What is the robbing of a bank compared to the founding of a bank? What is the robbing of a bank... What is the robbing of a bank... What is the robbing
Mocking or censoring some the most vulnerable, telling people not to say things because it harms the Socialist brand, ‘shaming’ people you disagree with because you’re worried about messaging to recruit normies makes the class unrecognizable to ‘ourselves.’
@TheLastFarm@BigMeanInternet One sure-fire way not to sound like a 'sore loser' is not believing you lost or that your enemies scored a point off you just because your enemies tell you that happened. Sure, stuffing our heads in the sand isn't good, but neither is surrendering before the battle is even fought
@TheLastFarm@BigMeanInternet Our strategy (generously assuming we're on the same team) has to work with the assumption of right-wing propaganda distorting everything we do, no matter how academic or down-to-earth our rhethoric will be. Not playing their game is the only winning move, the rest is for chumps
@TheLastFarm@BigMeanInternet If your pathway to victory is not getting 'posterized' by the right-wing content mill, and you think a superior strategy or ideology can let you avoid that, then you've lost already (but waiting to find out a decade from now).
@TheLastFarm@BigMeanInternet You can say tongue-in-cheek stuff, up to and including (mis)using the absurd notion of 'dysgenicity', at a conference by socialists, for socialists, among socialists. I see no good reason to automatically self-censor on the assumption that someone, somewhere could misinterpret us
@BigMeanInternet@TheLastFarm Zero solidarity or even plain generosity in these people's hearts - every word from a comrade is just another opportunity to flaunt their superior understanding and Normalness to (again, imagined) normies. Pick-me leftism
@BigMeanInternet Instead everyone just naively accepts right-wing framing, some because they explicitly believe in it and some because they like to feel above some leftist academic, dismiss out of hand other views to pose to (largely imagined) 'normal' opinion as The Rational Leftist.
@BigMeanInternet How do people not get this is so fucking infuriating. It is OBVIOUSLY a critique of the eugenicist framing, not a value-flipped acceptance of it, and it's so evident if you listen to just a little bit more from her than right-wing provocateurs provide.
this really is a litmus test for determining how deep someone's professed desire for and interest in critique and revolution actually is. for, if you just dismiss this point as is, I'm sorry to say, but you're not actually interested in those things at all...
@glosseantics isn't adler-bolton just right here? do your exercises if you can they're good for you but it's not a moral failing nor is it politics. Our politics clearly has to center the 'dysgenic' if we actually care about anything
Since some of you are willing to take an actual enemy from the Manhattan Institute at his word, instead of @realLandsEnd here’s the portion right after he cut the video: “ Revolution is sustained by care work, networks of food distribution, medicine, transportation, shelter
speed limits exist in this way because they are probable cause machines, allowing police to interrogate and search an arbitrary subset of the people caught in their surveillance dragnet, something police love to do but can’t find constitutional grounds to do in other contexts
Can’t believe we’re on our 800th iteration of the Corbyn playbook. All smoke, zero fire. These “antisemitism crises” are complete confections that exist entirely to discipline critics of Israel, and Left projects more broadly. They cynically weaponize liberalism against itself.
@_rob_scott@materialcritic And I've been feeling like Pippin's Kantgelian Hegel and Rose's Hegel of organon vs canon can't really be reconciled. But Pippin didn't notice it, or at least doesn't mention that, did Rose?
@_rob_scott@materialcritic Did she mention why? I've been comparing their readings of Hegel recently, and while he also has some positive remarks about Rose in Hegel's Idealism, he stays with an interpretation of logic as metaphysics, whereas Rose calls it a phenomenology of abstract phil consciousness
putting my jolene hat on: the beauty and importance of the trans-id stuff is defining dysphoria as a crippling necessity for things to be Different and you can be trans- anything -- defining it as a social necessity for your continued life for things to be that way.