There were betrayals and brutal slayings to go around between and through the World Wars.

When I see these sorts of portrayals of communists and anarchists I always wonder why the contemporary actions of the Whites or the Fascists get to enjoy omission.

Like: Mahkno is a popular example and figure, but he and his army were a component of a larger class system. Hryhoriv, a contemporary, was a large reason for the eventual downfall of all the atamans, including Mahkno, even though Mahkno was the one who killed him.

Another example is Durruti in the Spanish Civil War, whom I admittedly don’t know a great deal about. But he died for reasons that are not clear except: war. It’s a topic of literature at any rate.

After the Republican forces lost the war it was Francoist forces that exterminated anarchists in one of many White Terrors of the 20th century.

We put a lot of meaning on ‘Boots on the ground.’

Breakfast of Champions by Kurt Vonnegut Jr, if I am not mistaken.

The British Bakeoff show is forever weird for me.

Unfortunately this covenant is a deep bond. To sever ties with one is to sever with all.

The best single pizza was a pepperoni pizza from a street vendor in Hawaii many years ago, with hot sauce I still special order from the islands.

However… if we’re just talling toppings a pineapple, peppercini pizza is my dark horse favorite pizzas. I first tried essentially on a bet. Never would’ve expected it to be so good, and have since determined it’s best (optionally) with chicken, feta, and/or roasted garlic.

Reminds me of the Palladium monk occupation. Strictly about dodging and the point was monks did NOT attack or fight. Striking an opponent meant being defrocked and losing monk status. I thought it was a neat take (and a direct response to the DnD monk trope.)

Pure dialogue and skill class. Never got a Palladium campaign really going though. Just a sea of worldbuilding.

I don’t really know 5e very well, nor PF, but monks were always kind of an awkward fit in 3.5 too. From what I understand the redesign put then closer to an old 3.5 prestige class with the ki strikes and such.

The meat of the class that I think is valuable is a martial that’s survivability is in dodging and whose offensive loop is to set up and exploit vulnerability each turn, whether it’s by buffing themselves or debuffing their enemy.

sad monk class sounds

But seriously, I always felt archetype of light armor being the ‘stealth’ armor class was silly. Sure, less penalty than chains and plates, but still.

Tuberculosis (consumption) was another constant killer, coming in at second.

Congratulations!

From,

There’s this one neat trick: Just call the communists fascist!

Now you can support foreign invasion and regime change as a proud member of anti-fa!

…Still won’t oppose capitalism though.

Spongebob’s eyebrows are symbolically, if not literally, Amazon. What did the artist mean by this?

Especially the pizza box.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jJxMpTeEf8Q&pp=ygUXZmlmdGggZWxlbWVudCBidWcgc21hc2g%3D

Clearly Obi-Wan is the master of the High Ground. He knows its strengths and weaknesses as second nature enough to exploit as he needed.

Anakin and Maul had no chance.

*edit To add: Obi-Wan gets caught in a fight on flat ground in front of Luke? Just gives up.

I hear you, though I am more inclined to take a Gramscian view that cultural hegemony of capitalist/imperial core entities convert those anarchists to libertarians, or some form of compromised anarcho-syndicalism or libertarian socialism. So I wouldn’t call them anarchists.

But it’s not a True Scotsman thing for me, so I don’t fundamentally disagree with that perspective.

I feel similarly. I can do the rhythm and timing stuff, but I just kept wanting to do something different each time and there’s just no room for that in Sekiro. You play Sekiro’s way and that’s kind of it.

That and the grappling hook parkour kept giving me light vertigo.

Anarchists usually don’t need the kind of deprogramming of capitalist, monarchist, colonial, or imperial systems that socialist and Marxist theories typically focus on.

It doesn’t, and it shouldn’t be taken as such. It’s just historicity.

Pretty much between 1914 and 1946/53 you have an impenetrable web of colonial empires colliding and crashing apart. There is very little purity to be found, so accuracy is about all you can rely on. Not knowing about Litvinov, (or Pilsudski, or the Phoney War, or whatever) is fine and normal.

Like, there are often counter/fingerpointing on this subject about Churchill being a pile of shit (and sure, super racist) but in this specific context we’re still in the Chamberlain era. Pointing that out is neither support for Chamberlain nor a judgement on Churchill.

And there’s plenty about Stalin-era USSR to complain about. Lysenkoism or Beria, for instance. It’s such a deeply complex subject that accuracy tends to be the most damning evidence.