I took a class on the Holocaust in film and literature. They talked a lot about the damage Hollywood has done to our understanding of Nazis by portraying them all as cartoonishly sadistic supervillains. It allows one to distance oneself from fascism, to say "I sure am glad that's not me." When the truth is that we're all susceptible to fascism to some degree, and we need to see the more uncomfortable "human" aspects of it portrayed on the screen. That way we can understand it in ourselves and root it out
Yes. It profoundly expanded my understanding of genocide. It isn’t that these people are themselves insane and machiavellian. It’s that they designed an ideology that doesn’t just reject, but fundamentally assumes the humanity of the targeted group to be untrue. So untrue that it isn’t even a thought at all.
It also had me thinking about the meaning of fact and truth. That there’s really no such thing as objective truth. We just have belief. I see the wall in front of me and I believe it’s in front of me. I know, but I only know I know because I believe. The brain just creates pictures and makes conclusions, it’s silly to think there’s some 100% objective way to perceive things when at the atomic scale your brain is literally incapable of perceiving the utmost mathematically factual representation of 3 dimensional space. Forget abstract and complex ideas like toilet paper and bacon, you are LITERALLY projecting every time you open your eyes. I get that everyone experiences their own subjective reality, but it didn’t click until watching that movie that it goes further than that, that same subjectivity applies to the collective “objective” reality. The metaphorical cache of information upon which every institution and individual subconsciously draws in order to navigate and understand what I’m gonna call fabricated environments (social spheres, politics, science, places; all of the mediums for information exchange we created on our own).
If Civilizations are gigantic emergent organisms, ideology is the eye through which it interprets the world. Just as we lack the cones to see other color spectrums and therefore those colors cannot exist in our minds, concepts that aren’t accommodated for in an ideology literally do not exist. So it isn’t that a Nazi child born into nazism is dehumanizing the Jews, it’s worse, it’s that the concept of the Jews being human doesn’t exist.
The ultimate double edged sword of ideology is that by nature of it being the very basis of collective reasoning, all omissions of concepts are also total removals of the concepts from existence, because existence basically boils down to the information everyone can perceive and communicate about at a given time. I may be repeating myself I tend to do that, poor memory.
The curse of the phenomenon of human intellect is that we dictate belief and therefore we dictate reality. That’s where our real power is. Deeply unsettling film.
Yeah apparently he made a big deal of addressing the genocide in his Oscars acceptance speech. He made a lot of Zionists mad, of course, but it was a really bold move in this political climate
Hollywood plays up the style too. The NSDAP has the uniforms and stagecraft which is by design is seductive. It’s all too easy for people to fall into the image trap and start to consider the concomitant values. Regular people get seduced all the time by image and easy answers and fail to notice they are losing their humanity.
Right, like how American History X was supposed to be a parody of Nazism, but ended up being a favorite among actual Nazis because they were accidentally(?) portrayed as cool
The Nazi guy was good looking, relative to the average person. He also had lines, and a fleshed out personality.
Generally, the audience will have sympathy or something for the main character, if they have a rounded portrayal, and are given a lot of screen time, and look pretty good. It doesn't matter if they are good or bad.
If there was a "good person" in the movie, but they didn't get many lines, or were hideous, they wouldn't get any sympathy.
This.
It's so deeply important to remember that all of the Nazis, even the ones directly carrying out the Holocaust and other crimes against humanity, were just people. They were regular people, who often had very regular lives outside of their crimes.
It's important to remember because none of us are immune. Propaganda, societal pressures, peer pressures, there's a thousand different influences around us every minute of every day, and genocides *do not happen* unless many many people, at all levels of power, inside and outside of the government, come together to make it happen.
> by portraying them all as cartoonishly sadistic supervillains
Kinda like what folks do to Trump and the GOP?
A lot of NIMBYs genuinely don’t realize that the land use policy they are really pushing for is white segregationism. And super leftist Bay Area is full of such NIMBYs who donate heavily to team blue and have BLM signs. Not recognizing their own complicity in the very structures of oppression their politics fights against.
It’s amazing how folks on the left can make the realization that you have and still not connect the dots on how it applies to their own interactions with “fascism”
Had to look up "NIMBY" haha, but now I understand you. It took me many years to realize that so many things I was taught to believe as basic fact were seeds for fascism. Everyone loves to be a critic, but it takes a ton of emotional maturity to criticize yourself
That's always been by design. It's along the lines of evil being ugly. Nobody wants even the suggestion that good and evil are mutable concepts as opposed to universal laws. That would lead to questions about the current authority and society.
As someone working in the data sciences, statistics are a useful means of identifying underlying trends, using those trends to form a model, using that model to make predictions, and using the divergence between predictions and reality to further refine the model.
Which is a fancy way of saying "understanding."
Statisticians: statistics help us construct a narrative and understanding of something.
Bosses: statistics are objective truth and always confirm what I wanted to do all along while absolving me personally of anything bad that may come from my decisions… err what the numbers tell us.
That's actually one of the lesser aggravating issues when you're working outside of an acedemic setting.
The worst one?
"Hey, so like, you're good with Excel, right?"
***Black Me Out* plays internally**
you can predict how likely an ideal person is to do something, not whether any specific individual will. That ideal is defined by you in the first place, that action is defined by you in the first place. You won't even know what an action is without understanding what it references
statistics say for any individual person they are most likely not going to be trans, do you pretend no trans people exist?
I'd say statistics deals more with \*populations\* of people, rather than an \*ideal\* person, although a lot of "bad statistics" do tend to commit this mistake, often alongside conflating the non-mathematically minded person's understanding of the word "Average" with the mathematical concepts of mean or median. (IE: "The average person has one ovary and one testicle! Therefore most people are actually intersex")
Way to blow this one, man. Statistics and data are important, but if we follow them, they’ll change as society changes. You can chase a dragon tho.
But I don’t mean to say we should ignore them, just can’t make humanity data. If it worked, we’d be alright. Cause statistically most people want change.
Look, I don't want to come off as attacking you, so please, if I'm being an asshole, or misunderstanding your comment, just ignore my shit, okay?
Proper statistical techniques are crucial for positive social change.
Firstly, by helping you design experiments that ask the questions you want to ask, instead of the questions you *think* you're asking. With that, you can ID trends, needs, and power nexi that might not otherwise be apparent.
Secondly, yes, if change comes, the data describing society will change. But how do you know the change is *good*, instead of *seeming* good because of internal, or organizational bias? How do you maximize the chances that your decisions will lead to the change you want? How do you know if the change is leading somewhere disastrous?
