✨idk anymore✨

Destiel AU,fox castiel and lumberjack dean.😛

Just peaceful and happy life.

and my friends go you gotta get out there. you gotta get on heated rivalry .everyones on heated rivalry that’s where sarah met her fiancee you need a change. and i go i dont know i just don’t think i’m ready. and there’s the kid to think about (destiel).

I'm not super knowledgable about the Campbells but Deanna has been on my mind for the past couple of days. The fact that Dean is named after her does something to me in my chest uk. He's named after his grandma, there's something soooo tender and tragic about it 😭😭😭. He never got to know his grandma that well (he at least saw samuel in s6 a bit...tho he kinda saw him at his worst but uk meh...it still counts).

So, I was wondering if you have any thoughts on canon Deanna? (Do we have enough scenes with her or must we make do with headcanon? If so, I wanna know your hc too!).

Love 💕

I loved entertaining this thought so much that I turned this into multiple posts. Thank you for sending it!

Overall, I get a few key impressions from SPNprime Deanna:

(1) Deanna's the "fun" one to Samuel's "killjoy" worrier personality.

Outwardly, she's fun-loving, friendly, and loves to make merry with eat and drink. (We see her with beer, inviting Dean to dinner, making alcohol jokes, etc.) She's at least outwardly a foil to Samuel's crabbiness. But though she puts a gentle hand on Dean and plays nice in the beginning, she's also very VERY ready to kill him for being a potential threat later. She goes from friendly to ready to kill Dean, while Samuel goes from gruff to ready to throw in everything to help Dean.

Remember how Samuel liked Cas? I think Deanna would be the one in the family who would seriously want to kill Cas at first. I think she considers herself the ruthless one who does what needs to be done; she makes the hard decisions like sending Dean away and discounting what he's saying.

//

(2) In the Samuel-and-Mary rebellion dynamic, Deanna's the peacemaker.

She watches them poke and pick at each other, realizing that they fight because they're alike. She is the one who is always keep an ear out for a fight and checking in on them to puts a stop to their sniping:

//

(3) Deanna lightens the mood, cracks jokes, and assures everyone that things will be fine.

Between them, she's the one who cracks a lighthearted joke while downplaying the danger and stress of the hunting life.

(See what I did there with the spirits and the mixxing?) She pokes fun at John's goody-two-shoes nature... and gets away with it.

Because in Mary's eyes, her mom can do no wrong.

When it comes to family decisions, Deanna is the one who has the final say. She is BOSS. She's the head of the table.

She may not go on every hunt, but she is the one who "LETS" them put themselves in danger. She's the commander, the marshal.

We see this in action when Dean is talking about Azazel. Samuel listens attentively, but he is checking in with and CONSTANTLY looking to Deanna. (He looks pleadingly to her about 7 times during this particular exchange.)

In this case, she unfortunately downplays the danger. She doesn't even go on the Walsh hunt. I get the impression that her mode of survival is to DENY and RATIONALIZE danger.

And I really hate that for her. She very likely winds up thinking it's her fault, that she make the wrong call, that she should've gone with them, etc.

//

(4) Mary idolizes Deanna. Deanna is boss, hero, and head of table. (Actually, they have a very balanced, healthy round table, when you get down to it.)

But my point is, Deanna occupied an idolization space that is culturally more reserved for hero-fathers. That's why Dean got named after Deanna. Because Deanna was "dad" in so many ways. (Yes, she cooks, which could be viewed as stereotype, but Samuel gets shackled with a lot of the actual cultural "caretaking" duties, both in SPNprime and SPNwin.)

When Mary is scared, she looks to Deanna first.

Like here, when Dean mentions John might be in danger, Mary's eyes snap to Deanna. (Samuel is like this too ofc.)

Furthermore, Mary doesn't seem to get mad at Deanna in quite the same way as she does Samuel. In 4x03, we hilariously see Deanna poke fun at John's nonexistent hunting skills, while Samuel catches most of the flack for it.

The truth is, Deanna probably has a lot of qualities that Mary wishes she herself had. Even as late as season 14, we see a Mary is worried that she comes off "cold and mean," because what she WANTS to be is more like Deanna: fun-loving and good with people and badass while also being a GOOD cook.

