Anonymous asked:
argumate answered:
I just find it amusing that every self-described leftist who accuses me of being a fascist invariably gets torn to pieces by other self-described leftists a week later, who then get torn to pieces in turn, and so on ad infinitum, like a bizarre political karma system.
daniel-r-h asked:
luminousalicorn answered:
Alarm clocks are VERY LOUD AND THREATENING but I will FIGHT THEM if they come near my nest!
Anonymous asked:
argumate answered:
I just find it amusing that every self-described leftist who accuses me of being a fascist invariably gets torn to pieces by other self-described leftists a week later, who then get torn to pieces in turn, and so on ad infinitum, like a bizarre political karma system.
I’d always heard about the left’s — factionalism? circular firing squads? Like, “People’s Front of Judea/Judean People’s Front” har har har but boy did tumblr make that real to me
Not JUST the way that the left - political, cultural, etc. would tear itself up constantly, drive off potential allies, etc., but the contrast.
Like, remember the “Axis of Evil” of right-tumblrs a few years ago? Whose symbol was ≠? (“equality” woulda worked too, I thought)
If ANYONE, they were an incoherent coalition, from Christian traditionalists to proto-ancap free marketers to Third Reich cosplayers to folks from Jewish expat anticommunist traditions like Communism Kills, but they stayed friendly, pissing out of the tent
The essential irony of people who want to destroy the left (and this also goes for feminism specifically, and for Marxism specifically) is that the only thing keeping those groups from destroying themselves is the external pressure of enemies who blatantly belong to an outside faction and lump them all together. If there was a sustained 20-year period where nobody worth noticing was trying to destroy “the left” it would atomize completely from its own internal conflicts.
I’m not exactly sure what the deal is, honestly. I think it’s a thing to some extent on the right, but why it’s so much more prevalent on the left, that eludes me.
For a long time, my estimate was that there are simply more ways to be left-wing than to be right-wing.
I’m no longer so sure.
I’ve discussed what WW called “localism-ingroupism” on this blog, and perhaps the right-wingers are, in some sense, less universalist. If one believes in a world of nations and differing traditions, it isn’t so necessary that literally every territory on Earth adopts the One True Ideology.
Or maybe it’s just that the right-wingers do have a higher neural threat recognition and consider themselves outnumbered even when they aren’t.
Harem anime is like reverse birds: the females are colorful and competitive creatures full of life and personality, and the male is an indistinct grey blob that goes flying sometimes.
the mods are awake, stop posting discourse
“The Postmodern Symbolism of Predatory Birds in Post-Rationalist Mythology”
@mitigatedchaos, with excerpts from WP:ForestWander, WP:Stemonitis, et al. Tumblr Journal of Sociology, 31 Mar 2017. (CC-BY-SA)
i don’t think mating birds ever do their dances sarcastically
can you imagine if they did tho?? it would be frickin hilarious.
*jumps around with exaggerated wing movements* ooh ooh I’m one sexy bird
Owl Under Investigation for Misconduct Claims Mating Dance Meant “Ironically”
Anonymous asked:
fierceawakening answered:
…someone who understood what i was trying to say, omfg
and also like… do people know what to Google? I do, but that’s because I’ve already been in SJ circles
I mean, like, I haven’t actually Googled “things that offend POC” (and wouldn’t) but I can easily imagine that it, or queries like it, might return exactly the sorts of result SJ types would not want un-woke-yet wypipo reading.
So it’s… my problem is it seems so much like advice from inside the circle. And… dude, we have a country to save. We need to be talking to people outside the circle, getting them to come in. And that means not setting up barriers like “don’t talk to me unless you are THIS woke”
Yeah, googling can produce some seriously bad results from time to time - like, right now, typing “did holocaust happen” into Google actually gives me a page titled … “Top 10 reasons why the holocaust didn’t happen” as its #1 search result … wtf.
SPLC did some time ago post a piece ( https://www.splcenter.org/20170118/google-and-miseducation-dylann-roof ) arguing that this sort of terrible google results to unfortunately-formulated queries was actually an important part of what got someone like racist mass murderer Dylann Roof drawn into violent white supremacism in the first place.
Which makes it … kinda odd to see that flippant “google it” type responses without any specifics (like, say, search phrases or date ranges or similar) are apparently still a thing.
This!
I wanted to say that too but I didn’t have the evidence ready to hand. Thank you!
I had a discussion with someone who, it turns out, was using “Whiteness” to mean “White supremacy” which last time I checked they maintained should have been understood effortlessly by others to mean that. It’s three pages into the Google results with “Whiteness definition Sociology” before that meaning is mentioned.
A link to eg. that Everyday Feminism or Ta-Nehisi Coates article that explains whatever is WAY more helpful and less likely to send an already irritated and uninformed person into the hands of people who violently disagree with Social Justice.
That, yes.
