Is it racist to acknowledge that some leftist rhetoric is alienating the white working class and that we may need...

Is it racist to acknowledge that some leftist rhetoric is alienating the white working class and that we may need restrategize to prevent the rising tide of fascism from poaching off potential comrades?

reddit.com/r/ShitLiberalsSay/comments/5891qn/brocialists_decide_they_would_rather_attract/

reddit.com/r/DebateAnarchism/comments/5834mz/weve_lost_the_privilege_argument/

Other urls found in this thread:

strikemag.org/manarchist/.
reddit.com/r/Anarchism/comments/5893qj/check_your_fucking_privilege/
reddit.com/r/Drama/comments/4itvgu
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

No. You might be called a bigot or a brocialist/manarchist or whatever, though. I doubt left liberal types would call you a racist for that, although they might say you're using the reverse racism card.

'We', as in the left in general, need to restrategize period. Before even pulling out the tumor from the left that is identity politics and postmodern modes of thinking, there needs to be an actual, anti-establishment left. We're just as stuck in centrist limbo as the right, but as of late the (non-liberal) right is actually gaining some ground.

Also have some extra cancer I found.

Wake me up.

No, the actual racists are glad the left is alienating the white working class.

Thanks. Now I have stage four pancreatic cancer. I love that essentially no amount of agreement will make a white cis male acceptable according to that chart.

How is that a manarchist position? Shouldn't radicals expect to be arrested at some point in time?

Aside from being cheesy as fuck what's wrong with that statement? Isn't race a social construct.

But how?

This must be a joke.

This focus on gender and racial minorities is why proles look away from the left and embrace conservatism.

We need a left with simple jargon that adresses real material problems.

The fuck is that neurotic shit?

Nope: strikemag.org/manarchist/. This is just what American anarchism looks like, basically.

you know the expression 'just enough rope'?

America was a mistake

No

Why did the left decide to go complete retard on identity politics, gender, immigration, islam etc?

I have just lost all hope for american anarchism

1968 and liberals

Intersectionality is not "leftist" anything. It is just liberal cancer.


Mother of God.

Left liberal and American anarchist infiltration poisoned the otherwise traditionally class-centric left, starting in the late '60s. Since this is completely compatible with the capitalist paradigm, it has quickly recuperated is a tool for maintaining the status quo (it does not threaten the material base of capitalism. and in fact serves to justify it) and has even consciously and tactically been motivated by bourgeois interests, with operations like COINTELPRO using identity politics to derail what little worth the Occupy movement had.

ShitLiberalsSay is absolute cancer and I'm a Marxist-Leninist

That DebateAnarchism thread is woke asf

Death to the progressive oppressors!!!

I refuse to believe this is not satire.

According to the chart being a "cis gender male" (i.e. at least 1 yes) is already a reason enough for "constructive criticism" of you.
This is just a parody, but really itself is now a parody of itself, so…

This is really just frustrating more than anything else because it's probably written from a liberal's perspective, but presenting itself as radical.

Not everything about this is even wrong:
If that's the case you should probably stop talking so much and make other people feel like they can speak.
May be true, but if you always think this you're probably a bro.
Pretty fucked tbh
If you don't experience a form of oppression you just can't speak with the same level of insight as someone who does.

You should still be able to, though. But you should also be mindful of your position.
Again, you're probably a bro who needs to let other people talk if you do this. Pretty r00d
Liberal bullshit.
All historical evidence points to this not being the case. Oppression on the axes of identity have their own unique logic that needs to be engaged with on those terms, even if the State and capitalism are very closely connected with them.
If it's not institutionalized it doesn't really count.
Anyone who thinks this is a creep tbh

But then there's shit like:
smh where does this meme come from that all cishet males are inherently bad?

Sure, statistically speaking you might argue that the majority of cishet men are assholes - especially the kind that actually adhere to masculine gender roles - but this doesn't equate to an objectively negative thing.
It's not the unsettling aspect so much that "safe spaces" are deserving of critique as far as their effectiveness goes.

It seems more often than not that "safe spaces" are just self-marginalization, when they should also be a space for attack and claiming more space. I also don't think there's anything wrong with creating spaces where racism/sexism/homophobia are explicitly kept out, but again this seems to also carry the assumption that all white cishet males are inherently bad and will just inevitably do these things.
Pretty ironic that the person who made this infograph is making the same mistake as reactionaries of conflating all of feminism with identity politics.

