Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
FFS. If you'all want to respond to Twitter posts, why don't you go to Twitter and do that in its natural habitat? This place is becoming more Twitter-like every day. 
The Alt-Right
- Thread starter Jeff Robinson
- Start date
CRI
Registered Chooser
Sure, no one likes being generalised about. It happens all the time though when the subject is people who are marginalised due to race, class, gender, sexual orientation, etc. If they complained about every example, they'd be talking about nothing else all day, every day. Too often when they do, they're told they have a chip on their shoulder, are jealous, are bitter, or making a fuss of nothing.
When a woman who's experienced say sexual harassment talks about how "men are like this," and a bloke says, "but not all men . . . " or a Black person says they're uncomfortable working with white people, knowing so many back a racist President, and a white person insists, "not all white people . . . " it's not simply asking for "clarity." It's expecting the person to put aside their painful experience long enough to reassure that they didn't mean you, no you are nice, of course you're not like that, it's definitely not to do with you, make sure your feelings aren't hurt, etc. before going on to describe their experience of injustice.
It also says, "Okay, you can carry on now, but if I'm not convinced (or you make me feel uncomfortable again), I reserve the right to reject what you say completely.
It's really just playing along with the rules of structural oppression while wanting to play at showing solidarity and it sucks.
If you know they're not talking about you, don't insist they make it about you.
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
CRI
Registered Chooser
I've actually seen quite a few articles, blogs, etc. where people do take pains to explain they're they're not talking about "all men" or "all white people" or "all straight people," etc., and I always think, fuck, it's really sad they think they have to do that preemptively to avoid a shit storm. As often as not, the shit storm comes anyway.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
The point that both danny and J Ed (and others across many threads) have been making is that this is an example of a wide ranging tendency in liberal politics. A politics that is harmful and actively undermines the aims some of us have, a politics that rejects class as a means of analysing society and fighting capital to instead reduce it to an identity. A politics that is/has been embraced by the politicians and capital currently attacking us.
That's why some people give a fuck, not because this one person, who I've never heard of, has said something stupid on twitter but because it's representative of a politics that is damaging and part of the problem.
Ole
Well-Known Member
They should not do it to avoid a shit storm, they should do it for basic moral reasons and to avoid being absolute fucking hypocrites of the nth power, because I bet none of these people would stay quiet if someone else condemned an identity to which they belonged.
These people are a fucking embarrassment, who literally undermine our ability to build support for anti-imperialism, anti-racism and anti-capitalism, because they want to massage their narcissism.
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
THAT
Raheem
Well-Known Member
Or, to put the same thing another way, a couple of posters have jumped on a random tweet because it's evidence of something they reckon is a thing being a thing. And, while it may or may not be a thing, the evidence is pretty lame as evidence goes, and doesn't really support any broad-brush generalisations.
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
I think that what's also worth thinking about in this context is how important, especially in modern politics, the demarcation of in groups and out groups is in political discourse. Trump has been very good at this, if you listen to his speeches he is clearly outlines the in group as encompassing a coalition of people which includes the working-class amongst others, in the out group you have the elite and various corporate interests which Americans rightly despise but who he actually has a class interest in defending.
What do we have on the other side? Well, Clinton's political rhetoric clearly demarcated working-class Americans, at least as working-class Americans, in the out group while putting the political class, the media class and corporations in the in group.
I think we are seeing something similar here, albeit on a smaller but increasingly widespread scale, political discourse in which white people are in the out group. Why? Who does this benefit? Is it good for anti-racism? For building solidarity? Corbyn and Sanders don't do this, why not?
What do we have on the other side? Well, Clinton's political rhetoric clearly demarcated working-class Americans, at least as working-class Americans, in the out group while putting the political class, the media class and corporations in the in group.
I think we are seeing something similar here, albeit on a smaller but increasingly widespread scale, political discourse in which white people are in the out group. Why? Who does this benefit? Is it good for anti-racism? For building solidarity? Corbyn and Sanders don't do this, why not?
Last edited:
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
So, someone posts a tweet presumably thinking it says something worthwhile. Some others agree. Then yet others - including myself - don't think the tweet displays a good attitude and say so, and enter into a discussion with those who liked it.
