet in length, fifty feet wide or some. Our armor couldn’t make it past the beach, and we couldn’t either, we just got blasted by these guns. It was hell. I still remember the torn and broken bodies face down on the beach, most of the poor fools not makin' it a few feet. Normandy was a disaster. A nightmare. And you can blame those Yanks and their great planning for it.”
-- Excerpt taken from interview with U.S. soldier, circa 1944
“Remember – your best chance to survive a nuclear bomb attack is to -- Duck and Cover! […] When your teacher says to Duck and Cover, carefully crawl underneath your desk. Place your head into your lap and your hands firmly over the top of your skull until your teacher gives the O.K. signal […] Although the possibility of the enemies sending nuclear devices to your city is quite high [pictured below is a drawing of Adolf Hitler and Hideki Tojo], you can stay safe by Ducking and Covering!”
-- Excerpt taken from Chinese school poster, circa 1995
Recent PostsBZ's Summer Slam Link Thread on 9/16/2017 12:01:06 AM
Yeah man I'm not about to get shamed ;) Like most of everyone else's (I think) it's unfinished, but I guess it can still kinda work as a storygame just not exactly the most fulfilling one.
edit - Wow, turnout is kinda depressing as usual :(
BZ's Summer Slam Contest! on 8/26/2017 3:21:55 AM
Why not just 'hero' without the 'super'?
That way you don't exclude stories where the hero doesn't have any powers... like mine for instance. And the OP of the contest lists 'spies, vigilantes, and heroes' none of which are inherently 'super'.
I guess it is an incredibly small matter, but it is the only hero-related tag, and it would be nice if it were broadened instead of seeming to pertain to only one type of story...
Music on 8/19/2017 5:55:10 PM
Only genre I listen to is rap, any artist, any year, any type. People say it's distracting because of the vocals, and that's true, but I don't think I'll start caring anytime soon.
I've been writing to 21 Savage's recent album, "Issa Album" in particular these days. Shit goes hard, but it has some good reminiscing songs like "Numb" and "Thug Life", makes you hype and cry at the same time lmao.
Nazi Scum Thread on 8/18/2017 6:06:42 AM
>Of course now the fucking Nazis taking over the protest
Just want to correct you here: the Nazis never hijacked the protest, they were the ones behind it all along. Source from an organizer himself. Specifically around 1:15
Nazi Scum Thread on 8/18/2017 6:03:03 AM
>First of all, don't talk to the furry about fetishizing inanimate objects, because now all the nightmares are returning. Now the argument you didn't want has to happen because I really need to get back at you for reminding me of the fucking things you have.
I'm not really sure what you're talking about, but ok lmao. Anyway...
Half of your post is continuing to fethisize the statue, and the other half is trying to convince me that Robert E Lee was a good person. Thus your arguments don't really change my mind at all, because I don't believe in magic, and I also don't believe that a general on the Confederates side could ever be a good person regardless if he personally was one. Allow me to explain...
You're falling into the same trap people always do when describing (for example) police officers. They always tend to exaggerate or make a point of saying something like "not all cops are bad people!" -- When the reality is, whether or not cops are personally good or bad people doesn't matter at all, in the same way whether or not Robert was a personally good person doesn't matter at all. Describing people like that is a spook, and what really matters is what they do or did -- police are class traitors and subjugate members of their ex-class, so to me they're collectively "bad" people no matter what else they personally do. Robert fought a war to keep others in bondage*, so to me he's a "bad" person no matter what else he did, especially because he never did anything during his life to reconcile his fighting for the Confederates. (it's worth mentioning Robert played the role of a modern policeman during the events of John Brown's siege, another point of contention I have with him... #restinpowerjohnbrown...).
>Firstly, yes, it was as Mizal said, a historical monument made by historical people. It's an artifact that's a part of our history and what was once our culture, as well as something that CANNOT be ignored.
Yay good job continuing your fucking fetishizing. I can't tell if this was written in 2017 CE or 2017 BCE. Just like this rock here can magically control the powers of history and culture, my other rock can cause famines if I don't pray to it hard enough!
As I said earlier, the only effects that will occur from taking down the statue is that we simply stop publicly glorifying someone we don't need to. Our culture will continue to evolve and change as culture does, and history will remain largely unaffected. Don't worry, people will still remember the Civil War occurred and shit, and will talk about it, just like Russians remember the USSR happened despite the lack of Lenin statutes there.
I don't live near the statue. Am I ignoring "it" (at this point I can't tell if "it" is in reference to the war / Robert himself / the statue itself) because I'm not gazing upon it 24/7? Is my knowledge of history and my culture constantly at attack because I'm not constantly bombarding myself with the image of nineteenth century slavers striking dignified and regal poses? Do you think I should plaster pictures of the statue around my house so that I don't accidentally forget the war occurred? Because if I ignore the statue, the statue will use it's vile magic to make me forget the war ever occurred! Maybe I should also start sacrificing lambs to the statue too... y'know just in case...