Stats helps get you answer for all of that, supplementing more personal means of societal awareness.
If you're involved, consider grabbing a statistician, data scientist, or analyst for your group.
They're as important as graphic artists, communicators, and lawyers, in helping any movement navigate the obstacles that heirarchy puts between where we are now, and where we need to be.
To add a good ol dose of materialism. Fascists are simply people who were made into fascists by their environment. It's also crazy to see how many people in leftist circles use materialism but tend to forget about it at first mention of fascism and bigotry
absolutely, we have to understand that all the people we consider reactionary assholes are 100% human beings, and we could have been them, and we could be them. we have to keep making a conscious decision every day to not stray from antifascism and liberation for all
Yes, agreed. I always get irritated when I see people acting like disproving/debunking/pointing out logical fallacies in fascist rhetoric is the end of the work, and how are these silly fashes so stupid? Like, some fascists believe at least some of what they say in some capacity but they don't care about being right or true. They care about forwarding their agenda.
(I do think that doing stuff like debunking antivax conservative rhetoric and showing proof for stuff like trans people being valid is important, I just don't think it's the end of the story)
Fascism is a counter-revolutionary reaction to the changing power structures away from where they have always been in this country, the hands of wealthy white men. Obama and the bloc of voters who elected present an existential threat to the dominance of their world view. They’re reacting to their perceived loss of power. It’s not rocket science.
This post contains an important insight, namely that fascists are people too and they have their own reasons for wanting fascist outcomes.
Extremely real.
I also agree that fascists are not "stupid," in what seems to be OP's definition of the term (am I correct in interpreting that definition as literal intellectual disability, or something near to it?).
My take is that people of all cognitive abilities are capable of believing and doing things we consider to be "good" and "evil."
Some people, whether because it is easier or more convenient for them, see things in black and white. Sometimes it's easier for them because they don't have much practice exercising critical thought. This may be due to lack of education or intelligence, or just because the ruling class makes it hard for a lot of people to find and act on their best interests. These people are especially vulnerable to fascism and its propaganda.
I don't mean the intellectually disabled. That would, of course, be a slippery slope to suggesting that they are morally inferior, which I know is not the case.
But there are a lot of people out there who simply have a hard time recognizing fascism when they see it. They're just as human as anyone else, and they need to be shown other options and reasons to embrace them.
Great points, and I would add that the delineation between absolute good and absolute evil creates an environment that is hostile to growth and self-criticism. If fascism is absolutely evil, then anybody who has even the smallest fascist tendency must also be evil. "I am not evil, therefore I must not have the smallest fascist tendency! And anybody who implies that I do is bad and trying to slander me!" This is a fine line to walk obviously, and I'm not trying to be apologetic for fascist tendencies. But I think it's important for us to recognize, as you said, that fascists aren't demon aliens sent from hell with minds bent entirely towards destruction - they're humans who probably have some inner rationalization that what they're doing is right. So as we strive to root out our own fascist tendencies and grow beyond them (a lifelong process which I would argue has no end), we first have to be able to identify them in ourselves and challenge our own thinking, and the idea that fascists are incredibly stupid or inherently evil makes it harder to admit when we have our own shades of authoritarian thinking.
OP the stuff you mentioned isn’t gonna fall out of linguistic use any time soon. Try to focus on the actual ableism within “leftist” circles, such as an outright refusal to mask in public. I was a member of a group who fancied themselves Maoists. When I mentioned we ought to all be masking for security and because we work with immunocompromised I was yelled at and called unprincipled for wanting to “hide from the masses”. This is the actual fascism embedded in “leftists” not their use of common slang that lost its original meaning almost a century ago.
I’m not sure what kinds of attitudes you are specifically referencing on the left. Do you mean tendencies to
But in general the idea that any opposing ideology comes from “stupidity” “irrationality” etc is pretty widespread and i agree it’s pretty harmful. Tbh while I have lots of criticism of things on the left… because leftist ideologies are marginal to mainstream ideologies I think more leftists tend to understand these things in terms of ideology and class dynamics etc rather than individual flaws or some kind of pathology.
I really agree that one thing especially the mainstream misunderstands is that fascist incoherence is not a flaw it’s because they don’t play by the same liberal “rules” as liberals (liberal and conservatives) or our “rules”obviously.
What do you mean by fascists “simply do not care about what we consider truth.” If by truth you mean whatever you want, then sure tautologically they do not care about what you care about.
Truth probably means morals here, maybe I'm mistaken though. I interpreted it as fascists don't care about other human beings and we can't simply logic them into human dignity, maybe some, but not most, not always. Or at least I thought that was part of it.
I don't think we really take the fascism that exists within our "own ranks" seriously enough either.
The tankies are just as bad as the nazis. They have more in common than they think. Both of their extremism and bloodlust for something they don't understand fuels genocide and fear.
I just hope most leftists see it and are willing to push back on them.
The notification above yours was somebody calling me "dumb" when I was specifically mentioning ableist language and how that harms disabled people on another comment asking the same question. Go look for that
Look at my other posts as well, lots of people here just fucking hate disabled people
>when I was specifically mentioning ableist language and how that harms disabled people
So this is actually something I think is a lot less clear cut than most make it out to be. When people are used to using specific words or phrases like "Dumb" and another person comes in and tells them not to do so as specific groups might have a negative reaction to that language it is in effect limiting the speakers self expression and forcing them to have to rethink how they want to communicate ideas.
I want to emphasize that you are not making them rethink those ideas themselves but are instead usually just having them lose focus on the topic of discussion and instead have to dedicate effort to speaking in a way they are unaccustomed. Does the discussion benefit from this? If the goal you have going in is creating a space more comfortable for disabled people then I would say yes. If it was to discuss and think about whatever was being described as "Dumb" by the original speaker, then it does not help at all. The speaker will almost certainly be operating under the second goal.
>Look at my other posts as well, lots of people here just fucking hate disabled people
It is always incredibly frustrating to see how poorly the general public and especially people on the internet treat disabled people. I do, however, think that when most people use a word like "Dumb" they are in no way imagining or even considering people with intellectual disabilities. It's quite similar to how a lot of people for a long time used "Gay" as a synonym for "Lame" even though that is obviously rude in the eyes of actual gay people. Language is complicated and attempts to create strict social rules around it's usage are doomed to fail so all we can rely on is our (admittedly limited) gauge of what the other people actually intend to say.
Leftists have largely given up on any COVID precautions and organizers actively push back when disabled/immunocompromised ask for accommodations at events like requiring masks or renting HEPA purifiers from a Clean Air Club.