I think it's pretty weak to say that discussion of the tweet and attitudes around it is somehow the responsibility of only those critical of it. We didn't bring it up. We're only asking why those who brought it up thought it was so great. And, further, it is only the jumping off point for a discussion. A discussion that has already ranged across literature and ideas far wider than the tweet itself.
If people would rather not engage in that discussion, fine. We're all adults: just say so. Or just don't participate. But don't bring something up on a discussion board and then wonder why it's being discussed.
There's important stuff in amongst all this that we can get into. It's in the exchanges already.
I think it's pretty weak to say that discussion of the tweet and attitudes around it is somehow the responsibility of only those critical of it. We didn't bring it up. We're only asking why those who brought it up thought it was so great. And, further, it is only the jumping off point for a discussion. A discussion that has already ranged across literature and ideas far wider than the tweet itself.
If people would rather not engage in that discussion, fine. We're all adults: just say so. Or just don't participate. But don't bring something up on a discussion board and then wonder why it's being discussed.
There's important stuff in amongst all this that we can get into. It's in the exchanges already.
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
How does what happened over the weekend not have its own thread? I'm pretty sure that in hindsight, this will end up being one of the biggest moments in US history of the past few decades
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
start one
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
I would but I'm very busy, also, I live in the US and I'm kind of too caught up in the whole thing to know where to even begin.
Nylock
I hate 'these days'...
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
Well I'm glad to hear that. The isolated quote doesn't really get that across though.
Well since you're both so interested. Although I thought the point was fairly obvious.
So the original quote was "Racism gets its power from capitalism. Thus, if you're anti-racist, whether you know it or not, you must be anti-capitalist. The power for racism, the power for sexism, comes from capitalism".
Racism had a fair bit of power under Stalin whilst he transported a shit loads of people about the place. Ergo, racism does not get its power from capitalism. Racism gets its power from racists with power.
Nylock
I hate 'these days'...
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It's hardly as conveniently simple as that. It's not about a lack of cuddles, or whether daddy played with their peepees. It's about some men being raised to believe that their senses of entitlement, of right and wrong, of morality, are the correct viewpoint. It's about these same men not being able to cope psychologically, when it turns out that their toxic viewpoints are not socially-normative.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
.
Last edited:
maomao
普費斯
If communication between liberals on Twitter has broken down to the point where they somehow can't avoid using the language and tropes of the people we're all supposed to be fighting it's hardly anyone else's fault.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
Within the last week one of the most prominent proponents of liberal identity politics on the boards falsely called another poster a racist (not for the first time), because she didn't read what he posted and then refused to apologise. Socialists, both on U75 and wider afield, were smeared as racists because they attacked St. Obama for talking hundreds of thousands of dollars from a fucking investment bank for a few hours worth of speaking. There's been one post/tweet/article/etc after another calling those that made a 'leave' vote in the referendum racists and/or idiots, likewise with the US election, non-voters and Green voters have been smeared as racists/sexists. And both the Sanders and Corbyn campaigns have been repeatedly accused of the same.
Danny has already given one reference on this thread, and people have quoted or linked to Kenan Malik or other writers on others. There's been plenty of material and examples given to show that this is not just a few twitter idiots but a consistent and widespread theme within liberal politics. (Indeed, I'd argue that it's become a survival tactic for liberalism, it no longer has anything else and so had no option but to climb into the life raft of identity politics/political multiculturalism).
Last edited:
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
The claim is fairly obvious, whether the assumptions behind it correct is not so clear. Perhaps you could start with Stalin being an anti-capitalist.
Last edited:
Athos
Well-Known Member
Link?
When the only thing in your political tool box is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. As if there could be no basis for criticising Obama other than race!
Jonti
what the dormouse said
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Didn't see that at the time. It's disgusting, and something I hope this community will not tolerate.
Treacle Toes
Time
Treacle Toes
Time
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
This is extremely relevant to the themes in the Fields' book, Racecraft. If I have time today I'll try to expand on that. (Though I've got a lot on).
Similar threads
- Poll