I would imagine that Deanna naturally makes friends quite easily, and Mary probably idolized her mother's extensive hunting network... unlike dad, who doesn't wanna work with other hunters and isn't popular.

I can see Mary spending hours trying to live up to Deanna's sword/knife skills, even thought she's technically more of a natural with a gun.

Dean idolized John for much of his life, and I think Mary idolized Deanna and longed to be more like her.

When Dean says this weird thing about Deanna's name with that goofy face, Mary doesn't even blink. She's all smiles and nodding.

Like YUP THAT'S DEANNA AND OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE FLOORED BY HER PRESENCE BECAUSE SHE IS THE BEST AND THE COOLEST

...unlike my dad, who is a Mean Loser who wants to "control" me.

//

(5) Deanna is not the primary caretaker

When things are balanced, she's there. But I don't think she gravitates towards taking care of kids. While food is a love language for Deanna, we see that she doesn't exactly gravitate towards the lion's share of the child-rearing.

Samuel seems to take on the caretaking duties moreso, both in SPNprime with Mary and in SPNwin when it came to taking care of Mary, Maggie, Lata, Carlos.

Which is why Deanna is the hero, and Samuel is... not. He's taking on the "mean mom" cultural stereotype.

///

As for SPNwin, @angelsdean had some wicked awesome headcanons while it was running about Deanna's speculative relationship with the Akrida Queen plot. (I think it would've been a Deanna plot if the series had gotten a full season.)

After all, Mary realizing how imperfect Deanna is has the bones of a delicious crisis.

///

Despite Mary lip servicing that Samuel is a big meanie, we see that Mary and Deanna are actually SO FOND of him. Even when he's making this huge show of growling at strangers and making his gruff quips, they're rolling their eyes and smiling.

Mary even smiles genuinely the dumb cheerleader joke he makes on the case. Because of this, it reads like an in-joke.

Like, "Dad, you know I'm the jock in that scenario. I want John to be waving the pom-poms."

///

Anyway, at dinner, when Dean gives it right back to Samuel, everyone smiles.

Dean fits in really well with their family because his prickliness is something they appreciate and like.

(Deanna hides her smile by stuffing her face. OMG I LOVE HER.)

///

EDIT BONUS:

Dean picks up on the "dogpile on Samuel" energy. Look at this SENIOR joke he cracks. (Jack Kline would be proud.)

Then Dean throws Samuel under the bus, and it's so funny. Given how this woman's sons refers to them as "Bible thumpers," I think it's safe to say that this woman hates religion, and she's passive-aggressively making it known.

LOL.

It's painfully obvious that Samuel doesn't love talking to people, especially emotional people. Which is valid, because he's got a SERIOUS case of foot-in-mouth disease. But anyway, that's probably why he begged Mary to come along in the first place.

A grieving widow... BY MYSELF? PLEASE. SOMEONE ANYONE

DEAN NO

(6) I think Deanna is good at detecting lies.

She downplayed Dean's concerns, but it's possible that she was sensing CORRECTLY that something was off in his explanations.

I think that Samuel and Mary tend to get taken advantage of because they're so deeply emotional behind those gruff exteriors. Deanna is (usually) the one to step in and protect them from that tendency!

But this brings in a tragic layer of complexity to this whole thing. If Deanna is great at pinging a liar, then she trusts her gut. A LOT. This mistake must be particularly devastating for her (as it is for Dean about Chuck in season 14-15).

She made the wrong call by... being RIGHT that Dean was hiding things from them:

...

DEANNA MENTALLY: Ohhh, he's a LIAR liar, and he raised his voice at me. I'm just gonna... put this bowl down and get my knife now. Then I'm going to kick him out of the house.

///

But when Dean talks the Colt, their alarmed expressions turn to pity. Deanna has the air of, "Oh this poor crazy boy is a fruitier fruitcake than the fruit salad I was just chopping up. Whew! I was scared for a second! He's just grieving the loss of his family is all."

They humor Dean... and send him on his way.

Deanna breathed a sigh of relief... and wrote Dean off completely.

//

So when Samuel and Mary head off to check on Liddy Walsh, Deanna 1000% thinks it's just a wellness check, that's there's going to be nothing there.

She doesn't even go.

She stays home.