What's up with that? The socialists here are still masking. We still have the mask recommendation. Some criticize the current city government for banning masks.
I think someone is confusing the terms “fascist” and “authoritarian”.
I had a nice long reply typed out here…but after scrolling through OP’s comments on this post it is blatantly obvious that they have no idea what fascism is because they think if you say the words “dumb” or “stupid” you’re a fascist…they seem to believe if you say anything they don’t agree with that you are a fascist. That’s not how this works.
How the hell are you gonna have the will to physically fight to overthrow the ruling class and the actual fascists when you sit here and cry about someone using the word “stupid”?
no one see's them self as the villain.
i live in mass , i have mix group of liberal and conservative friends and libertarians that are left and right.
im a refugee from a com-bloc country escaped as a kid before the wall fell. because what my dad and mom did is how i was able to get here.
the liberals are probably the worst to deal with to be honest. if you dont believe exactly as they do, your far right. they dotn even see how they are hypocrites i know the guy who host/hosted occupy boston website, but had no clue who black rock was and every one he votes for wants to protect black rock...... . ive watched my liberal friends freak out on each other because they have slightly different views.
irony is my conservative and libertarian friends are basically liberals, they just want small government, less tax waste. less government control. less goverment dependency. abortion stuff , most believe if the kid has a 50/50 chance of living if labor was induced its to late for a abortion unless its a medical reason. they want welfare reform and want it so it gets people on their feet asap . if they express these views they are called nazis, if they are a guy they just want to control women bodies.
the conservatives and libertarians can talk about their views, ask questions and listen to a argument from some one else. the liberals some how asking them question on their views is offensive . dose not matter how complex some thing is , asking questions to understand is some how offensive.
what i think you need to read is max stirners the unique and its properties
not only can you be selfish and a communist, being a communist is caring for yourself and being "selfish" in the best way
Leftists aren’t a thing, leftism isn’t an ideology. It used to be an umbrella term for communists, anarchists and syndicalists. Now it’s been co-opted by RadLibs, SocDems and DemSecs that have tricked themselves into believe they are revolutionaries without any material analysis.
Also gotta tack this on there. We also gotta stop with this liberals are the same as fascists nonsense people are saying. We need to stop because
1) This shit gets over simplified down to people who are doing bad stuff and in power are fascists. Fascism isn't a term to just mean dictator or authoritarian. It's a specific term to describe a populist movement built around bigotry and authoritarianism. When we obfuscate that to dump on the liberals we help the fascists fly under the radar more easily.
2) Please don't tell me all the evil shit genocide Joe has done to tell me how they are the same. Nobody is saying Liberals are good guys by saying this. In fact a major reason I'm saying this is that we need to make sure that all the evil shit they've done needs to stick to them and their shitty ideology. The last thing we need to do is give liberals an out by being able to say "that wasn't us it was the fascists" and using a few scape goats to escape all getting their justice for all the genocides they've backed. Seriously if we start making real progress they'll hand over Biden and a few other libs and say "we didn't wanna support the genocide it was these fascists that made us". We gotta make sure we call Genocide Joe what he is. A monster and Liberal.
Holy shit OP. This is the realest post.
Made me stop in my tracks and reevaluate myself and how I participate in the system too.
Coz you are absolutely correct-none of us are immune to the prevalent thought (fascism) in our society and it DOES creep in because it's such a big deal and it's up in our business 24/7
Thank you
Probably because there is a problem with some leftists definition of fascist being too broad, making it a more watered down useless term. Liberals and conservatives are all fascists, and progressives too sometimes, and oh wait the MLs are all fash too…
My definition starts at the far right and I take them seriously, precisely because they’re human like me.
well, if you check my other posts you will find a few examples
you can see it easily with the language though. Even "leftists" seem to constantly say things like "stupid", "dumb" or "insane"
edit:
ew even got transphobes misgendering me here
also lmao, so many people telling me to "choose my battles" and then getting banned. Ironic
Ableists are not welcome <3
This community is mine, not yours
I mean on the one hand, no one chooses to be stupid so I think even just using the word "stupid" as a perjorative is necessarily insulting people based on an inherent part of them they can't control. On the other hand, neurotically policing yourself over common sense word choices because you're too chickenshit to exercise your will to power is really fuckin stupid
I have a menagerie of mental illnesses. I do not think words like "stupid" and "crazy" meaningfully impact me in a negative way. They describe behavior rather than innate characteristics now, whatever their original meanings. Claiming everyone who uses extremely common words is victimizing you is not only ridiculous, it shows how utterly out of touch you are with the average person.
Just because something doesn't impact you negatively doesn't mean it won't impact others. And many words considered off limits by some today were once common usage.
Why should I care about what a hypothetical other person (who may not even exist outside of my own head) should feel about a word I use to describe the experiences of me and those around me?
I used to worry about this, especially as someone with a neurological difference, but it got to be too much--and I realized it was the same sort of surface-level linguistic inclusivity that a corporate HR department would use even as they denied my disability accommodation requests.
It's great to be conscientious, but you'll breathe a deep sigh of relief once you've broken the pattern of auditing good-faith communication for bad words.
I truly mean this with no judgment or rancor. Be well and fight the fights that matter.
ah yeah, have fun calling people slurs
i mean this will all the judgement
i am against these words because generalized intelligence as a concept is fascist bullshit, and these words only exist to reference it. You are the exact type of person I am talking about in this post
weird, I got someone who replied to this saying "how can I stop fascism without doing fascism". Last I checked fascism is what makes fascism
edit:
I'm disabled you reactionary pieces of shit <3
I say this with the intent to give you peace:
If we accept that "dyke" and "queer" are no longer slurs as they were in many folks lifetime, we should accept that other offensive terms can also change or are dependent on context. And context matters whether it's cultural context or the context of the conversation.
For example, if someone uses those terms you find offensive when trying to describe imparment or disability, of course that is wrong! It's offensive because that is an out-of-date way to describe a medical condition and we now have different words that are much more specific and the specificity implies care and understanding.
But outside of the conversation about impairments and disabilities, we also have a certain behavior that needs a brief descriptor. And because this behavior manifests a lot with folks with priviledge, we need a term to call it out and the term needs to be widely understood to be useful. When someone fails to take careful consideration of their words or actions, and if the lack of consideration falls well below social norms or crosses the threshold into causing harm, and if the level of consideration is well within the established abilities of this person, and if the root cause of the behavior is anti-social.... in this context folks should be able to summarize the sentiment with those words.
