Thomas "Tom" Jasper Cat, commonly referred to as Tom Cat, or more simply referred to as Tom, and originally known as Jasper, is one of the two anti-heroic protagonists in Tom and Jerry, alongside Jerry Mouse, created by William Hanna and Joseph Barbera. Despite being referred as an anti-heroic, Tom is more often placed in the role of the antagonist, with Jerry often being the protagonist just as much.
Tom is a bluish-grey and white anthropomorphic domestic short haired tuxedo British cat who first appeared in the 1940 MGM animated short Puss Gets the Boot. The cat was known as Jasper during his debut in the short; however, beginning with his next appearance in The Midnight Snack he was known as Tom or Thomas.
Tom and Jerry cartoons
His name, "Tom Cat", is based on "tomcat", a word which refers to male cats. He is usually mute and rarely heard speaking with the exception of a few cartoons (such as 1943's The Lonesome Mouse, 1944's The Zoot Cat, 1947's Part Time Pal, 1953's Puppy Tale and 1992's Tom and Jerry: The Movie). His only notable vocal sounds outside of this are his various screams whenever he is subjected to panic or, more frequently, pain. He is continuously after Jerry Mouse, for whom he sets traps, many of which backfire and cause damage to him rather than Jerry. His trademark scream was provided by creator William Hanna. Hanna's recordings of Tom screaming were later used as a stock sound effect for other MGM cartoon characters, including a majority of Tex Avery's shorts.
Tom is usually defeated in the end (or very rarely, killed, like in Mouse Trouble, where he explodes), although there are some stories where he outwits and defeats Jerry. Besides Jerry, he also has trouble with other mouse or cat characters. One of them that appears frequently is Spike Bulldog. Spike regularly appears and usually assists Jerry and beats up Tom. Though in some occasions Tom beats him or he turns on Jerry (like his debut appearance in Dog Trouble). Usually when Tom is chasing Jerry after a bit Jerry turns the tables on Tom and beats him or uses an outside character such as Spike to beat Tom.
Tom has variously been portrayed as a house cat doing his job, and a victim of Jerry's blackmail attempts, sometimes within the same short. He is almost always called by his full name "Thomas" by Mammy Two Shoes. In 1961 short Switchin' Kitten Tom has a membership card as belong to the "International Brotherhood of Cats".
- π»Link to all Hexbear comms https://hexbear.net/post/1403966
- π Come listen to music and Watch movies with your fellow Hexbears nerd, in Cy.tube](https://live.hexbear.net/c/movies
- π₯ Read and talk about a current topics in the News Megathread https://hexbear.net/post/5200244
- β Come talk in the New Weekly PoC thread https://hexbear.net/post/5195185
- β¨ Talk with fellow Trans comrades in the New Weekly Trans thread https://hexbear.net/post/5197809
- π New Weekly Improvement thread https://hexbear.net/post/5189599
- 𧑠Disabled comm megathread https://hexbear.net/post/5075301
- Parenting Chat https://hexbear.net/post/5186781
reminders:
- π You nerds can join specific comms to see posts about all sorts of topics
- π Hexbearβs algorithm prioritizes comments over upbears
- π Sorting by new you nerd
- π If you ever want to make your own megathread, you can reserve a spot here nerd
- πΆ Join the unofficial Hexbear-adjacent Mastodon instance toots.matapacos.dog
Links To Resources (Aid and Theory):
Aid:
Theory:
- β€οΈFoundations of Leninism
- β€οΈAnarchism and Other Essays
https://manhattan.institute/article/2025-nyc-mayoral-poll
Looking at polling data, it really does look like Mamdani voters are a categorically different breed from the rest of New Yorkers. 26% concerned about immigrants (electorate is 63%), 68% support amnesty/citizenship (electorate is 32%), 63% oppose stricter subway policing (electorate is 24%) 18% support enforcement of minor offenses (electorate is 59%).
Each one of these is a huge chasm, a discontinuity with the American political spectrum/Overton window. There's probably a subset of these voters that are rigorously progressive/socialistic. But this subset is a small fraction, even if you dial up youth political engagement AND the polling underestimates it within the greatest margin of error. It's still never going to win elections on its own; compromises will need to be made, or a slew of clever gambits pulled off victoriously, just to stay viable on the same level as establishment Democrats.
One conclusion from this is that, of course, Americans at large are profoundly reactionary creatures, who would mount popular resistance against the cause of equality and freedom for all. The other conclusion that's really driven home for me again here is the futility of entryism. You can get a couple good candidates, propel them into office with untold hours of work... and then what? You still have institutions that will drag their feet every step of the way (in the case of executive office), or completely nullify their power (in the case of legislative office). It becomes a story of "We wanted something better, so we strived to steer the whole of the country, but in reaching the position of power and encompassing that whole, we sacrificed the coherence about the direction we wanted to move in".
The aggregate of America is by and large hostile, and not worth trying to salvage. Instead of trying to win democratic power by which to control the economy, we would do better to build economic power directly. We could house people, freeing people from rent and unleashing their capacity, by breaking or bending the law- the bending would be done by taking over smaller city governments, a much more reachable goal. Concentrating in the places where we can win by big margins is a better prospect than trying to squeeze over the 50% bar in a more populated territory. Businesses owned and operated by the workers would have a lot more ideological stability than a successful unionization drive that would merely force a capitalist business to be slightly friendlier to all of its (at-large American) workers. Linking together organizations of people who can directly act on their convictions is a better use of our efforts than trying to pull people toward us in general.
Every revolution needs a base of support anyways, and this doesn't just emerge out of nowhere.
not that we shouldn't try this method, but I reckon historically the reaction would involve bombings and reactionary riots burning down the socialist enclaves. Civil defense against such would probably be seen as insurrection tho so it would probably escalate quickly.
The only historical context I can think of is race riots. Are there cases of communes being attacked purely on economic/political grounds?
no ig in those cases it was assassination and infiltration mostly
I have an elegant strategy for how to make orgs assassination-proof, blackmail-proof, and infiltration-resistant, but that's a completely separate topic.