DEANNA MENTALLY: Ugh, Samuel is getting on my nerves tonight. Think I'll stay home, take a long hot bath, and watch my show. If I have to bear witness to one more dumb fight between them, I'm going to scream.

She says goodbye and sends them off on the hunt that will essentially kill them all.

//

Once they get there, Samuel and Mary have to act too immediately to the unfolding situation to clue her in. (After all, it's NOT like they can text Deanna to give her a heads-up.)

In the aftermath of the dust-up, Samuel is compromised, and Mary's so shook up that she runs into John's arms for comfort. From Deanna's POV, she's probably surprised to see Dean, Samuel, and Mary come through that door a short while later.

///

Which brings me to

(7) Deanna probably wouldn't have been able to shoot Samuel with the Colt

Here, Deanna creeps closer...

And it's no accident that Azazel's taunt to Dean flashes over at the same time as Deanna. Deanna too wants to save everyone.

But she probably feels like it's her fault that everyone she loves is in danger in the first place. She didn't believe in Dean or the demon or the Colt. Now, she looks with DREAD upon the Colt.

Because if she picks it up, then she has to aim it at Samuel.

Her dread is holding her back. I'm not sure that had she gotten she gun she would've been able to do it. I really think somehow... that she wouldn't have been able to.

:(

It's not until Azazel MURDERS Samuel... that Deanna gets serious.

Azazel has situational awareness. He likely knew Deanna was there all along, and being inside Samuel... he knows how deep their bond goes.

So, Azazel has a little fun.

He winks at Dean, because he knows Deanna is back there.

And Azazel knows killing Samuel will debilitate Deanna and disorient her long enough to prevent her from getting the gun...

...so Azazel can GET her.

His kill signature is as ever playful and theatrical as it is sadistic.

(Watch this, Deanna.)

When Azazel guts Samuel and does the slide slash, that's fatal.

Deanna knows it.

Even though this would have been the perfect moment to grab the gun and shoot him, in her despair, she gives herself away. Her knees go weak as she sinks a little against the door frame, and she screams.

If Samuel's job was to protect Mary, then Deanna's role was to protect Samuel.

And Deanna knows her time with Samuel is now over. She's failed.

She may not be watching him burn on the ceiling, but she is absolutely united in horror with the likes of pilot-John and Sam, who both watched Mary and Jess get gutted in a similar manner to this.

She just watched her husband die.

But, as Crowley says... takes a helluva long time to bleed out from the gut. That's on purpose, because like with Mary, Azazel wants to play with Samuel. He wants Samuel to watch.

He's killing him nice and slow, with added psychological torture for zest and flavor.

//

When Deanna locks eyes with her husband's killer, that's what spurs her into action. She leaps for the gun.

Samuel's already dead.

She WILL shoot him now. She can end his suffering.

Azazel strikes. Deanna screams. She is thrown past the gun she didn't believe in, and past the journal of that goody-two-shoes she poked fun at.

Despite all that, and still reeling from the death of her husband, she gets up.

Dean still needs her.

Mary still needs her.

But she realizes what's about to happen. Samuel's going to see his own hands killing her. She's not gonna let that happen.

She scowls, musters up all her strength.

It's not enough.

///

Azazel kills Deanna the same way he kills young John. It's less the signature of his playtime and more the signature of his cold, brutal efficiency.

Azazel broke Deanna’s neck high; her eyes are open. She died knowing the truth about the hunting world and being trained to fight, but it wasn't enough to protect her or her family.

Though John's neck is broken, his eyes are closed, because was the one well and truly left defenseless in this whole situation.

After Azazel kills Deanna, he doesn’t even bother picking up the Colt.

He could have gone for Dean, but he’s not threatened. He enjoys the danger. Torturing Samuel and locking in the deal with Mary is too satisfying to pass up.

///

So. after Samuel watches his own hands kill Deanna, he watches himself murder the very civilian he was always worried about—John.

And finally, he becomes the instrument that traps Mary, sealing the deal with a kiss.

Azazel doesn’t just kill Samuel; he erases a father’s ability to protect his daughter, both literally and symbolically. It’s a twisted mockery of everything Samuel stands for: family, free will, and protecting others from evil.

Samuel represents the old guard of hunters, and Azazel takes pleasure in erasing that legacy and mocking their need to protect one another.