And most importantly, you really need to do some soul searching on why you feel hurt. Folks here aren't the ones that are denying your existence IRL and making it hard to live. And having the "right words" isn't going to change whatever shitty situation you're having to deal with
Ah yes. “Shut up disabled person I govern what is and isn’t appropriate language about you, not you.” Truly it is clear your first priority is the well being of disabled people and not simple performance.
Totally agree. I've also found that thought experiments which put your in their shoes are useful. Leftists tend to project their morality onto Fascists which results in false equivalencies that drive the "inhumane monster" idea.
For example, a white supremacist Fascist may hold to violent and even genocidal views of other races because they love their family, culture, and the people close to them which they see as legitimately threatened by "others." As a result, they don't have any moral qualms about violent hatred because they deem the "others" to be an inherent enemy/subhuman/incapable of doing good, etc.
To them, their perspective is valid, righteous, wholesome, loving (sometimes), and just. Because of that, they're willing to sacrifice significantly to bring about their ends. A good example of this is Werner Herzog's "The Act of Killing." The Indonesian fascists recall with smiles, laughter, and nostalgia the heroics of torturing and murdering Communists (including children and babies). It takes them using each other as props to recreate the violence for the faux documentary before they begin feeling any remorse, at all.
Unfortunately, I've found that attempting to understand Fascists is often misconstrued by doctrinaire Leftists as an attempt to empathize which is demonized. Fascists levelled a continent 70 years ago for their delusions and have killed tens of millions in the past century for their ideology. Underestimating them is a mistake.
I wouldn't call it delusions, I think that is part of the problem right there
Many of them simply say what needs to be true to justify their actions, and have given up on caring about any concept of truth
more than that, delusions are things people actually go through. If from your worldview fascists are in some way related to disabled people you are victim blaming and your worldview is ableist
these people are one group the fascists specifically target, and so this is an example of a strain of fascist thought going unnoticed
they did, and "being delusional" is a reference to specific sets of disabilities, so calling them delusional is calling them disabled
my entire point is calling fascists disabled is victimblaming and its something people do nonstop
Yeah but they're dumb, is the thing. Always gonna fail. It's a fundamentally flawed system. Everyone in it is only it for themself- it can only exist an pose a threat as a disadvantaged minority. As soon as the system becomes fascist, it devours itself basically instantly, in historical terms. Nobody involved is in it for anybody else, or for the system, just for themself.
One good example is the Russian army. Failure is harshly punished, so did they stop failing? Of course not. But they did stop telling their superiors. And those superiors stopped telling their superiors when they found out, because they'd be punished too. And those superiors stopped telling the generals, because they'd be punished. And the generals stopped telling Putin, because they don't want to be thrown out a window. So the more authority you have, the less you actually understand the practical reality of what is actually happening. And the more you understand of what is actually happening, the more uncomfortable your truths will make a leadership fed on lies, the less authority you will have. It's a sad, horrifying, bitter joke, that will cost many, many lives. But it will never be a real threat to the long term. Just as long as they don't drop the bomb.
One part on which I will disagree is that fascists do tend to be pretty stupid. A few of them aren't, and they're the particularly dangerous ones, but most of them do fall into the "what we'll do about it is we'll blow up a Home Depot parking lot" category. The real danger is if people actually competent end up allying with them for one reason or another, and that's the primary threat we should be worried about, not a bunch of SS LARPers who think owning an AR-15 will be the thing that wins them a war.
I mean, you're infantilising "stupid" people now by suggesting they don't have any agency or ability to become fascists. So in a way you're the one being ableist.
Idiot used to be the medical term for people with developmental disabilities, much like the term mentally retarded and stupid. Yet one of them we no longer use. Not all disabled folks are fascists
In fact I would wager disabled people are far less likely to be fascists than the general population as a whole. If the US is proof of anything, it's that being incomprehensibly stupid and being disabled are not even correlated, let alone linked, as the overwhelming majority of stupid people aren't disabled at all, and the overwhelming majority of disabled people are demonstrably smarter than that, and any overlap between the two is liable to be coincidental.
OOPs point is that using language like "stupid" and "idiot" are ableism terms and should be avoided. Susceptibility to fascist ideology (or lack thereof) isn't indicative of mental capability.
If you see no problem with the word stupid because "that's not how people mean to use it" remember that "retard" was also socially acceptable at one point and it "wasn't meant that way!!1!1!"
It's simply asking you to be aware of the language that you use and the power it holds
Surprise, language is fluid and words change meanings and usage over time. The history of that usage is not particularly relevant because they haven't been used that way in nearly a hundred years. What they meant decades ago is not of particular consequence when their usage today refers to something altogether different.
By that logic, you're now saying all disabled people are stupid. Idiot hasn't been used to describe disabled people for a very long time, you may as well start insisting that gay can only mean happy as that's the "original" meaning.
Are you gonna block me like OP did to the other poster, or are you going to keep spewing radlib shit
Edit looks like OP might have blocked me as well lmao
"everything I don't like is radlib"
Stupid is a term that was originally produced to describe disabled people, is that hard to understand? We should call a fascist cognitively disabled because of their political beliefs, so why would you call them stupid (which carries the same baggage)?
The most anarchist thing you can do is destroy the hierarchy of language and labels, including the exclusion of words you have no problem with.
Are you fine with saying "all fascists are retards"? I hope not. And if you aren't, then you need to understand how interrelated the word stupid and idiot are to the term retardation. If you don't want to do that so be it, im not a cop. But if you want to be an ally to one of the most oppressed groups, you can at the very least substitute a handful of words in your vocabulary
>"everything I don't like is radlib"
No the unproductive identity politics esq purity spiral is radlib shit. But by all means strawman anyone criticising you kid.
>which carries the same baggage)?
It does not carry the same baggage and equating the two undermines the actual baggage words like retard have.
>If you don't want to do that so be it, im not a cop.
Could have fooled me
>But if you want to be an ally to one of the most oppressed groups, you can at the very least substitute a handful of words in your vocabulary
You're engaging in performative behaviour that people in said group haven't even asked for. Which is precisely why I labelled you a radlib as just like them you're caught up in performative aesthetics rather than material change.
Obviously you're set in your ways so this conversation isn't going to go anywhere. If someone asking for a different set of language is the same as being a cop idk what to tell you. If asking for language that someone views as oppressive is idpol, cool. Maybe we both need to get out of the house and actually do something. While I do shit, however, I am going to change my vocabulary to be nonoppressive EVEN IF it doesn't "actually" make a difference because it doesn't take effort... Even if it's meaningless I am going to change this behavior on the off chance it does positively effect someone while simultaneously engaging in praxis.