Identity politics is a separate issue from feminism as a whole. One can be critical of identity politics and still be an anarcha-feminist/Marxist feminist
I mean you shouldn't need to be spoonfed the answers and should read shit on your own, but I don't see why you can't ask questions and why you might sometimes need to be called out if you're saying stupid shit.
How does this have anything to do with feminist issues? The whole fucking point of the black bloc is anonymity.
I'm not even sure what the second sentence is supposed to mean in this context, but sex work is about as empowering as being a "free" laborer in capitalism. It's empowering in the sense that you're at least on the same level as men by being able to sell your labor for a wage rather than having to be a housewife and be dependent on your husband, but slavery is slavery whether you're chained to the assembly line or the kitchen sink or the stripper pole.
I mean, it really is a meme. But it still highlights sexist bullshit within the radical milieu, which is important. It seems like it's mostly abused by liberals, though.

The whole scoring system is also rather flawed. You can only put one yes, and even then you're still a little wrong? Basically you have to conform absolutely to the ideology of whoever made this infograph and is purporting to be a representative of Marxist feminism/anarcha-feminism, or you're still kinda sexist at best. And of course because the person who made this graph isn't a cishet white male, that means that their opinion is basically law and they can do no wrong.

The whole discourse on these issues is just really fucked.

1. Not all radicals are in a position where arrest poses the same threat to them or their families livelihood and security.
2. Not all radicals are treated the same way by police institutions, prompting some groups to fear arrest more than others.
3. "A lack of fear, courage in the face of danger, etc. might by some be seen as typically masculine ideals for radicals to live up to.

Point is that an attitude like "you should wear arrests like a badge of honor", encouraging radicals to fight rather than flight in a confrontation with police can be exclusionary to the movement.

The human race thing is probably just a repeat of the "colorblind" question, to give racists a second 'point'.


Can somebody explain to me why sex work is not oppressive?
It's literally non-productive work. Meaning that the only reasons to do it are:
1. Oppression, as a slave to the pimp or the capital system in general, or
2. Recreation, in which case it would no longer be work in a post-capitalist society???
Sure there might be some people in todays world that don't do sex work specifically due to oppression, but if there was no capital incentive they sure as hell would not do it, and even if they did it wouldn't be work in any meaningful sense of the word since it's non-productive.

I know the whole thing is a joke, but I don't see why anybody could say no to the 5th question and still call themselves a leftist. The important factor should not be anything anybody might have done in the past, it's if theres any relevant risk that they might do so again, that action should be taken. But it might be that I'm the uncharitable one here, since they just use the word "rapist", which could of course mean people who pose a risk.

I think that's a pretty strawmanny representation of the anti-idpol crowd. Even though they sure do exist, it's my feeling that the portion of people who believe that structural oppression will just "le wither away" are a pretty small minority. Most people just hold the view that fighting structural oppression (Outside of economical oppression) from within capitalism is counterproductive.
Of course within that group there's another relevant distinction between those who think that fighting structural oppression at all pre-revolution is counterrevolutionary.

Again, I feel this is a strawman again. I don't see how anybody could hold the view that opinions are equal. The point is that an opinion's value comes from how well informed the holder of said opinion is, and it just so happens that blacks in America have a better experience of the cultural oppression of blacks in America, which means that their opinions generally hold a much larger weight than most other people on this specific issue. This doesn't mean that a old cis straight male Japanese sociologist can't hold an opinion of much more value than some black opinionstube lolbertarian, born and raised in some closed garden suburbia.

Other than that, while I may disagree with some of them, I think it's a pretty reasonable document. E.g. even though I think that idpol is a distraction, I don't think people who disagree necessarily are completely unreasonable. It's a complicated issue. Same with affirmative consent. Rest seem to just be about being a decent person to be around, which can be a relevant quality when developing a social movement.

I think it's just a repeat of the "opinions aren't equal lmao" question.
I actually opened up this reply expecting to discuss some of the points you brought up, but I completely agree with everything you wrote lol.

Except about affirmative consent, but that's a different discussion.

I mean, it's true that all opinions aren't equal. I don't think a Nazi's opinion is equal to mine, because I think it's wrong. I don't think that a white cishet male's opinion is necessarily equal to a queer/female/PoC/etc. on identity issues, because they have differing experiences to draw from and these issues don't take the same precedence in their lives.