He offers to bring back John, because he has no reason to be afraid of little ole John, and he's fairly sure that this trauma will keep Mary's lips sealed as she runs from hunting forever. (He's right. Mary was already in runaway mode, and now that's going to be absolutely turbo-charged.)

But when Mary hopefully asks, "My parents, too?"

No.

This is long.

But if you're questioning some part of the meme above, you can scroll down and learn how these things are similar.

SKINHEADS VS KEFFIYEHS

Skinheads and people wearing keffiyehs are not inherently or necessarily biased against Jews. But as a group, we've seen a disproportionate amount of negativity and even violence against Jews from each one.

SWASTIKAS VS RED TRIANGLES

Swastikas are a symbol of a group that explicitly considers Jews the enemy; accuses them of controlling the international mass media and imperialistic nations with their wealth; starting and profiting from every war; corrupting societies; wanting to occupy the entire world; and having outlined this plan in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion....

And so are inverted red triangles. I literally copied all of that from Hamas's founding documents.

Additionally, inverted red triangles are the symbol Hamas uses to mark targets it's boasting about hitting or hunting down.

NOT WHITE VS TOO WHITE

Nazis and other white supremacists, to this day, vehemently argue that Jews are not white. Jews are one of their favorite targets.

That's a big part of the reason that in the U.S., almost every single year, the second-most hate crimes are against Jews.

(The most: Black people. The third-most: Gay men. If you include the hate crimes against all groups in the LGBTQIA+ community, the total is larger, but still third.)

Worse: there are 7.55 times as many Black people in the U.S. as Jews. But there are about twice as many hate crimes against Black people as Jews. Which means that in terms of hate crimes per person, Jews win first prize?

If you're not Jewish, you're probably going, "But you can't trust the ADL!" And I have to tell you: these statistics are from the FBI, actually.

But this is a good moment to think about where your distrust of the ADL comes from. Was the source solid? Did you fact-check what it was saying?

If a different marginalized group said, "We've tracked the actions that harm us," and people outside that group said, "No they don't, you're just bad people who are trying to chill free speech," what would you think? Would you have the same reaction to that group as to the ADL?

Anyway, here's a fun tweet from Elon Musk:

Please note: that is an actual link preview from the actual link to his tweet. That is not a photoshopped fake tweet. The man literally said this, and I didn't see the Musk-hating progressive community even blink.

He had previously said that white people are gonna get eliminated and replaced, which is standard neo-Nazi garbage. And which DID elicit a lot of outrage.

This is not Elon Musk agreeing that Jews are just regular white people like him.

This is Elon Musk saying that Jews are hyper-privileged. That Jews have enormous power.

This is, simultaneously, Elon Musk weaponizing the Holocaust to be like, "See? That's proof of white genocide!"

Nazi Twitter took great offense.

This Nazi's response neatly bridges the gap for everyone. This is where the two beliefs join hands and become one.

(Tumblr struggles with tweet previews sometimes, so that one IS a screenshot.)

I've seen lots of "Jews are white" people also say that a secret cabal of Jews controls the media, the government, and/or the world. Sometimes they think the Israeli government is that secret cabal of Jews. Sometimes they think AIPAC is. Sometimes they just call it "Zionists."

Other comments included: "You got community noted by the jews that run your community notes"

"Stop playing stupid." followed by this:

And, of course, "The jews are NOT White. They wear 'Whiteness' like a skin suit when it's "convenient. Don't believe me, listen to her..."

Followed by a video in which a Jewish creator explains, "Some Jews are white, like me, but our whiteness is conditional, and that's why it's different…. we are [considered] white when it's convenient [for actual white people]. We are [considered] white when our whiteness boosts the numbers of white people in order to oppress people of color. We are white. until. we're fucking. NOT.

"And when we're not, we're almost hated in a different way because we can 'fool you' with our whiteness. We can assimilate. Which is why the man whose name starts with H put stars on our jackets. so we wouldn't trick anybody."

(He got the idea, presumably, from the centuries of European countries making Jews wear badges or silly hats for the same purpose. And they got the idea from the centuries of caliphates doing the exact same thing across North Africa and the Middle East.

Which begs the question: if Jews are so obviously white, why did Jews from Morocco through Afghanistan need to wear special badges, belts, or even strings of bells, to make sure they weren't accidentally treated as equals there either?)