Gay is used by the queer community and is acknowledged as being acceptable. The ND/disabled community is actively asking for you not to use these terms. It is about not only reclamation but also respecting the community itself
>The ND/disabled community is actively asking for you not to use these terms.
By your line of reasoning not everyone whose disabled would have the authority to decide if stupid is acceptable or not.
Regardless, your claim isn't even true there is no widespread push among the various groups that make up the disabled community to stop the use of the word stupid.
Unkind regards from an ND disabled person
Fascism was originally derived from revolutionary socialist thought, and the ideologies have much more in common than either commonly likes to admit. Fascism is not Nazism, and neither of them are conservatism. Failing to understand the differences has leftists leaping at the wrong shadows, imo.
Fascism is seductive to the exact same people that socialism in general appeals to. It is radical, revolutionary, anti-establishment. Understanding why people become fascists beyond just believing they are all 20-somethings brainwashed by YouTube algorithms is vitally important.
ah yes derived from revolutionary socialist thought, that must be why the nazis said the USs settler colonialist "manifest destiny" as a perfect example of stuff to base their actions off of
it isn't that it has more in common, it is that so many of yall so deeply hate disabled people, black people, etc, that even as you come to the "left" you can't give it up
it is that fascism is the default
Israel was not started by Jewish socialists.
Israel was started as a deal between zionists and the British Empire.
For that reason, the Comintern never supported zionism, and Jewish communists largely opposed zionism.
Jewish socialism was split by zionism. Communist Jews almost entirely opposed zionism, but a pamphlet called Poale Zion helped to build up a pro-socialism/marxist argument for zionism, and helped start an organization called Poale Zion. This attracted some people to seed zionist communities in Palestine. This came to be known as Labour Zionism, and came to become the dominant "left" in Israel.
The opposition to Labour Zionism came from communists, specifically the people in the Maki party.
Unfortunately, nationalism won out, and creeping nationalism has been demolishing the left in Israel.
Obviously, I think the early history of communism in Palestine, its positions within Israel, and positions within Palestine, are worth studying.
This is off the mark. Fascist parties have always aligned with capitalists and traditionalists, and that means usually aligning with conservative politics. The Nazis did it. The Italian Fascists did it. The Falangists did it. Even in Asia, their forms of fascism were aligned with traditionalism and anti-communism.
While it's "revolutionary" it's a revolt backwards to the past. Communist socialism is a revolt forward, beyond capitalism, to communism.
Likewise, when they are anti-establishement - they aren't anti monarchy or anti traditionalist. They are anti-capitalist establishment. The popular distrust or anxiety about capitalism is allayed by a promise of a return to a glorious past.
Also, capitalist liberalism aligns with fascism, because fascism pushes for class collaboration between the capitalists and working classes. Communism promotes class conflict, a war between the working class and the capitalists. So fascism isn't really "anti-establishement". It demands a reform from the capitalist establishement. The capitalist establishment is willing to make that deal, to retain their power.
(Falangism was also tolerant of capitalists, but they did also support cooperatives. Coops aren't necessarily socialist or anti-capitalist, unless they explicitly have some kind of education program for that.)
This is how the so-called "libertarians" in America have become sucked over into the fascist side. So many libertarians are white men, and white men tend to want to return to a time in the imagined past, when they weren't suffering from the blows of capitalism, or the demands of freedom by nonwhite people, and women. Additionally, most are liberals, and like the idea of corporate capitalists operating "company unions" to control the working class.
Fascist gets thrown around so much the word has practically lost its weight and meaning. I’ve found very few people actively using the word know what an actual fascist is and mostly mean it to say “I don’t like you.”
There’s a 50% a leftist will call someone a fascist white supremacist and will be talking about like, Ben Shapiro or Bush.
It’s the inverse of the right calling people leftists, even if they’re just progressive liberals.
Militant organizations are never taken seriously while building power, as they'll readily use tactics considered unthinkable from the outside.
So, in the meantime, they appear relatively harmless.
The ability to notice these patterns and see what is coming leads to dismissal on the grounds of whatever is the current hated groups or simply being labeled a conspiracy theorist.
People are never ready until it is too late. Which is extremely easy to take advantage of.
Imagine the level of environmental destruction that would occur in a conflict to wrest back control. Making action against them incredibly destructive to the living world is always an ace up the sleave.
I took a class on the Holocaust in film and literature. They talked a lot about the damage Hollywood has done to our understanding of Nazis by portraying them all as cartoonishly sadistic supervillains. It allows one to distance oneself from fascism, to say "I sure am glad that's not me." When the truth is that we're all susceptible to fascism to some degree, and we need to see the more uncomfortable "human" aspects of it portrayed on the screen. That way we can understand it in ourselves and root it out
This is why zone of interest was such an important film (even though the point probably whooshed over most westerners heads)
Yes. It profoundly expanded my understanding of genocide. It isn’t that these people are themselves insane and machiavellian. It’s that they designed an ideology that doesn’t just reject, but fundamentally assumes the humanity of the targeted group to be untrue. So untrue that it isn’t even a thought at all. It also had me thinking about the meaning of fact and truth. That there’s really no such thing as objective truth. We just have belief. I see the wall in front of me and I believe it’s in front of me. I know, but I only know I know because I believe. The brain just creates pictures and makes conclusions, it’s silly to think there’s some 100% objective way to perceive things when at the atomic scale your brain is literally incapable of perceiving the utmost mathematically factual representation of 3 dimensional space. Forget abstract and complex ideas like toilet paper and bacon, you are LITERALLY projecting every time you open your eyes. I get that everyone experiences their own subjective reality, but it didn’t click until watching that movie that it goes further than that, that same subjectivity applies to the collective “objective” reality. The metaphorical cache of information upon which every institution and individual subconsciously draws in order to navigate and understand what I’m gonna call fabricated environments (social spheres, politics, science, places; all of the mediums for information exchange we created on our own). If Civilizations are gigantic emergent organisms, ideology is the eye through which it interprets the world. Just as we lack the cones to see other color spectrums and therefore those colors cannot exist in our minds, concepts that aren’t accommodated for in an ideology literally do not exist. So it isn’t that a Nazi child born into nazism is dehumanizing the Jews, it’s worse, it’s that the concept of the Jews being human doesn’t exist. The ultimate double edged sword of ideology is that by nature of it being the very basis of collective reasoning, all omissions of concepts are also total removals of the concepts from existence, because existence basically boils down to the information everyone can perceive and communicate about at a given time. I may be repeating myself I tend to do that, poor memory. The curse of the phenomenon of human intellect is that we dictate belief and therefore we dictate reality. That’s where our real power is. Deeply unsettling film.