But really though: when you place a statue of someone in a dignified posture on a city corner, the primary purpose isn't to memorialize history. This is how a statue of Lee will differ from a book or article about Lee. Unlike all those other things, the statue of Lee on the street corner is primarly to publicly glorify him, and that there are other, much more better ways to preserve the memory and history of Robert E Lee. For some reason, you attribute extended powers to the statue, the powers of controlling history and controlling people's memories and such. I don't understand why...
>I'd consider Malcolm to be almost as morally gray a figure to memorialize as Lee tbh
That's just fucking disgusting and gross, and now I'm actually triggered. Malcolm didn't die so that his legacy could be equated to that of the people he fought against his whole life by future ignorant people...
Can't have my negroes be uppity about the brutal racism they face everyday or anything! They've gotta be nice and calm, otherwise they're just as bad as a man who fought a war to protect the institution of slavery!
*So to clear something up: Did Robert fight on the Confederates because he hated Africans? Maybe not 100%, and there are surely more important factors that he considered when joining the Confederates like his southern nationalism, but a part of him was definitely racist and reactionary. Source
A desire to maintain racial control figured most prominently in Lee’s Southern identity. Often portrayed as opposed to slavery, he in fact accepted the peculiar institution as the best means for ordering relations between the races and resented Northerners who attacked the motives and character of slaveholders and seemed willing, or even eager, to disrupt racial stability in the Southern states. In late December 1856, he ruminated at considerable length to his wife on the topic. “[S]lavery as an institution,” he wrote, “is a moral and political evil in any country. It is useless to expiate on its disadvantages.” But he also believed slavery was “a greater evil to the white than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strongly for the former.” The fate of enslaved millions should be left in God’s hands: “Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild & melting influence of Christianity, than the storms & tempests of fiery controversy.”
Yet Lee certainly resented Northerners who would tamper with the South’s racial order, an attitude that continued during the war. Although it is seldom quoted by historians, his response to Lincoln’s final proclamation of emancipation leaves no doubt about the depth of his feeling. On January 10, 1863, he wrote to Confederate Secretary of War James A. Seddon, calling for greater mobilization of human and material resources in the face of U.S. military power that threatened complete social disruption in the Confederacy. Lincoln’s proclamation laid out “a savage and brutal policy,” stated Lee with simmering anger, “which leaves us no alternative but success or degradation worse than death, if we would save the honor of our families from pollution, our social system from destruction….” Lee’s use of “degredation,” “pollution” and “social system”—words often deployed by white Southerners in antebellum discussions about the possible consequences of abolitionism—highlight the degree to which Lincoln’s policy menaced more than the integrity of the Confederate political state.
Lee’s devotion to a slaveholding republic’s “social institutions”—he had used the phrase “social system” in his letter to Secretary of War Seddon regarding the Emancipation Proclamation—does much to explain his fierce loyalty to the Confederacy. When Lee observed that Union victory would end slavery in a “manner most pernicious to the welfare of our people” and with “evil consequences to both races,” it is reasonable to infer he meant without a guarantee of white supremacy and with massive economic dislocation. During the debate over arming slaves, he reiterated the opinion expressed to his wife in 1856: namely, that he considered “the relation of master and slave, controlled by humane laws and influenced by Christianity and an enlightened public sentiment, as the best that can exist between the white and black races while intermingled as at present in this country.” That relation, which was most desirable in Lee’s judgment because it afforded white people control over a huge black population, might be maintained indefinitely if Confederate armies established Southern nationality.
Huh... really fries up those almonds doesn't it? I wonder what he meant by by this.
>you shouldn't try to rewrite even the small details of history because, y'know, that's what Pol Pot was trying to do.
>The reason statues can and should exist is to remind people of the person and the importance of that person
>You can discuss things like statues and pieces of art, you can be a responsible human being rather than a triggered snowflake and explain why it's there, who it is, and talk about the morals of the person.
Here are several examples of you fetishizing the statue. Reminder: the statue does not hold the powers of history.
And in response to the last one, I like the 'triggered snowflake' -- because if you don't want to publicly glorify a racist person from the eighteenth century, you're a snowflake.
Nazi Scum Thread on 8/17/2017 12:00:09 AM
>I'm assuming you have a religiously motivated dislike of statues, but you don't consider a historical thing about a historical person, commissioned and created over a century ago by historical people for historically significant reasons to be worthy of preserving as an interesting part of history?
Lmao. Well I suppose Muhammad would agree with me about the problems associated with the fetishizing of objects.
And I guess the only way I could tolerate such things is if they're stored away in a museum, instead of being publicly displayed on our streets.
