fragmentos (discrimination)

Originally Posted by Quail View Post
Is it helpful to label people as "good" and "bad" with no chance of redemption?

I think we already know that this is a religious, and, as such, outdated, view.

The problem is that we are reinventing this kind of manicheism with different labels, such as "racist", "sexist", etc. substituting for "evil". And that in that process we are "personalising" those traits. Instead of realising that we live under the ideological dictatorship of racism, sexism, etc., we reinvent "racism" or "sexism" as an individual feature.

The point then becomes whether Bowie (or whomever) is "a sexist" (often in a quite essentialised way), instead of whether Bowie's actions are or were dictated by sexism as an ideology, and to which extent those actions reinforce(d) social sexism.

Of course, a subproduct of this is the loss of any distinctions between different Bowie actions: if he was a sexist, then it follows that all his actions were tainted by sexism, nevermind whether those actions were banging underage people or composing music.

This is however a quite agreeable way to posit things for most people, because sexism, racism, etc., are otherised in doing it. If people either are or are not racist, then only others are racist; I am not. And I can consequently threat any discussion of my actions as personal insults, instead of meaningful discussion of how racism as an ideological force that is also a social construct influences my actions.

The price of this line of action, of course, is that we remain unable to actually fight against sexism or racism; we can only objectivate them into other people, and wage word wars against each other, under the pretence of "fighting" them (actually, only fighting for our own inimputability on accusations of racism, sexism, etc).


Originally Posted by soup View Post
How do you feel about the concept of "safe spaces" which is becoming an increasingly popular idea amongst young left-liberals in universities?

The safest space in the world is an open street at noon.

The idea of "safe spaces" behind closed doors is extremely dangerous.



Well, Trump (at least at this moment) is no Hitler. He does not have a mass movement behind him, he has no private army of street brigands, he does not have a political party, he does not have any kind of permanent organisation.

This does not mean that he isn't dangerous, of course. He is certainly moving the Republican Party to the right, and he has scared other candidates into seconding, or at least not opposing, his proposals.

On the other hand, we don't know exactly what he is doing. Is he really running for President? Or is this just a publicity stunt? Or, as some more paranoid Republicans believe, a Clintonite manoever to destroy the GOP? Or an attempt to build a third party to the right of the Republicans?


Originally Posted by blake 3:17 View Post
I'm always astonished at how much faith ultra lefts put in the capitalist state.

How would one be "ultra-left", if they didn't rely in the bourgeois State to check the most destructive tendencies of the system? You know, we can't count on the working class to do this, because it would be "reformism", so somebody else has to stop fascism, and that somebody else is most likely to be the bourgeois State than not.

Anyway, the Republican Party is deeply divided, Trump is an integral part of that, and it is quite possible that the GOP won't be able to hold together for much more time in a relatively short future. And that puts the American political system in danger, because it can't function with more than two parties.


Originally Posted by QueerVanguard View Post
So this happened recently Black Alliance for Just Immigration calls out the reformist Sanders idiots for their racism and the response from his supporters is to flood the internet with their special "progressive" brand of racism.


My first thought is, cui prodest?

And my second thought is, "Hillary Clinton".


(fim da primeira página)

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License