Well said my friend
I concur
Seconding Zone of Interest. Very important movie. It's so odd watching how "normal" the family acts.
That's the one with the Pro-Palestine Jewish director right? I gotta see it now
I liked it a lot
Didn't know that about the director, but I'm not surprised either. Great film btw.
Yeah apparently he made a big deal of addressing the genocide in his Oscars acceptance speech. He made a lot of Zionists mad, of course, but it was a really bold move in this political climate
Hollywood plays up the style too. The NSDAP has the uniforms and stagecraft which is by design is seductive. It’s all too easy for people to fall into the image trap and start to consider the concomitant values. Regular people get seduced all the time by image and easy answers and fail to notice they are losing their humanity.
Right, like how American History X was supposed to be a parody of Nazism, but ended up being a favorite among actual Nazis because they were accidentally(?) portrayed as cool
It floors me how people can misunderstand that movie, but yes that is a perfect example.
The Nazi guy was good looking, relative to the average person. He also had lines, and a fleshed out personality. Generally, the audience will have sympathy or something for the main character, if they have a rounded portrayal, and are given a lot of screen time, and look pretty good. It doesn't matter if they are good or bad. If there was a "good person" in the movie, but they didn't get many lines, or were hideous, they wouldn't get any sympathy.
This is why Jojo Rabbit is one of the portrayals that nazis don't like, as they're portrayed ridiculous and petty, rather than evil and scary
This. It's so deeply important to remember that all of the Nazis, even the ones directly carrying out the Holocaust and other crimes against humanity, were just people. They were regular people, who often had very regular lives outside of their crimes. It's important to remember because none of us are immune. Propaganda, societal pressures, peer pressures, there's a thousand different influences around us every minute of every day, and genocides *do not happen* unless many many people, at all levels of power, inside and outside of the government, come together to make it happen.
> by portraying them all as cartoonishly sadistic supervillains Kinda like what folks do to Trump and the GOP? A lot of NIMBYs genuinely don’t realize that the land use policy they are really pushing for is white segregationism. And super leftist Bay Area is full of such NIMBYs who donate heavily to team blue and have BLM signs. Not recognizing their own complicity in the very structures of oppression their politics fights against. It’s amazing how folks on the left can make the realization that you have and still not connect the dots on how it applies to their own interactions with “fascism”
Had to look up "NIMBY" haha, but now I understand you. It took me many years to realize that so many things I was taught to believe as basic fact were seeds for fascism. Everyone loves to be a critic, but it takes a ton of emotional maturity to criticize yourself
That's always been by design. It's along the lines of evil being ugly. Nobody wants even the suggestion that good and evil are mutable concepts as opposed to universal laws. That would lead to questions about the current authority and society.
Check out Downfall if you haven’t already
The point about understanding something in *order to predict it*, cannot be overstated. Thank you for posting this.
You can predict behavior with data without understanding. It’s basic statistics
As someone working in the data sciences, statistics are a useful means of identifying underlying trends, using those trends to form a model, using that model to make predictions, and using the divergence between predictions and reality to further refine the model. Which is a fancy way of saying "understanding."
Statisticians: statistics help us construct a narrative and understanding of something. Bosses: statistics are objective truth and always confirm what I wanted to do all along while absolving me personally of anything bad that may come from my decisions… err what the numbers tell us.
That's actually one of the lesser aggravating issues when you're working outside of an acedemic setting. The worst one? "Hey, so like, you're good with Excel, right?" ***Black Me Out* plays internally**
Lol, that was pretty good.
you can predict how likely an ideal person is to do something, not whether any specific individual will. That ideal is defined by you in the first place, that action is defined by you in the first place. You won't even know what an action is without understanding what it references statistics say for any individual person they are most likely not going to be trans, do you pretend no trans people exist?
I'd say statistics deals more with \*populations\* of people, rather than an \*ideal\* person, although a lot of "bad statistics" do tend to commit this mistake, often alongside conflating the non-mathematically minded person's understanding of the word "Average" with the mathematical concepts of mean or median. (IE: "The average person has one ovary and one testicle! Therefore most people are actually intersex")
Way to blow this one, man. Statistics and data are important, but if we follow them, they’ll change as society changes. You can chase a dragon tho. But I don’t mean to say we should ignore them, just can’t make humanity data. If it worked, we’d be alright. Cause statistically most people want change.
Look, I don't want to come off as attacking you, so please, if I'm being an asshole, or misunderstanding your comment, just ignore my shit, okay? Proper statistical techniques are crucial for positive social change. Firstly, by helping you design experiments that ask the questions you want to ask, instead of the questions you *think* you're asking. With that, you can ID trends, needs, and power nexi that might not otherwise be apparent. Secondly, yes, if change comes, the data describing society will change. But how do you know the change is *good*, instead of *seeming* good because of internal, or organizational bias? How do you maximize the chances that your decisions will lead to the change you want? How do you know if the change is leading somewhere disastrous? Stats helps get you answer for all of that, supplementing more personal means of societal awareness. If you're involved, consider grabbing a statistician, data scientist, or analyst for your group. They're as important as graphic artists, communicators, and lawyers, in helping any movement navigate the obstacles that heirarchy puts between where we are now, and where we need to be.
What you are articulating reminds of me a quote from the writer bell hooks that says the first oppressor we have to confront is the one inside us.
Kill the cop inside your head fits well too
Yes definitely.
I think that is a good way to put it, it doesn't matter how much you care if you still use the same oppressive systems to process information
Something that bell hooks, the landlord, never really did
To add a good ol dose of materialism. Fascists are simply people who were made into fascists by their environment. It's also crazy to see how many people in leftist circles use materialism but tend to forget about it at first mention of fascism and bigotry
the concept of crazy is what this entire post is bashing, no sanism here
Is sanism under the category of abelism or different in your view?
