|
Can we give ferrinus another dunce cap avatar please. When in training asked for some AFLCIO history he also provided a garbage essay that was just meandering about how the AFL and CIO rivalry in the 30s was like WW2 china and mumbling about differing methods to the same goals which is both not true and not a history
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 05:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
the Long Picket Line
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 05:51
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:Can we give ferrinus another dunce cap avatar please. When in training asked for some AFLCIO history he also provided a garbage essay that was just meandering about how the AFL and CIO rivalry in the 30s was like WW2 china and mumbling about differing methods to the same goals which is both not true and not a history did it work this time?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 07:28
|
|
|
woke capital is racially realist, which is the opposite of what we need/want. woke capital is absolutely happy to emphasise differences which are implied to be inherent and racialised, and to wokeness as a tendency is a dead end. even if you managed to achieve parity *between the races* you'd still be stuck with the fault line of race running through your movement, ready to be exploited by the bourgeoisie at a moment's notice
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 10:14
|
|
|
its really obvious that its toxic to an egalitarian movement if you think about it for two seconds. the only reason i think it persists online is cuz of all these middle class crackers who have never in their life had to think about why racism exists and think they have great insights because of it
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 11:28
|
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:There is a white supremacist pedo elite in charge of the US, and they aren't going to leave on their own. They'll lay the groundwork for their own demise, but workers have to actually push them out. I think "ID pol" is good when it's emerges from communities upset at the special oppressions they face. It's rarely expressed in a precise Marxist manner, but people being pissed off at the unfairness of the capitalist system is good. It is just a starting point, but it's a pretty good one. it may be good but it's not revolutionary. barrack obama is windsurfing on billionaire island, only descending when it's necessary to crush unions or soc dems. white supremacist pedo elite is perfectly willing to have him
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 11:33
|
|
|
https://redsails.org/on-identitarianism-a-defense-of-a-strawman/
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 11:59
|
|
|
this text seems to be basing itself on a 1950s moral panic reading of nietszche
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 12:14
|
|
|
like, the first half of the text is saying "actually, ressentiment is good because i construe nietszche to be a Bad Man, an antisemite and aristocrat", which is both a bad reading of nietszche and just a bad formal point to make lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 12:17
|
|
|
ok i finished it and it's just a weird text from start to end at one point the author seems to think that the anti-identitarian point is "you shouldn't ever try to persuade people to behave a certain way, ever" and goes on a long assault on that strawman in an effort to expose the practical contradictions of the people being attacked for setting up strawmen it's a deep kind of irony, this
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 12:26
|
|
|
God bless you for reading the whole thing cuz I got to the part at the beginning where basically it said anti-idpol was dumb because nobody says they're idpol people and immediately closed it lol. That's cuz it's not an ideology doofus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 12:36
|
|
|
pausing a patreon episode of chapo trap house to read this for a few seconds like i'm lost driving and looking for a turn before angrily X'ing it out and hitting "play" again
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 12:43
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:its really obvious that its toxic to an egalitarian movement if you think about it for two seconds. the only reason i think it persists online is cuz of all these middle class crackers who have never in their life had to think about why racism exists and think they have great insights because of it even if you manage to cut out all the petit bourgeois twitter wokes -- which is an admirable goal, don't get me wrong -- you're still gonna have to be keenly aware of race when organizing among the American working class. You will have to talk about it and deal with it frequently. We live in what's effectively an apartheid state, denying that fact is denying objective reality. smarxist posted:pausing a patreon episode of chapo trap house to read this for a few seconds like i'm lost driving and looking for a turn before angrily X'ing it out and hitting "play" again tiny cracker brains baffled by the concept of "corporations do woke ad campaign" but also "race is part of the material conditions and cannot be wished away because it makes you uncomfortable" animist fucked around with this message at 13:23 on Apr 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 13:21
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:woke capital is racially realist, which is the opposite of what we need/want. woke capital is absolutely happy to emphasise differences which are implied to be inherent and racialised, and to i don't know what you mean by "wokeness as a tendency". antiracism? edit: were the george floyd uprisings at all related to wokeness? Ferrinus fucked around with this message at 15:57 on Apr 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 15:41
|
|
|
