How do we convince idpolers to stop focusing on word usage so much? Saying "nigger" is rude...

How do we convince idpolers to stop focusing on word usage so much? Saying "nigger" is rude, but it ultimately isn't causing any harm. Same with using autism as an insult.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=PdtHZ_6oz9Q
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Although at the moment the idpolers are enemies of the revolution, it is not inherent in their mindset. We need to find a way to demonstrate the true effects of class in general as well as showing how class discrimination does disproportionately affect minority groups.

I made the picture more intersectional.

Good thread

you are all going to the no-gf gulags

...

Same way we convince normals to revolt against porky.

you need to steer the milquetoast democrats toward actual socialism and the self described socialists away from identity reductionism and micronationalism
easier said than done

I hate to buy into the individualist nature of contemporary history studies but we really do need a modern Lenin to properly diffuse modern sociological economic ideas into easy to comprehend aphorisms.

Ask them what difference will it make for Blacks shot by cops to make people stop saying nigger online.

but the class lines could totally be vertical, in fact, a simple rotation would reveal this. You would want to show distribution through class (which would still be used in the idpolrs favor). This is just proof that idpol is toxic to logic, and will have to be combatted, not lived alongside. The focus really isn't on someone telling you not to use autism as an insult (probably shouldn't) but the ideology behind it.

hows that?

tell them idpol is a trick the system uses to control minorities and keep them dependent on capitalism. The black panthers didn't want black superheroes or CEOs, they wanted to abolish capitalism and the American empire. idpolers uncritically internalise the standards of capitalism and mass culture and deny there is any alternative.

It is dehumanizing. It is because of this, /idpol/ers will disregard anything you have to say because it would appear as tone-deaf. The issue at hand is not whether or not /idpol/ is focused on word usage so much as /idpol/ missing the forest for the trees. Racism is symptomatic but not the core problem.

The Venn Diagram of "people who use slurs" and "counterrevolutionaries" is just one circle fully encased within another one. Why is that?

So, if we don't live under capitalism, no one can call you a nigger and beat you with sticks?

You don't.

Fighting idpol in a purely critical way won't work and will galvanize feminists against you, while wasting all your time creating free propaganda for people who want the word "nigger" to become acceptable - usually in the context of "lets lynch all dem…"

Idpol is shit because most idpolers are liberals. You change that by introducing socialist ideas into their discourse, using their language.

Say it with me: "Yes, eliminating sexism is important. Here's how capitalism fucks over women especially. And here's how taking control of the means of production empowers women especially."

You underestimate the power of language, you brainlet.

Saying nigger is no different than spreading any other kind of reactionary propaganda.

Anybody can, but it doesn't really matter because its just a word with no power over you on its own.
Its assumed that everyone is still individually armed in communism, so your able to defend yourself if it comes to that, and there will still be the local community to turn to if things do escalate to such levels. Its also very unlikely we'll actually see such actions given how in socialism your material compensation is based on the amount of labour you put in (making it difficult to scapegoat problems) and in communism automation has all but abolished material competition (which most racism and violence is built off). Economics is the foundation upon which all social relations are based user.


See
tbh, this either has to be bait or you've never actually used an imageboard before.
Also, yadda yadda George Carlin youtube.com/watch?v=PdtHZ_6oz9Q

How does this refute what I said? Saying nigger is no different than spreading any other kind of reactionary propaganda. Reactionary propaganda isn't magic, it isn't "worse than" starving to death or being a wage slave, but it can be very powerful at reinforcing capitalism. 'Nigger' is a key phrase for reactionaries, communists should not spread or reproduce it. Does this mean they have to say "N-word," when they're quoting someone else or whatever? Who cares either way tbh. But the general principle holds.

Nigger.

Language is inherently highly mutable and capable of change. It does regularly change on its own based just on context, and the meaning of words and phrases will tend to change over time, even without people using words intentionally differently or meaninglessly. Arguing that we should not use certain words in such a way just gives reactionaries more power by making the words themselves more powerful things. If anything we should be attempting to sabotage the power that reactionaries have with _any_ language by intentionally sucking their value dry.

Literally how

My view is that the best way to rob racist terms of their power is to push for their widespread use, but with a meaning separate from their original use as a racial slur. Take the way the word “fag” is used on the chans for example, it’s been use to describe so many people of different kinds that it has no real homophobic connotations here anymore. It’s gotten to the point where we actually call people “gayfags” and “straightfags” because the term fag has no real meaning on its own. Also consider other common terms/expressions that once had ethnic slurs embedded in them, such as “paddy wagon” or “what a gyp” etc.

I cannot imagine anything mattering less than word policing.

You can't. From what I've seen, idpol proponents have adopted the position that eliminating words from the language also removes the ability to think the ideas that word represented. To the idpol this idea is a dogmatic belief and beyond question.

more like this tbh
Gotta account for the (mostly minority men) who are lumpens.

...

LOOK AT THIS GRAAAAAAPH

"How do we stop idpolers from using sociology to examine injustices against minorities in themselves and society".

So basically you want minorities to shut up and deal with it until the glorious revolution comes. And pray tell, when's that going to be? Because we've got a lot of injustice out here.

We want people to stop identifying as "minorities" being exploited by "whitey" and start identifying as the working class being exploited by porky.

Yes, but there's no harm in recognizing minorities are oppressed or marginalized in other unique ways.

OP, I agree that people using epithets isn't the end of the world. But it's not id pol to not want to be referred to in a demeaning way with words like that. Also, you can't expect to attract minorities and the like to the left is your throwing around words that devalue them as people.

yes there is. it causes artificial divisions that derail the conversation towards artificial enemies. it's very easy to manipulate "minority" demographics into chasing after shadows, just as it's very easy to manipulate "majority" demographics into being distrustful of shadows. it's inherently divisive in a group of people who should be struggling agasint a common enemy.

nah

I'm guessing represents burgerland, otherwise yellow would be the plurality of the race pyramid.

Please let this be bait