Back to the bullet points.

The argument I have seen made over and over, across social media platforms, is that Israel was founded by and is mostly made up of Ashkenazi Jews. I.e. Jews who immigrated from Europe. Who are, therefore, white people.

Literally: they came from Europe, therefore they're white.

Because nothing says, "I am a well-informed person engaging in perfectly reasonable discourse" like the descendants of people who forced Jews into Europe, repeatedly exiled them from region after region, and/or repeatedly tried to kill them off, insisting that being in Europe makes you white.

This short gives a good overview of what's wrong with that theory. But basically, moving to an area with less sunlight will in fact make your descendants lighter-skinned. So will intermarriage and - though this video doesn't address it - rape.

When people are challenged on this idea, the fallback is Khazar theory and racist blood quantum.

Blood quantum emerged as a way to measure 'Indian-ness' through a construct of race. So that over time, Indians would literally breed themselves out and rid the federal government of their legal duties to uphold treaty obligations.

This is the inverse of the equally racist "one drop rule."

The one drop rule measured the amount of 'black blood' that black people had in society. And that ensured that every person who had at least one drop would be considered black and would be covered under these discriminatory laws and, even in the earlier days, enslaved.

Basically, if you have a way to exploit a group, you define them using "one drop." If you don't, then you just want to eliminate them. So you use "blood quantum"/DNA to argue them out of existence.

People will claim that research shows Ashkenazi Jews only have European DNA (false) and that's why DNA tests are illegal in Israel (false): because (((they))) don't want you to know they don't belong there!

There are 4,000+ years of continuous archeological and historical records showing that the Jewish people originated in Israel and are the only group that has continuously been there.

But we don't learn about the history of West Asia (the Middle East) in Western schools. So we default to our racist assumptions about the people there, and ignore and speak over all of them.

HOLOCAUST DENIAL VS HOLOCAUST INVERSION

Holocaust Inversion is a much easier one to explain.

Inversion is when you take a traumatizing experience of oppression that a group has experienced, and claim that actually, that group is the one committing that oppression on another.

White replacement/white genocide theories are a good example of that.

Like when white conservative groups, who are only here because their forebears violently replaced the existing populations (in some cases via actual genocide), claim that they're being deliberately "replaced" by indigenous people immigrating from farther south. And that the intention is somehow to commit genocide against them.

Inversion conveniently waters down what actually happened.

It relieves people of the perceived guilt from what their ancestors did, while awarding themselves the moral weight of it.

It's so, so juicy, you guys. It's such a good move. Who wouldn't want to turn, for example, the deliberate attempt to demonize all Jews, in order to gain the power to take over the world, while wiping them off the earth, and the mass enslavement of Jews along the way, into a war that has killed about as many Gazans as have been born during that time?

It simultaneously removes "you literally tried to kill all of us less than a century ago, don't talk to us about genocide" as an argument, and (ironically) gives you that healthy moral glow you feel from passionately arguing against the Holocaust.

Plus, it makes arguments against it sound like they're the ones minimizing it. It's very difficult to argue against exaggerations of the death toll, for instance, without sounding callous and uncaring of those who have been killed.

Ultimately, Holocaust inversion does the same thing as Holocaust denial.

Many Holocaust deniers don't argue that the Holocaust never happened. Instead, they seek to minimize it by saying that far fewer than 6 million Jews died. 271,000 is a popular denial number that I've seen thrown around in a lot of Instagram comments.

Or to increase the number of non-Jews who were killed. To argue that it was not specifically an attempt to kill every Jew on earth. To argue that Jews weren't targeted at all.

By contrast, people commonly say, "what Israel is doing in Gaza is exactly like the Holocaust."

This is the equivalent of saying that the Nazi Party spent almost two years bombing a 140 square mile area where 15% of the Jews on earth lived. And attacking it through ground invasions. And that they let humanitarian aid in.

And that the UN could not distribute that aid effectively, partly because 88% of its trucks regularly got looted, partly because there was a war going on around it.

It's actually a brilliant way to erase both the Holocaust and October 7.

Because the assumption, and implication, is that Israel attacked Gaza in order to wipe Palestinians off the face of the earth. Or at least to drive them out of Gaza and grab the land.