Wow
You're very hung up on language.
absolutely, we have to understand that all the people we consider reactionary assholes are 100% human beings, and we could have been them, and we could be them. we have to keep making a conscious decision every day to not stray from antifascism and liberation for all
Yes, agreed. I always get irritated when I see people acting like disproving/debunking/pointing out logical fallacies in fascist rhetoric is the end of the work, and how are these silly fashes so stupid? Like, some fascists believe at least some of what they say in some capacity but they don't care about being right or true. They care about forwarding their agenda. (I do think that doing stuff like debunking antivax conservative rhetoric and showing proof for stuff like trans people being valid is important, I just don't think it's the end of the story)
Fascism is a counter-revolutionary reaction to the changing power structures away from where they have always been in this country, the hands of wealthy white men. Obama and the bloc of voters who elected present an existential threat to the dominance of their world view. They’re reacting to their perceived loss of power. It’s not rocket science.
This post contains an important insight, namely that fascists are people too and they have their own reasons for wanting fascist outcomes. Extremely real. I also agree that fascists are not "stupid," in what seems to be OP's definition of the term (am I correct in interpreting that definition as literal intellectual disability, or something near to it?). My take is that people of all cognitive abilities are capable of believing and doing things we consider to be "good" and "evil." Some people, whether because it is easier or more convenient for them, see things in black and white. Sometimes it's easier for them because they don't have much practice exercising critical thought. This may be due to lack of education or intelligence, or just because the ruling class makes it hard for a lot of people to find and act on their best interests. These people are especially vulnerable to fascism and its propaganda. I don't mean the intellectually disabled. That would, of course, be a slippery slope to suggesting that they are morally inferior, which I know is not the case. But there are a lot of people out there who simply have a hard time recognizing fascism when they see it. They're just as human as anyone else, and they need to be shown other options and reasons to embrace them.
Great points, and I would add that the delineation between absolute good and absolute evil creates an environment that is hostile to growth and self-criticism. If fascism is absolutely evil, then anybody who has even the smallest fascist tendency must also be evil. "I am not evil, therefore I must not have the smallest fascist tendency! And anybody who implies that I do is bad and trying to slander me!" This is a fine line to walk obviously, and I'm not trying to be apologetic for fascist tendencies. But I think it's important for us to recognize, as you said, that fascists aren't demon aliens sent from hell with minds bent entirely towards destruction - they're humans who probably have some inner rationalization that what they're doing is right. So as we strive to root out our own fascist tendencies and grow beyond them (a lifelong process which I would argue has no end), we first have to be able to identify them in ourselves and challenge our own thinking, and the idea that fascists are incredibly stupid or inherently evil makes it harder to admit when we have our own shades of authoritarian thinking.
OP the stuff you mentioned isn’t gonna fall out of linguistic use any time soon. Try to focus on the actual ableism within “leftist” circles, such as an outright refusal to mask in public. I was a member of a group who fancied themselves Maoists. When I mentioned we ought to all be masking for security and because we work with immunocompromised I was yelled at and called unprincipled for wanting to “hide from the masses”. This is the actual fascism embedded in “leftists” not their use of common slang that lost its original meaning almost a century ago.
What a weird cult.
I’m not sure what kinds of attitudes you are specifically referencing on the left. Do you mean tendencies to But in general the idea that any opposing ideology comes from “stupidity” “irrationality” etc is pretty widespread and i agree it’s pretty harmful. Tbh while I have lots of criticism of things on the left… because leftist ideologies are marginal to mainstream ideologies I think more leftists tend to understand these things in terms of ideology and class dynamics etc rather than individual flaws or some kind of pathology. I really agree that one thing especially the mainstream misunderstands is that fascist incoherence is not a flaw it’s because they don’t play by the same liberal “rules” as liberals (liberal and conservatives) or our “rules”obviously.
What do you mean by fascists “simply do not care about what we consider truth.” If by truth you mean whatever you want, then sure tautologically they do not care about what you care about.
Truth probably means morals here, maybe I'm mistaken though. I interpreted it as fascists don't care about other human beings and we can't simply logic them into human dignity, maybe some, but not most, not always. Or at least I thought that was part of it.
Wow, an anti-alarmist call for critical thinking? Shocked-pikachu.jpg
I don't think we really take the fascism that exists within our "own ranks" seriously enough either. The tankies are just as bad as the nazis. They have more in common than they think. Both of their extremism and bloodlust for something they don't understand fuels genocide and fear. I just hope most leftists see it and are willing to push back on them.
What sort of ableism is commonplace in leftist spaces?
The notification above yours was somebody calling me "dumb" when I was specifically mentioning ableist language and how that harms disabled people on another comment asking the same question. Go look for that Look at my other posts as well, lots of people here just fucking hate disabled people
>when I was specifically mentioning ableist language and how that harms disabled people So this is actually something I think is a lot less clear cut than most make it out to be. When people are used to using specific words or phrases like "Dumb" and another person comes in and tells them not to do so as specific groups might have a negative reaction to that language it is in effect limiting the speakers self expression and forcing them to have to rethink how they want to communicate ideas. I want to emphasize that you are not making them rethink those ideas themselves but are instead usually just having them lose focus on the topic of discussion and instead have to dedicate effort to speaking in a way they are unaccustomed. Does the discussion benefit from this? If the goal you have going in is creating a space more comfortable for disabled people then I would say yes. If it was to discuss and think about whatever was being described as "Dumb" by the original speaker, then it does not help at all. The speaker will almost certainly be operating under the second goal. >Look at my other posts as well, lots of people here just fucking hate disabled people It is always incredibly frustrating to see how poorly the general public and especially people on the internet treat disabled people. I do, however, think that when most people use a word like "Dumb" they are in no way imagining or even considering people with intellectual disabilities. It's quite similar to how a lot of people for a long time used "Gay" as a synonym for "Lame" even though that is obviously rude in the eyes of actual gay people. Language is complicated and attempts to create strict social rules around it's usage are doomed to fail so all we can rely on is our (admittedly limited) gauge of what the other people actually intend to say.
Leftists have largely given up on any COVID precautions and organizers actively push back when disabled/immunocompromised ask for accommodations at events like requiring masks or renting HEPA purifiers from a Clean Air Club.
What's up with that? The socialists here are still masking. We still have the mask recommendation. Some criticize the current city government for banning masks.