Of course that doesn't mean I think that you can't be a socially-consicous white cishet male or that you can't be an ally, but you should just be mindful of the fact that you will have a different perspective on the matter that might make you inclined to be dismissive of them.

I mean, it's not like every time my partner and I have sex we get explict consent from each other every time, unless it's something that we haven't done before. It's ridiculous to think that you need to do that when there's a foundation of trust in the relationship.

But if it's casual sex or like with someone you haven't been with before, yeah, I think you should get affirmative consent. It's just the safest thing to do.

Got banned instantly lol

Non-verbal consent is not a thing? WoW.

reddit.com/r/Anarchism/comments/5893qj/check_your_fucking_privilege/

A thread in response to that second link you posted.

We only legitimize this shit as some official left-wing dogma when we call it "leftist rhetoric". Most of the intelligent criticism to these concepts that I see come from the Left as well, so let's not act like they're the norm. We need to isolate SJW politics from the notion of left-wing politics.

I love how these people commit to a fringe political ideologies without even knowing its basic tenents and its lexicon.

Prevent what? It's already too late. In countries like Austria, Finland, Denmark, Hungary, the US and some more far-right nationalist parties and politicians already are the preferred choice among the majority of white working class voters.

The left of this generation completely failed at capitalizing on the ever greater alienation of the white working class and drove them into the arms of the fascists.

why should we care? countries will go to war, white workers will die and everyone will remember why fascism is flawed

because these are things we typically try to avoid

no

fascists are completly disposable

you have bad reading skills piratanon

Don't tell me you still hoist a nationalist flag?
what are you waiting to join the sea nomadic tribes and raid spanish and british ships?


nomads have no history only geography, therefore no nation

No, it's racist to think badly of people for being of a certain race.

Politically irrelevant ideologies that have been completely and utterly outmaneuvered by capitalist propaganda for decades don't have the sense to admit that they've been outmaneuvered.

What almost all of the commenters in that R/ anarchism thread don't seem to realize is that they've already lost. Americans have lost any class consciousness that they might have had, that went away with the demise of the labor movement. If the proletariat in America has forgotten to act in its own self interests in regards to class, it has instead enthusiastically taken up pursuing it's own self interest in regards to race.

I don't know why this is exactly, but I don't blame the left for it. It's right for them to align with oppressed identities in the face of far-right reaction. This has led to a sort of selection bias in the left today, its members are primarily interested in championing marginalized identities while maligning the muh privileged and in Anti-fascism. I don't think that they are wrong for doing this, I believe that fascists(proto- or pseudo- or otherwise) should be met with anti-fascists.However, I feel that they are not all that interested in class, it doesn't drive them. An assault on fascists or racists or the muh privileged is not an assault on capitalism, and while these sorts of efforts are needed, they are not revolutionary. And maybe I'm being pessimistic but I don't believe that they will engender any revolutionary activity that isn't in essence reactionary.

The proles hate immigrants, the proles hate the blacks, the proles hate the whites, the proles couldn't give a shit about capitalism.

Can we start doxing these fucking cunts and report them to their employers now? I'm sick to fucking death of them, Holla Forums is more tolerable.

It's sexist as fuck as well.

Le men aren't allowed to cry xD xD xD

One of the few times 'regressive left' actually applies,

It's a newish account that was modded at creation so I assume it's a doxxable mob or SRS.

It's a shame the guy who hacked subreddits was just a braindead skid, the internet would love to dethrone and demask these people.

It's going to be a fucking bloodbath when their email database gets leaked one day.

Mod*, obvs

Does anyone have a reddit account? I've found some drama where one user seems to have some dox /u/Prince_Kropotkin

where?

Yeah it's a real mystery.

reddit.com/r/Drama/comments/4itvgu

Real people will always identify with religion, ethnicity, nation, etc. before class. This is something leftists never understand because they are autistic misfits.

Leftists could have victories if they acknowledged this fact, but they are too dumb to do so. Instead they say "hey normal working Joe. You know all that shit you care about that defines your deepest values, sense of self, and place in society? Yeah, that shit doesn't matter, you need to focus on your income and this 19th century pseudo-economic political screed instead." And that's why they turn away from the left. Because you are repellant impersonal autists.

I meant other than what I had stated in the previous paragraph, please elaborate as to any other reasons.