>I'm just wondering why I so rarely hear it applied to museum exhibits or something like Mt. Rushmore or half the shit on display in Washington.
To add onto what Malk said, because unlike statues, museum exhibits are actually for preserving history.
You don't find people wanting to smash stuff like Mt. Rushmore or the Washington monument and other stuff commemorating our presidents because that's 'anti-American' talk, despite the fact it's totally hypocritical.
But that shit doens't apply to me, because I'm more Red Guard than I am American! As such, I wholeheartedly support the smashing of all the monuments to our slaving founding fathers. Scatter the Old World, and build the New!
>Declaring Robert E. Lee someone 'only Nazis like' is pretty childish however. He was a pretty interesting human being if you're not naive or blindly idealist enough to think every historical person has to be measured and declared objectively Good by today's standards (i.e. the standards of wealthy first worlders, the only ones with opinions that matter) a test literally no one can stand up to, in order to not be considered objectively Evil.
Good points here. At the same time, plenty of people believed slavery was wrong and were willing to fight a war over it when he was alive, so I'm not really judging him by today's standards in that regard.
Nazi Scum Thread on 8/16/2017 3:52:23 AM
I don't really want to get into an argument because I have to write for the contest, but this has kind of stuck with me ever since it was posted because it's so blatantly idealist, as well as misunderstanding and dismissive of the other view.
What you are doing right now, is a prime example of the fetishising inanimate objects. You are infusing an inanimate object, in this case a statue, with power which does not actually exist, thus fetishising it.
The primary purpose of statues isn't to document or safeguard history like a textbook or encyclopedia. The primary purpose of a statue is simply to glorify people. It's kind of hard to tell if you're serious, but in case you aren't, smashing a statue isn't going to suddenly rewrite history, and we're not going to start pretending like the Civil War never happened, and the general populace is still going to remember who Robert E. Lee was. It's just that, there's no longer a statue glorifying him and his love for exploiting the labor-power of Africans through slavery. History isn't magically rewritten because we no longer publicly glorify people. People don't just stop remembering past events and past people because we've stopped glorifying them.
I literally can't think of a single reason we should be keeping this statue up. It's reactionary, unnecessary, and with the lengths people go to defend it, they just end up fetishizing a hunk of a metal, attributing the powers of 'safeguarding and protecting history' and such nonsense to literally just metal that holds no historical significance! The statue is unwanted and no longer serves any purpose besides making most people uncomfortable and giving white supremacists something to salute to.
All of these "but muh history!!!" arguments I keep seeing are such absurd nonsense, dishonest to basic common sense as well as history. Just to give an example, on the Eastern Bloc when everybody stopped pretending to be Leninist and they took down Lenin statues -- or hell even during the Destalininifacation Khrushev did decades before that -- nobody just plain forgot who Lenin and Stalin were because the statues of them were gone and there were no longer any cities named after them. Everybody still knows who they are, it's not like with statues gone everybody just forgot and pretended like the USSR never happened, and it's definitely not like history was rewritten or any of this other stupid, dramatic nonsense. If anything, from the liberal viewpoint, people started getting more woke about Lenin and Stalin after the statues came down because then they started learning about their crimes against humanity, or something. Anyway, decades later, Russians recently voted and considered Stalin to be the best leader ever, so yeah they clearly still remember who he was (not trying to say Stalin should have been voted that or not, just saying Russian people still remembered him so much, such that that a bunch of them voted for him in a poll about who was the greatest Russian leader and he won).
And as for this nonsense...
>it looks really cool
>it's a nice statue
>probably took a long time to make
I'm just not really sure what to say... like... what the fuck, who gives a flying fuck? The aesthetic of the Nazis was also kind of cool too, but they've been long since replaced and nobody wants them back. We can tear down these statues and erect much more beautiful structures of Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, Malcolm X, John Brown, or something like that if you want something that looks nice.
Maybe I can understand the whole issue if the object that had a little more historic weight to it? But this is just some twisted metal in the form of a person nobody but Nazis likes. I just don't see the magical powers you attribute to this statue, and as a result, I don't see the purpose in keeping it around.
Don Lemon said this on CNN but: What if after WW2 German people just kept around all the Nazi iconography because 'it looked cool' and 'we don't want to rewrite history'. How do you think Jewish people would feel.
Nazi Scum Thread on 8/13/2017 4:47:04 PM
I heard on /pol/ that the woman who was murdered was apparently a Wobbly. That just makes me sadder.
An injury to one is an injury to all. Rest in power.
Nazi Scum Thread on 8/4/2017 5:29:26 AM
Darn I didn't even notice his insult until you pointed it out.
>mrw someone calls me a commie cunt :(
Nazi Scum Thread on 8/4/2017 2:55:06 AM
Speaking of which, I find it really sad how there's no local Antifa groups in my area :/