Land where Israel had already destroyed all its settlements in 2005, when it pulled out of Gaza and turned it fully over to Palestinian rule. Land where all synagogues have been destroyed. I don't know why Israel would wait 20 years and then try to take the entire thing back. So far, nobody I've asked has been able to give me a reason for thinking that.

It erases the fact that Hamas invaded Israel and mutilated, tortured, and burned its way across an area larger than the Gaza Strip itself, in just one day.

It erases how incredibly, graphically violent that attack was.

It erases the fact that Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007, kicking the Palestinian government out entirely, and has run it as a brutal dictatorship ever since.

It erases the fact that Hamas's stated mission is to violently destroy Israel (because Jews are terrible and have no right to be there, see above).

And that it asked for, and got, $500,000,000 from Iran to plan October 7.

And that it has publicly stated, at least twice, that it will keep attacking until Israel has been "annihilated." (Hamas even has explicit plans for what it will do when it conquers that land.)

Ok I don't know why I thought "easy to explain" would mean I could explain it BRIEFLY

NAZI GERMANY VS THE USSR

Honestly, these are just two wildly Jew-hating places. That's it, that's the tweet.

Okay, fine:

The Russian Empire, while trying to control more and more land, instigated pogroms that scapegoated and killed hundreds of thousands of Jews, while driving out about as many. It continued to be a nightmarishly Jew-hating and Jew-scapegoating place, yea, verily even unto today.

Doesn't matter what it's called, it's been doing the same shit the whole time. Including empire-building invasions.

And part of the way it scapegoated and mass-murdered Jews was by creating some of the worst, most powerful antisemitic propaganda the world has ever seen, and actively spreading it around the world.

The Nazi Party had the same playbook. Land, propaganda, murder, profit.

And it drew HEAVILY from the Russian playbook. It even integrated the Protocols of the Elders of Zion into its massive propaganda machine.

It was especially heartened by the fact that nobody lifted a finger against Russia for killing and cleansing a total of probably 500,000 Jews.

The main difference is: because the Nazi Party was willing to do the killing itself, and to industrialize it, it was able to kill 2 out of every 3 Jews in all of Europe. 90%+ of the Jews in the countries it occupied. Along with all the Jews who were just killed by civilians who believed in the cause.

It's especially awful that people claim Israel was founded by "white European colonizer Jews," when "white European colonizers" spent so much time and effort trying to wipe the Jews out during that time.

It's also just plain annoying that people misinterpret early Zionist writings as meaning, "we're powerful colonizers!" when, for the first 40 years of the Zionist movement, that was literally the Ottoman Empire.

I asked someone recently how she could claim those Jews were colonizing a literal empire. The response was that they were obviously colonizers, because they came from Europe.

Please send help.

RIGHT WING VS LEFT WING

This is purely a matter of what other issues you support, and - sometimes - how you frame your arguments.

I literally can't tell the difference on Twitter anymore.

Like, ok:

She's responding to French president Emmanuel Macron saying France stands with Lebanon. "Exterminating the population" is Holocaust inversion. I'm going to guess that this is a leftist, based on the "all of humanity" wording, but I literally don't know. Let's find out!

Her header says, "The whole world is my temple, love is my sanctuary, the universe is my homeland." She's white and blonde as heck, which maybe explains why she feels like the entire universe is her homeland.

Her retweets are for USAID, against everyone in the Epstein files, against attacking Iran. She has one saying, "they lied to you about what a terrorist looks like," with a photo of some white dude I'm guessing is Pete Hesgeth or somebody. And another claiming that they lied to you about who bombed all the countries in West Asia - that it was not Iran, it was all "false flag operations" by the US and Israel.

(hilariously, one of the tweets claims that this was "revealed" by someone named "Krystal Ball." propagandists have realized they don't have to try anymore)

And then: a retweet from white supremacist Jackson Hinkle, whose "MAGA Communism" has been called out by antifascist groups for "cryptofascist" socialism. In other words, he infiltrates the left wing and creates a pipeline to the right wing.

(Followed by a tweet claiming that "If we don't stop Israel in time, it will do to the entire world what it has already done to the Palestinians." Again, buying right into the standard-issue propaganda that comes from both Russia and the Nazis.)