thanks, i hadn't read this one yet and really liked it. now that i've gone through it i'm gonna quote backwards in time from my last post, so apologies to v. ilyich lenin (no relation) V. Illych L. posted:like, the first half of the text is saying "actually, ressentiment is good because i construe nietszche to be a Bad Man, an antisemite and aristocrat", which is both a bad reading of nietszche and just a bad formal point to make lol the red sails guy really does not like nietszche, let me see if i can dig up a summation of why https://twitter.com/RodericDay/status/1380932261894311946?s=20 he writes a little more about nietszche in this longer essay, comparing him to fukuyama https://redsails.org/whos-afraid-of-the-end-of-history/ i haven't read enough nietszche to know if it's an accurate critique, but i do know that the (maybe unfair, parodic, disingenuous) reading of nietszche described by the author is definitely an accurate description of the "anti idpol" "left", who seem to be concerned first and foremost with performing strength and avoiding association with grasping, cloying, weakness V. Illych L. posted:ok i finished it and it's just a weird text from start to end that's not really an accurate or honest summary of the essay's point. in the first place the vampire castle essay (which is not good; here's a more classically marxist critique by our formerly own mccaine http://mccaine.org/2013/11/) certainly does inveigh against people leveling certain critiques in public, so claims of avoiding the trap of individual scolding are obviously invalid. in the second point even if the strawman argument you describe here was made in the essay it's hardly the lynchpin of the argument, which i would say appears much more strongly in paragraphs like this one: quote:Such views run into the grave problem that they contradict how radical politics has in fact unfolded, both in the core and the periphery. Either a great deal of what is conventionally considered revolutionary history has to be rejected, or it must be gravely misinterpreted. The former option is openly taken by Rectenwald. The latter one is taken by Fisher, who at one point cites the example of Malcolm X and Che Guevara as authentically communist examples of “a psychedelic dismantling of existing reality.” But the lives of both of these figures reveals a quite different dialectic than the liquidationist paradigm Fisher holds up. Malcolm X thinking moved towards revolutionary universalism by fidelity to two particular experiences — that of being black in America, and being a follower of Islam — neither of which were static identities, but developed over time along with his overall political vision. Nor would the trajectory of Che Guevara make any sense without his loyalties to an interconnected family of patrias — Argentina, Cuba, Latin America as a whole — and his sympathies for the plight of those throughout the world who were dispossessed of a homeland of their own by imperialism. In neither case was the particular simply shed to reveal the “real” core of truth beneath all of the contingencies. What they wanted and who they were were inseparably intertwined. For both men, the abstract forms of political emancipation were given content by a concern to live out specific identities to the end, identities which in turn which were given a heightened meaning and intensity by being forced to acknowledge and search for what fell outside of themselves. And, pace Rectenwald, they were allowed to develop as very distinct individuals precisely because they took up as an ethical task the burden of bearing not one, but several, predications. which i think is really key, because in actual history, particular identitarian struggles have served to drive rather than stifle revolution. in What Is To Be Done, lenin explicitly and repeatedly dismisses the "economism" of leftists who think that labor organizing should be the primary political struggle, instead saying that the power of the labor movement needs to be devoted to particularistic causes like ending religious oppression or colonial subjugation. as i said in my first, shorter post, if the george floyd uprisings weren't an identitarian struggle, what were they?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 16:35
|
|
|
the inherently funny thing about wokeness is precisely that the dumb performative gestures and slimy statements corporations produce are absurd to imagine as meaningful antiracism thus the contradiction
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 17:44
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:the inherently funny thing about wokeness is precisely that the dumb performative gestures and slimy statements corporations produce are absurd to imagine as meaningful antiracism I think that’s part of the point, highlighting that these gestures amount to nothing materially can be used to radicalize people
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 17:44
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:i don't know what you mean by "wokeness as a tendency". antiracism? by 'wokeness as a tendency' i mean the present tendency, based on an idealistic conception of identity, based on (as far as i can tell) the standpoint theoretical insight that our perceptions are themselves shaped by our place in the world, combined with a particular reading of the radical translation problem which means that such truths are effecively occulted from those without a direct experiental access to them. that is: social issues are bad in that they are experienced as bad, and the truth of social oppression is mostly or solely accessible to through direct experience. thence the 'ally' discourse re: white anti-racists, the whole nonsense about checking one's privilege which we seem to be mercifully past, and thence the people theorising themselves into segregationism every so often over issues of cultural appropriation and minoritarian/majoritarian politics. the issue with this can be seen pretty obviously in the case of jeremy corbyn: if you cannot demand some independent verification and effectively have to take the word of the people on the thin edge of the issue, butthese people are capable of being scared without . the simple fact of the matter is that the majority of british jews believing corbyn's labour party to be institutionally antisemitic, or the man himself to be an antisemite, did not mean that the party was institutionally antisemitic to any meaningful degree, at least as compared to british society in general. re: nietszche, it's a terrible reading which has been outmoded since, at least, foucault. nietszche as a fascist or antisemitic thinker is literally buying into nazi propaganda about the guy, who was in reality sufficiently opposed to anti-semitism that he burned several important bridges (notably including wagner), and attempts (in 2020) to insinuate that people using nietszche have some assimilated antisemitism in their ideas is, at best, amateurish and at worst outright pernicious. there's something to be said about the mobilisation of ressentiment as a force for change, but a great deal of nietszche's point is that slave morality is passivising and effectively anti-romantic - and so to a revolutionary, the obvious take-away is that you need to mobilise people to action through some sort of romance, you cannot - as you youself note - limit yourself to the dry bones and economism of certain more positivistic tendencies. the issue with identitarianism is that it effectively divides people into suspicious groups based on non-objective criteria such as nationality, race or what have you. these things do matter, and they must be accounted for, but you cannot have a successful movement with them as the centre of the project, which is what identitarian politics very often boils down to. you simply cannot tell people that you have to support Group X because it's the right thing to do, because what people perceive as the right thing to do is very flexible. it is much more compelling to say that, hey, these people have a common interest with you, you should be looking to join with them based on this common interest, and in this struggle should one discard what is superfluous. racial jusice is absolutely important, but you cannot build solidarity with someone with whom you don't believe you can properly communicate - there's an element of moralistic objectification that's going on, which is simply not workable if you're interested in building any kind of mass movement. i absolutely expect black people to care about not getting shot by law enforcement; i believe that i, too, have an interest in people, even if they're black, not getting shot by law enforcement, and that this is a basis for genuine solidarity with black people. quote:that's not really an accurate or honest summary of the essay's point. in the first place the vampire castle essay (which is not good; here's a more classically marxist critique by our formerly own mccaine http://mccaine.org/2013/11/) certainly does inveigh against people leveling certain critiques in public, so claims of avoiding the trap of individual scolding are obviously invalid. in the second point even if the strawman argument you describe here was made in the essay it's hardly the lynchpin of the argument, which i would say appears much more strongly in paragraphs like this one: it's about as accurate and honest as this summary: quote:Finally, it said that bringing up individuals and their differences between one another is inherently inimical and divisive. We need to focus more on “impersonal structures” of economic power instead of seeking to criticize the actions of others. There is at the very least a performative contradiction at work here, if not outright hypocrisy. All three articles under discussion appeal to the readers to change their minds in a specific way (“get over yourselves, stop condemning”) but at the time they say that individual behavior is not “really” important, not something one should get excited about and write 2500+ words on. emphasis mine, obviously which i find hard to interpret, in a strong sense, as anything except "these people think that telling individuals what to do is bad political practice and yet here they are, telling individuals what to do! how hypocritical" which is an insane position to attribute to one's objects of critique and which frankly makes it hard for me, at least, to take his reading of the texts seriously
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 17:54
|
|
|
now, i would note that i'm not necessarily opposed to some level of identitarian thinking - i am, myself, deeply identitarian on some things which are very important to me and which i don't want to relinquish - but you don't build your communist party on the national question
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 17:59
|
|
|
animist posted:even if you manage to cut out all the petit bourgeois twitter wokes -- which is an admirable goal, don't get me wrong -- you're still gonna have to be keenly aware of race when organizing among the American working class. You will have to talk about it and deal with it frequently. We live in what's effectively an apartheid state, denying that fact is denying objective reality. no poo poo. that's not what idpol stuff typically is. don't you dare quote this with another tired actually intersectionality is real thing like everyone always says. im merely expressing disgust at the way most liberals handle race relations, which is usually incredibly gross like 'ah, let's only have latinos try to organize ESL latinos, instead of just any fluent spanish speaker' (guess which one actual unions and effective orgs do)
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 19:47
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:'ah, let's only have latinos try to organize ESL latinos, instead of just any fluent spanish speaker' lol does this actually happen
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 19:56
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:the issue with identitarianism is that it effectively divides people into suspicious groups based on non-objective criteria such as nationality, race or what have you. these things do matter, and they must be accounted for, but you cannot have a successful movement with them as the centre of the project, which is what identitarian politics very often boils down to. you simply cannot tell people that you have to support Group X because it's the right thing to do, because what people perceive as the right thing to do is very flexible. it is much more compelling to say that, hey, these people have a common interest with you, you should be looking to join with them based on this common interests, and in this struggle should one discard what is superfluous. racial jusice is absolutely important, but you cannot build solidarity with someone with whom you don't believe you can properly communicate - there's an element of moralistic objectification that's going on, which is simply not workable if you're interested in building any kind of mass movement. i absolutely expect black people to care about not getting shot by law enforcement; i believe that i, too, have an interest in people, even if they're black, not getting shot by law enforcement, and that this is a basis for genuine solidarity with black people you say it much smarter but this is why im generally deeply uncomfortable with that kind of language lol. it's not objective in the slightest. im hispanic, which depending on who you ask is either exactly the same as being a regular white American or exactly the same as being 'brown'. especially because even among people who consider themselves to be anti-racist, there's always a correct answer that predisposes them to me better, so I have to guess whether someone is racist and I should claim to be 'fully' white or wokely racist and claim to be 'fully latino'. I'd rather just be me, personally. indigi posted:lol does this actually happen it's a genius insight I've heard at DSA functions a couple times lol. Thankfully it's never gone anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 19:58
|
|
|
quote:the trad side is opposed to identity differences on an ideological level, sees them as a threat to the natural order, etc. – this position is probably doomed in the longer term, or at least takes a lot more effort to maintain in developed economies. Kind of, in reality the woke group slide into the trad group & decide things have gone "too far" The trade group die off over time as a new "natural order" is created to be defended. Which is why you have the "radical part" of france as center right, they genuinely were leftwing at their creation but the decades slid by them Working class politics aren't immune to this either, but I'd argue less hostility is displayed between the two sides in socialist states Dreddout fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Apr 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
Dreddout posted:Working class politics aren't immune to this either, but I'd argue less hostility is displayed between the two sides in socialist states really? seems like in the USSR and China at least things could/can get extremely antagonistic
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:12
|
|
|
1. it's very funny and sad when liberals talk themselves into opposing miscegenation or whatever, and as you note it arises from a fundamentally idealistic conception of reality in which there are eternally-existing and fundamentally immiscible static categories of things and especially of people. this is what happens when somebody correctly identifies that racism is bad but is not a marxist - they can only come up with liberal solutions to the problem, and liberalism will always loop back around to upholding racism in material terms. corbyn is a good example because in fact the opposition to corbyn was deeply antisemitic in like five different ways (including deliberately bungling the handling of legitimate antisemitism complaints in order to intensify fervor), such that even a left movement that took antisemitism as its primary issue should have supported corbyn! "antisemitism isn't a real problem" is a weak answer; "only socialism can deliver in the fight against antisemitism" is a strong answer 2. i believe you that nietszche rebuked explicit antisemitism, but criticism of master morality vs. slave morality and their applicability to the socialist project - which is ultimately founded on the observation that society's losers, rejects, and cast-offs in fact decisively outnumber and form the power base for the winners and heroes - doesn't really rely on nietszche's personal faults or virtues and is certainly applicable to the way some people talk about including e.g. the disabled into left organizing 3. i don't think your use of "non-objective criteria" makes sense here (against the "objective" criteria of what, employment?) race, gender, ability, etc are all social constructs, but so is money; just because something has been constructed and needs to be maintained does not mean it does not enjoy full material reality and isn't capable of killing you dead in seconds. since whiteness is a property relation maintained by both concerted propaganda and police terror, organizing against whiteness/the police is not only organizing around an objective criterion but in fact has been proven to turn more people out onto the streets and with a much higher level of militancy than, say, the bernie campaign. in other words, V. Illych L. posted:now, i would note that i'm not necessarily opposed to some level of identitarian thinking - i am, myself, deeply identitarian on some things which are very important to me and which i don't want to relinquish - but you don't build your communist party on the national question it's no accident that the national question was deeply important to like every successful socialist project and that the russian revolution produced a union of socialist republics rather than an undifferentiated communist great russia. mao called communism a hammer used to crush the enemy; until and unless the workers' movement is able to direct its energies towards the rectification of injustices above and beyond the basic wage-labor reaction, it'll only ever win slightly better wages
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:24
|
|
|
glad to see that ferrinus is helpfully sharing his intellectual equal, samantha pritchard, with the thread. pritchards main gimmick is being continuously wrong, harassing women in DMs and defending to the death the right to add minors to group DMs with 40 yos. thankfully i recently relocated one of pritchard's earlier published works, which demonstrates their keen intellect and normal brain https://www.dropbox.com/s/9yec2jys3ua3ji7/List%20of%20Formal%20Grievances%20for%20Disruptive%20and%20Undemocratic%20Behavior.docx?dl=0
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:29
|
|
|
quote:Felix Biederman:
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:30
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:glad to see that ferrinus is helpfully sharing his intellectual equal, samantha pritchard, with the thread. pritchards main gimmick is being continuously wrong, harassing women in DMs and defending to the death the right to add minors to group DMs with 40 yos. i'm going to admit that i moved from reading this to skimming this after a few pages but i'm not sure what it has to do with anything. it appears to be a grievance complaint about being intimidated online in like 2016??
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:36
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:now, i would note that i'm not necessarily opposed to some level of identitarian thinking - i am, myself, deeply identitarian on some things which are very important to me and which i don't want to relinquish - but you don't build your communist party on the national question I think you're right with regards to imperialist countries today. But historically, even going back to the Paris Commune, you see workers movements being propelled forward by the national liberation struggle. This is of course most apparent in colonized and formerly colonized countries, but it happened in Europe during WW2 as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:37
|
|
|
samantha pritchard really is a notorious twitter weirdo on a level that separates them from the other weirdos. just constant bizarre and bad opinions, half baked brain
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:43
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:2. i believe you that nietszche rebuked explicit antisemitism, but criticism of master morality vs. slave morality and their applicability to the socialist project - which is ultimately founded on the observation that society's losers, rejects, and cast-offs in fact decisively outnumber and form the power base for the winners and heroes - doesn't really rely on nietszche's personal faults or virtues and is certainly applicable to the way some people talk about including e.g. the disabled into left organizing dictatorship of the proletariat, master morality or slave morality 
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:44
|
|
|
THS posted:samantha pritchard really is a notorious twitter weirdo on a level that separates them from the other weirdos. just constant bizarre and bad opinions, half baked brain anyone who sees a samantha pritchard tweet and thinks "wow this is really insightful and smart" is either severely impaired or an at risk youth with a garfielf avatar. https://twitter.com/islamphobiacow/status/1386527266667221001
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:46
|
|
|
Ferrinus is a disingenuous liberal. Or at least that's the rational explanation. The other option is they're a psiop or legitimately brain damaged. Anyway none of that poo poo makes sense or is even a rational response. Moron.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:47
|
|
|
lmao once in a generation brain. theres nothing new under the sun, at best you scrape away a little more dirt that generations before you have been toiling at
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:49
|
|
|
after getting this new info, I don't know if I should feel better or worse about posting so much about why samantha pritchard is wrong
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:anyone who sees a samantha pritchard tweet and thinks "wow this is really insightful and smart" is either severely impaired or an at risk youth with a garfielf avatar. i see that the principled anti-identitarians are now against a particular argument because the wrong person posted it Larry Parrish posted:Ferrinus is a disingenuous liberal. Or at least that's the rational explanation. The other option is they're a psiop or legitimately brain damaged. well, go on, explain why. or are you afraid you'll lose control of the beast within and get probated again
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
if someone is a genuine idiot weirdo after awhile you begin to reflexively dismiss their ramblings. is this ad hom? yes. and good
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:56
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:i see that the principled anti-identitarians are now against a particular argument because the wrong person posted it you don't even having enough reading ability to actually understand the stupid and trivially wrong point pritchard was making lol, which i guess places you on a tier below rock bottom (perhaps worm?)
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:57
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:you don't even having enough reading ability to actually understand the stupid and trivially wrong point pritchard was making lol, which i guess places you on a tier below rock bottom (perhaps worm?) perhaps you could explain it better than i have?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 20:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
Ferrinus posted:i see that the principled anti-identitarians are now against a particular argument because the wrong person posted it i don't need to explain why you're a retard, dipshit. it's an observation for everyone else. clearly you're too mentally deficient for self-analysis. how childish, lol. please, engage with me on my terms! or my big brother the mod will spank you. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2021 21:01
|
|