Honestly I really don’t like these weird… expanded definitions of “white supremacy” much either. I mean, I think it’s worthwhile to mention that white people who fancy ourselves nice and nonoppressive can hold views that are actually grounded in some weird racist shit.
But if whiteness itself is “white supremacy,” how the hell do we accurately describe what happened in Charlottesville, or the ideology those people openly endorsed?
> Everyday Feminism or Ta-Nehisi Coates
Not sure if that’s even productive. Maybe Bannon was right, and the whiteness=white-supremacist identity politics equivocation will make white people vote for white identitarians because there is no escape anyway.
EF feels like a parody of itself.
I am leery of any sentence that begins “Maybe Bannon was right,” but I honestly do think that the tendency to label oneself based on groups has become incredibly intense these days, and I’m not surprised to see white supremacists saying “this is about my white identity” these days.
What’s that saying? “The Devil can quote Scripture for his purposes?”
When Bannon called that professor on the phone, he said that identity politics will turn white people into white nationalists faster than it turns out PoC to vote Democrat.
We can model ethnopol as having two aspects - attack, or as basis for resource extraction, and defense, as basis to prevent outsider resource extraction. The formation of ethnic identity can be reinforced by either, and potentially reinforces both. So I agree - going heavy on idpol risks reawakening white racial consciousness in a defense framing (even if one thinks that isn’t morally valid/permissible), which can then be shifted to an attack framing, which is bad, because of reasons already expressed at length by many people.
Anonymous asked:
fierceawakening answered:
…someone who understood what i was trying to say, omfg
and also like… do people know what to Google? I do, but that’s because I’ve already been in SJ circles
I mean, like, I haven’t actually Googled “things that offend POC” (and wouldn’t) but I can easily imagine that it, or queries like it, might return exactly the sorts of result SJ types would not want un-woke-yet wypipo reading.
So it’s… my problem is it seems so much like advice from inside the circle. And… dude, we have a country to save. We need to be talking to people outside the circle, getting them to come in. And that means not setting up barriers like “don’t talk to me unless you are THIS woke”
Yeah, googling can produce some seriously bad results from time to time - like, right now, typing “did holocaust happen” into Google actually gives me a page titled … “Top 10 reasons why the holocaust didn’t happen” as its #1 search result … wtf.
SPLC did some time ago post a piece ( https://www.splcenter.org/20170118/google-and-miseducation-dylann-roof ) arguing that this sort of terrible google results to unfortunately-formulated queries was actually an important part of what got someone like racist mass murderer Dylann Roof drawn into violent white supremacism in the first place.
Which makes it … kinda odd to see that flippant “google it” type responses without any specifics (like, say, search phrases or date ranges or similar) are apparently still a thing.
This!
I wanted to say that too but I didn’t have the evidence ready to hand. Thank you!
I had a discussion with someone who, it turns out, was using “Whiteness” to mean “White supremacy” which last time I checked they maintained should have been understood effortlessly by others to mean that. It’s three pages into the Google results with “Whiteness definition Sociology” before that meaning is mentioned.
A link to eg. that Everyday Feminism or Ta-Nehisi Coates article that explains whatever is WAY more helpful and less likely to send an already irritated and uninformed person into the hands of people who violently disagree with Social Justice.
That, yes.
Honestly I really don’t like these weird… expanded definitions of “white supremacy” much either. I mean, I think it’s worthwhile to mention that white people who fancy ourselves nice and nonoppressive can hold views that are actually grounded in some weird racist shit.
But if whiteness itself is “white supremacy,” how the hell do we accurately describe what happened in Charlottesville, or the ideology those people openly endorsed?
> Everyday Feminism or Ta-Nehisi Coates
Not sure if that’s even productive. Maybe Bannon was right, and the whiteness=white-supremacist identity politics equivocation will make white people vote for white identitarians because there is no escape anyway.
EF feels like a parody of itself.
It’s difficult for me to see that kind of strategic equivocation as *not* bad-faith-motivated.
SAN FRANCISCO—In an effort to reduce the number of unprovoked hostile communications on the social media platform, Twitter announced Monday that it had added a red X-mark feature verifying users who are in fact perfectly okay to harass. “This new verification system offers users a simple, efficient way to determine which accounts belong to total pieces of shit whom you should have no qualms about tormenting to your heart’s desire,” said spokesperson Elizabeth James, adding that the small red symbol signifies that Twitter has officially confirmed the identity of a loathsome person who deserves the worst abuse imaginable and who will deliberately have their Mute, Block, and Report options disabled. “When a user sees this symbol, they know they’re dealing with a real asshole who has richly earned whatever mistreatment they receive, including profanity, body-shaming, leaking of personal information, and relentless goading to commit suicide. It’s really just a helpful way of saying to our users, ‘This fuck has it coming, so do your worst with a clear conscience and without fear of having your account suspended.’” At press time, Twitter reassuredly clarified that the red X was just a suggestion and that all users could still be bullied with as little recourse as they are now.