Let's do just one more! I thought right-wing at first, based on "vibes" I guess. But then I noticed the use of "anti zionists," which implies leftist. And "zios" was popularized by KKK Grand Wizard David Duke, which should mean right-wing - but it's been embraced by the left now.

Plus, it's in response to a politically conservative rabbi rejoicing that literal Nazis Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Joe Kent are no longer working in government.

Aaaaand.... I'm wrong.

His Twitter page implies that he's a Christian Nationalist. His most recent retweet is from a contest to win three guns. And he follows that by retweeting something claiming that your enemy if you're a Republican or Democrat is not the other party, it's Satanists. This one really clinches it:

oof.

Okay, last item!

OPEN BIGOTRY/RACE POLLUTERS VS ELIMINATIONISM/ZIONIST INQUISITION

This is very "potayto, potahto."

But only if both potatoes are green and poisonous.

I assume we all understand that openly being a bigot is bad. And that believing a group is "polluting" your race is also bad. So let's look at "eliminationism."

The most obvious example is the frequent claim that Israel is "Occupied Palestine"/"a failed state" that should be eliminated.

Some people who say this seem to think it's possible to just order a country's government to disband and hand the reins over to the neighboring government.

This would be especially complicated in the current situation, when Israelis are explicitly not allowed in almost any West Bank cities and it's a capital offense to sell land in Palestine to Israelis.

But also, that's just... literally not a thing. The way you get that would be by Palestine invading and conquering Israel. That's what you're talking about. And honestly, the government of Palestine doesn't seem to want that land or its people. That's a lot to dump on it all of a sudden.

Others who say this are clear that they mean someone should indeed invade and kill all the Zionists, by which they mean everyone in Israel. (Including about half the Jews on earth.)

Personally, I think that there should be a once-a-millennium limit on killing half the Jews on earth. (/s)

oh crap they're just gonna say they're taking this one early fuck shit fuck (/gen)

Literally, though, you cannot just sit there and call for the destruction of a country. You know that's calling for genocide.

But what else does "eliminationism" mean?

Pervasive right-wing extremist themes on radio, television, and some online news sources (often as a modern-day replacement for hard-copy newspapers and newsletters).... support an increasingly passionate and virulent message in public discourse. This message encourages persons who feel uneasy or displaced in society to expiate their grievances not through the political process, but through murder.

That paper points out that Americans tend to think our country is immune to such things - and that our history of lynching, among other things, disproves that.

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, there were thousands of lynchings. This was a direct reaction to the end of slavery. That's why (and when) the KKK and other white supremacist groups started.

Being a Jew in a predominantly Christian town could be fatal. However, courts recognized that if the defendant was a black man the likelihood of race-based hostility grew significantly. ....When a more or less silent majority discounts eliminationist rhetoric as "merely" symbolic, the message can manifest as action. Cultural symbols gain power by articulating aspects of a group narrative.

People generally talk about this as a right-wing, even fascist phenomenon.

But like.

This is a false binary. But it's a very fucking popular false binary.

Because let's be real: we're all very fucking angry about how shitty capitalism is. And especially American capitalism. And especially its impact on the American healthcare system. And it's fun to fantasize angrily that this one dude killing one healthcare CEO is going to get us universal coverage. Instead of having zero impact on the system.

Fantasizing that you can achieve major social change by just going out and killing people, and that doing that wouldn't fuck you up, makes people feel powerful. Which makes us happy.

It's fun to imagine taking your rage out on the people in power.

But it's kind of scary to see people cheering on the murder of someone they abstractly hate, when you've seen time and again that they also abstractly hate you.

(In fact, people were spreading disinformation claiming that the New York Times ran a headline saying "The Glorification of Luigi Mangione Is Inherently Anti-Israel."

People are at the point where they make literally everything about "Israel" somehow. Everything is a "zionist psyop."

It feels like watching the Protocols of the Elders of Zion get popular. It feels like the 1930s.)

Symbols are manipulated to create an atmosphere that accepts political violence.

The next ones are replies to someone selling cryptocurrency called Snowball:

An NYC group tried to incite a second Crown Heights riot in 2025, spreading the same old lies that started the first one. but this time, targeting the "jewish supremacist zios" who "martyred" the kid who died to a car accident.

This was the lie that started the Crown Heights Riots in 1991, in which 29-year-old Yankel Rosenbaum was murdered and 38 civilians were injured.

