Here.
Please don’t read comments until you’ve read this. It is very short and fast to read. It is radicalizing. It is a good short story to send to your friend who needs to understand what capitalism is. LeGuin wrote this in 1973, cementing her status as Chad Supreme of Fuck Mountain. Bow before her might.
Let’s discuss in the comments below.
Contrary to what the left-wing media would have you believe, the child in the basement is no angel.
We just need to go back to a simpler time, when everybody was polite to each other and nobody discussed the child in the basement.
I can’t tell you how mad I was, wishing I could go back to that incident and fucking scream at everyone there that I know what they would do because they’re fucking doing it, they’re making their choice, right this moment.
If you don’t feel like this about multiple instances in your past I will question leftist credentials, I ain’t even shy.
I’ve given this story to many a liberal and it’s always the same: “oh my god, I can’t believe they walk away at the end. if it were me, I’d tear the kid free with my own hands.” pointing out to them that it’s an allegory for our world and all the suffering they accept, they to a one grow uncomfortable and change the subject. I’ve never had one willing to discuss the story past that point except perhaps to go back to insisting that they’d free the kid.
to those in this thread lamenting that they walk away at the end: walking away is a rejection of the society, of both its utopia and its curse. those who walk away do so to build a new world. walking away is the rejection of the very premise of the society - an embrace of revolution. perhaps LeGuin’s point, one of them, anyway, is that it’s very easy to say what one would do when put in similar circumstances. it’s another thing entirely to actually act. sometimes, it’s all you can do to refuse. after all, freeing the child is tantamount to ending capitalism. none of us can do that alone. the only choice we have alone is to walk away. and it’s only from amongst those who have rejected this society that you will find the revolutionaries that can band together to do anything greater. but we must each first choose to walk away.
Why Harry Potter needs a gun
Ok, this has been driving me crazy for seven movies now, and I know you’re going to roll your eyes, but hear me out: Harry Potter should have carried a 1911. Here’s why:
Think about how quickly the entire WWWIII (Wizarding-World War III) would have ended if all of the good guys had simply armed up with good ol’ American hot lead. Basilisk? Let’s see how tough it is when you shoot it with a .470 Nitro Express. Worried about its Medusa-gaze? Wear night vision goggles. The image is light-amplified and re-transmitted to your eyes. You aren’t looking at it–you’re looking at a picture of it. Imagine how epic the first movie would be if Harry had put a breeching charge on the bathroom wall, flash-banged the hole, and then went in wearing NVGs and a Kevlar-weave stab-vest, carrying a SPAS-12.
And have you noticed that only Europe seems to a problem with Deatheaters? Maybe it’s because Americans have spent the last 200 years shooting deer, playing GTA: Vice City, and keeping an eye out for black helicopters over their compounds. Meanwhile, Brits have been cutting their steaks with spoons. Remember: gun-control means that Voldemort wins. God made wizards and God made muggles, but Samuel Colt made them equal.
Now I know what you’re going to say: “But a wizard could just disarm someone with a gun!” Yeah, well they can also disarm someone with a wand (as they do many times throughout the books/movies). But which is faster: saying a spell or pulling a trigger? Avada Kedavra, meet Avtomat Kalashnikova.
Imagine Harry out in the woods, wearing his invisibility cloak, carrying a .50bmg Barrett, turning Deatheaters into pink mist, scratching a lightning bolt into his rifle stock for each kill. I don’t think Madam Pomfrey has any spells that can scrape your brains off of the trees and put you back together after something like that. Voldemort’s wand may be 13.5 inches with a Phoenix-feather core, but Harry’s would be 0.50 inches with a tungsten core. Let’s see Voldy wave his at 3,000 feet per second. Better hope you have some Essence of Dittany for that sucking chest wound.
I can see it now…Voldemort roaring with evil laughter and boasting to Harry that he can’t be killed, since he is protected by seven Horcruxes, only to have Harry give a crooked grin, flick his cigarette butt away, and deliver what would easily be the best one-liner in the entire series:
“Well then I guess it’s a good thing my 1911 holds 7+1.” And that is why Harry Potter should have carried a 1911.
This actually exposes one of the biggest reasons I dislike Harry Potter: ill-defined principles. Why are some people more magical than others? What form does that take? How do they do things differently? What sort of magic is involved in doing any given action? Why is it hard? Why is it easy? Nothing is every explained, and I’m not saying I need the science, I just need to know if lifting a car is harder than lifting a cup. And how is that determined and so on.
I’ve given this story to many a liberal and it’s always the same: “oh my god, I can’t believe they walk away at the end. if it were me, I’d tear the kid free with my own hands.” pointing out to them that it’s an allegory for our world and all the suffering they accept, they to a one grow uncomfortable and change the subject. I’ve never had one willing to discuss the story past that point except perhaps to go back to insisting that they’d free the kid.
I ask anyone saying they’d free the kid why they haven’t traveled to their nearest ICE facility and done the same. And you may say, well, they have weapons, and Omelas doesn’t have weapons. Sure. But you aren’t at these facilities daily protesting, and you have reasons for that, and those reasons are ones we have to live with because we aren’t actually doing everything in our power to do something. And that sucks a lot, but it’s absolutely a thing.
My favourite bit I think is where we’re told that the inhabitants are shown the child in the basement, and some even return when they’re older to revisit it. They know it’s there and they’re aware that their society and their comfort depends on the child’s suffering but most push it to the back of their minds.
I’ll be honest this reminds me of when you’re talking to someone and they acknowledge that yes, capitalism is pretty horrific but there’s this wall that they can’t quite get over. They usually mutter some platitude about ‘the least worst system’ and go on.
The end bit is the reason why I think. The residents of Omelas are fundamentally scared of change and they have no idea if something better is possible so they don’t really want to try.