It's a friendly Dolphin issue. Nonverbal consent is sometimes, perhaps usually, fine but seeing how it occurs in our most private of affairs we don't recognize how common it is. In recent years some ladies on the internet have taken it upon themselves to share how non-verbal consent wasn't sufficient for them, and we all end up trusting Flipper to lead us ashore.

I am feeling slightly triggered here.

As we all know bourgeois ideology isn't the dominant thought of the day and all comrades are born with an innate understanding of the myriad ways in which it dominates are relationships with the world and how we interact with others.

Socialist thought is an ideology. Don't fool yourself.

Explain how racial issues are a "huge" part of that ideology.


I see a lot of words but yet you say nothing at all.

What don't you get?

1. Bourgeois ideology is the ruling ideology.
2. Bourgeois ideology uses things like racism to divide the working class. Ensuring that they don't unite along class lines.
3. Bourgeois ideology also promotes anti-socialist/communist sentiments.
4. Basically every worker you encounter will be enamored with this ideology.
5. The course of action being put forth by the person you quoted amounts to "if you are confronted by bourgeois ideological thought you should no longer engage with that prole". If we take this to it's logical conclusion we will not be engaging with anyone due to the fact that all proles are currently neck deep in bourgeois ideology.

No.

i am become brocialist destroyer of feels

definitely not. eg is the dismissal of the rural american white proletariat as being racist, bigoted and completely uninterested in any form of revolutionary politics which is peak chauvinism and can only come out of the mouths of people who are 'with her'.
But this doesn't mean that racism and/or sexism exist within the left. In fact it's a major problem we're facing.

fuck

If you mean 'right wing' traditionalist racism/sexism, I'd be interested how you came to that conclusion

Racist is a concept bro. It applies for EVERYONE in every society, system or class can be racist.
The stupid bourgeoise statements is nothing but the same thing just reducting the problem to their own interpretation.

12 Yes
9 No
1 Unsure/Don't Know

...

That DebateAnarchism thread is fairly lucid by reddit anarchist standards. Damning with faint praise I know, but there it is.

But it's interesting to watch how viscerally people who are attached to muh privilege theory and identity politics more generally react when it's questioned. The moment somebody says something as innocuous as "maybe we should reassess how useful this actually is on the ground", out comes the indignation and anger, out come the apologetics, out come the pseudo-Calvinist proclamations that struggling, desperate people who are the wrong colour and are sick of being told how good they have it are just proto-fascists who can't be saved.

I used to moderate a pretty big multi-faith religious discussion board years ago and it's the same shit you see when one kind of Christian is questioned by another from a different denomination or a devout Muslim is questioned by some ex-Muslim atheist.

Because it has been co-opted by the "under-represented" rich and their allies, i.e. women, non-whites, etc.

Holla Forums gets upset when someone says that "all politics is identity politics" but you must understand: in America, the lower classes are made to believe that that is the absolute truth.

Isn't this the case with anything to do with politics on the internet?
When did you last see an online political discussion that wasn't a vicious shit flinging match?

Honestly, just as with religious discussion and debate, it is possible to learn to detach your identity from your politics for the purpose having a worthwhile exchange with someone who thinks differently and plenty of people can and do.

But there are definitely some ideologies that seem to be better or worse. For instance, in my own entirely anecdotal experience, a western Roman Catholic is more likely to be capable of this than an Evangelical Protestant (or New Atheist) just as a stuffy old newspaper-hawking Trot or ML is more likely to be able to than a woke American feminist or spirit o' '68 lefty.

Guessing by which of the clique have gone missing, my guess is on luckylucyp being the new account of mod punkswcleankitchens.


IIRC, that thread wasn't dox. I do, however, have the name, photograph and general location of eeplox / nowaydaddioh.

Warning: Shitty armchair pseudo-psychoanalysis coming through.

While I imagine their reaction has to deal with some extent an attempt to gain/hold onto power, I think we should also take into consideration the fact that by attacking muh privilege theory you are in turn attacking the very foundations of their ego. (There's a reason it's called identity politics after all). They have built their entire self-worth and world-view around the idea that they are under assault because they are female, or because they are gay, or because they are black, or because they are a black lesbian, whatever, and in turn have created an immense sense of righteous pride in that chosen identity, much like Holla Forums and how they believe they are under assault because they are white, male, "virtuous", whatever. By saying the real issue is class you are essentially destroying their entire universe.

Which is not to say you shouldn't, just that people generally don't take that very well.

Good! Fucking poltergeists!