This begins by dehumanizing the targeted social group. The repeated use of culturally specific imagery supports brutalizing such targets individually.

"The research found that student groups have explicitly called for violence against Jews, with some justifying the terrorist attack at Bondi Beach in December, which killed 15 people and injured 40. Nearly half, 49 per cent, of students had heard slogans or chants glorifying Hamas, Hezbollah or other proscribed groups on campus, while 47 per cent have witnessed justification of the October 7 attacks."

As moderate voices remain silent or ineffective in the face of such events, extremist messages move from the fringe toward the center of public discourse.

By imbuing the message with religiosity, extremist positions and actions convert into "[h]oly wars and just causes [that] invite warriors to view battle as sacred drama."

Extremist violence against the dehumanized becomes accepted.

Episodic events of assault turn into acts of arson and rampages, then, if unchecked, into pogroms and genocide.

(de-paywalled links: the bondi beach one, the jews are no longer surprised one)

TL;DR:

I got this as an ask and accidentally DELETED MY LIST so here it is once again.

I have realized that my preferred flavor of repressed tends less toward “I can’t be with cas because I’m NOT GAY!” and more toward “I can’t be with Cas because I am broken and unlovable” so a lot of these have sex before love type vibes or kinds secret relationship vibes or maybe i want this but i shouldn’t and i can’t stay away vibes. But the emotional catharsis comes in slow for all of them.

crossing lines by sometimeswelose

probably my “favorite” fic if i could even classify such a thing. extremely real PTSD and BPD dean. just bleeding out emotionally on everyone around him. gorgeous writing. huge payoff.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/29076138/chapters/71373267

then comes the rain series by someonetoanyone

i do not like mpreg and this is the only mpreg fic i’ve ever read and holy shit. it’s as good as it gets. so even if that’s not your thing i urge you to just give it a shot. it’s just aughhhhh. all of their stuff is great through if you wanna browse through.

https://archiveofourown.org/series/3867019

IPAMIS OL OLPRIT by emmbrancsxx0

I’m a huge sucker for “John comes back and Dean reverts to his worst self” and this is the most painful of those for me. Great established deancas whump. So fun to see dean be the worse version of himself.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/15371784/chapters/35670621

ten minutes from home: lebanon coda by disabled_dean

another John comes back and throws dean into chaos fic. a slightly more tender vibe, a different take on john, some of the most interesting world building i’ve ever seen. a must read.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/61589965/chapters/157459309

2003 by feargach

dean is sent back in time and wakes up under john’s thumb, missing cas, and reevaluating everything he used to believe in. meanwhile 24 year old dean wakes up in the bunker, forced to reconcile with things he can barely even think about. so tender. so beautiful. so healing. the final in my top 3 “john comes back to throw dean off” but this time it’s dean going back. he’s forced to confront so so so much stuff and the writing is just gorgeous.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/64973776/chapters/167035966#workskin

I wanna get outside (of me) by emwebb17

OCD reclusive cas is a dom who hires sub dean to come for a totally no-feelings at all contractual sex work job. such gooood OCD rep and i just love the slow burn/tons of kink blend.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/5221478/chapters/12040040

ramble on by gingerswag

trucker cas/sex worker dean on a cross country road trip and oh man this one rips my heart up. a tragic dean, a very autistic cas, a lot of mental health issues and such an unlikely connection through it all.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/58050421/chapters/147790846

the dean winchester beat sheet by saltyfeathers

college au. dean “why does everyone think i’m gay” winchester. such a fun, delightful read. probably the most truly “repressed” dean on this list in a classical sense. wonderful storytelling.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/19258594/chapters/45800209

faith healer by punkascas (earlwyn)

i put off reading this because i often find endverse style cas a little OOC but oh man not here. not at all. incredibly in character stuff. maybe my favorite dean/sam dynamic in a fic. a great case in the background and such a lived in world. it’s so so so good.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/5265206/chapters/12220853

plain and tall by destielpasta and mtothedestiel

a “sarah plain and tall” au and one of my favorite historical aus. homesteading on the kansas prairie. dad dean left alone with a baby. a realistic but never cruel take on mid 19th century homosexuality. a warm and cozy read with a good tense slow burn.

that being said, please welcome our newest guest: