|
Crane Fist posted:
Sharks Eat Bear posted:I think maybe we are more in alignment than not? Agreed that most mainstream US pols don’t generally have legitimate progressive goals so much as a progressive veneer (if that), which I’m arguing is all the more reason to not let them define the success or failure of a grassroots movement. I've been making this point over in the American Progressivism thread to deaf ears,https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3947316 quote:That said though, I'm really curious how you would even know what who is and isn't a charlatan? That's the point of what I posted above, that an ungrounded movement or political affiliation without any ideological basis is just going to float with the breeze and be appropriated by anyone who thinks they can profit by it to support any program that suits them. The progressive label can be applied to a giant insurance industry handjob as easily as M4A. Similarly with prosecuting killer cops for murder and defunding police vs paying killer cops extra to wear bodycams and go to bias training that does nothing. You can market anything as progressive. What is progressive? Is just saying "I see you, I hear you" to victims good enough for someone to get to brand themselves as progressive because at least that's better than regressive crypto-misogynism? Is recognizing victims not regressive crypto-misogynism with a new coat of paint if the abuser is allowed to go on with their life and the victim is not? There's really no way to know what is "Progressive" since it's an ideologically incoherent label, and it leaves well-intentioned people utterly adrift and completely fogged on whether a particular proposal (much less the sum of a platform's or person's positions and actions) should count as "progressive" or not. I'd argue recognizing victims is a failure because recognition is subject to immediate memory-holing when the victim and victimizer are politically inconvenient, and that will always be the case. If a community is capable of recognizing abuse but incapable of ostracizing and marginalizing abusers (vs, say, electing them to high office and ostracizing and marginalizing their victims instead), it's endorsing the behavior. But there's no way to know whether even that position is progressive because again, there's no yardstick or ideological litmus test. The Oldest Man fucked around with this message at 17:24 on Nov 13, 2020 |
#
¿
Nov 13, 2020 17:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 21:38 |
|