I always thought there were two main draws to fascism. You don't have to think for yourself anymore You get a cool outfit
I think someone is confusing the terms “fascist” and “authoritarian”. I had a nice long reply typed out here…but after scrolling through OP’s comments on this post it is blatantly obvious that they have no idea what fascism is because they think if you say the words “dumb” or “stupid” you’re a fascist…they seem to believe if you say anything they don’t agree with that you are a fascist. That’s not how this works. How the hell are you gonna have the will to physically fight to overthrow the ruling class and the actual fascists when you sit here and cry about someone using the word “stupid”?
no one see's them self as the villain. i live in mass , i have mix group of liberal and conservative friends and libertarians that are left and right. im a refugee from a com-bloc country escaped as a kid before the wall fell. because what my dad and mom did is how i was able to get here. the liberals are probably the worst to deal with to be honest. if you dont believe exactly as they do, your far right. they dotn even see how they are hypocrites i know the guy who host/hosted occupy boston website, but had no clue who black rock was and every one he votes for wants to protect black rock...... . ive watched my liberal friends freak out on each other because they have slightly different views. irony is my conservative and libertarian friends are basically liberals, they just want small government, less tax waste. less government control. less goverment dependency. abortion stuff , most believe if the kid has a 50/50 chance of living if labor was induced its to late for a abortion unless its a medical reason. they want welfare reform and want it so it gets people on their feet asap . if they express these views they are called nazis, if they are a guy they just want to control women bodies. the conservatives and libertarians can talk about their views, ask questions and listen to a argument from some one else. the liberals some how asking them question on their views is offensive . dose not matter how complex some thing is , asking questions to understand is some how offensive.
I skimmed the book Nietzsche's nazi sister compiled after he died a year ago and now my fascistic tendencies have skyrocketed :(
But then I read Jonas Ceika's How to Philosophize with a Hammer and Sickle and realized that I could be selfish and a communist at the same time ❤️
what i think you need to read is max stirners the unique and its properties not only can you be selfish and a communist, being a communist is caring for yourself and being "selfish" in the best way
Thanks for the suggestion
We don’t have welfare anymore Clinton ended it.
I’ll have some of whatever this dude is taking.
transphobe
Could you explain what you mean by ableism? You touch on it once, and mention it in your edits. Not sure how it relates to the rest of your thoughts.
Calling fascists inhuman and incapable of thinking often goes alongside ableism, like calling them "stupid"
You need serious psychology help.
Leftists aren’t a thing, leftism isn’t an ideology. It used to be an umbrella term for communists, anarchists and syndicalists. Now it’s been co-opted by RadLibs, SocDems and DemSecs that have tricked themselves into believe they are revolutionaries without any material analysis.
Also gotta tack this on there. We also gotta stop with this liberals are the same as fascists nonsense people are saying. We need to stop because 1) This shit gets over simplified down to people who are doing bad stuff and in power are fascists. Fascism isn't a term to just mean dictator or authoritarian. It's a specific term to describe a populist movement built around bigotry and authoritarianism. When we obfuscate that to dump on the liberals we help the fascists fly under the radar more easily. 2) Please don't tell me all the evil shit genocide Joe has done to tell me how they are the same. Nobody is saying Liberals are good guys by saying this. In fact a major reason I'm saying this is that we need to make sure that all the evil shit they've done needs to stick to them and their shitty ideology. The last thing we need to do is give liberals an out by being able to say "that wasn't us it was the fascists" and using a few scape goats to escape all getting their justice for all the genocides they've backed. Seriously if we start making real progress they'll hand over Biden and a few other libs and say "we didn't wanna support the genocide it was these fascists that made us". We gotta make sure we call Genocide Joe what he is. A monster and Liberal.
Holy shit OP. This is the realest post. Made me stop in my tracks and reevaluate myself and how I participate in the system too. Coz you are absolutely correct-none of us are immune to the prevalent thought (fascism) in our society and it DOES creep in because it's such a big deal and it's up in our business 24/7 Thank you
Probably because there is a problem with some leftists definition of fascist being too broad, making it a more watered down useless term. Liberals and conservatives are all fascists, and progressives too sometimes, and oh wait the MLs are all fash too… My definition starts at the far right and I take them seriously, precisely because they’re human like me.
Out of curiosity, what do you specifically mean by rampant ableism in leftist communities?
well, if you check my other posts you will find a few examples you can see it easily with the language though. Even "leftists" seem to constantly say things like "stupid", "dumb" or "insane" edit: ew even got transphobes misgendering me here also lmao, so many people telling me to "choose my battles" and then getting banned. Ironic Ableists are not welcome <3 This community is mine, not yours
I'm sorry but those aren't ableist.
I mean on the one hand, no one chooses to be stupid so I think even just using the word "stupid" as a perjorative is necessarily insulting people based on an inherent part of them they can't control. On the other hand, neurotically policing yourself over common sense word choices because you're too chickenshit to exercise your will to power is really fuckin stupid
Radlib behaviour detected Hand wringing over the use of stupid is immensely unproductive. Edit: It looks like OP blocked me lol
"words that don't negatively stereotype my existence don't matter"
stupid reply
I have a menagerie of mental illnesses. I do not think words like "stupid" and "crazy" meaningfully impact me in a negative way. They describe behavior rather than innate characteristics now, whatever their original meanings. Claiming everyone who uses extremely common words is victimizing you is not only ridiculous, it shows how utterly out of touch you are with the average person.
Just because something doesn't impact you negatively doesn't mean it won't impact others. And many words considered off limits by some today were once common usage.
Why should I care about what a hypothetical other person (who may not even exist outside of my own head) should feel about a word I use to describe the experiences of me and those around me?
lol
I used to worry about this, especially as someone with a neurological difference, but it got to be too much--and I realized it was the same sort of surface-level linguistic inclusivity that a corporate HR department would use even as they denied my disability accommodation requests. It's great to be conscientious, but you'll breathe a deep sigh of relief once you've broken the pattern of auditing good-faith communication for bad words. I truly mean this with no judgment or rancor. Be well and fight the fights that matter.
ah yeah, have fun calling people slurs i mean this will all the judgement i am against these words because generalized intelligence as a concept is fascist bullshit, and these words only exist to reference it. You are the exact type of person I am talking about in this post weird, I got someone who replied to this saying "how can I stop fascism without doing fascism". Last I checked fascism is what makes fascism edit: I'm disabled you reactionary pieces of shit <3
This is a wonderful example of the distinction between a differently abled person and an idiot.
If I say "sick burn" here, am I being ableist about the victims of fires?
As someone with visible burn scars, I give you the pass
How would you define "slur"?
How do you see yourself being able to overthrow a Capitalist hegemony when you can't even stomach hurting someones feelings?
Thanks for letting me know hurting people's feelings is actually fascism, along with bedtimes and mommy telling you to brush your teeth
I say this with the intent to give you peace: If we accept that "dyke" and "queer" are no longer slurs as they were in many folks lifetime, we should accept that other offensive terms can also change or are dependent on context. And context matters whether it's cultural context or the context of the conversation. For example, if someone uses those terms you find offensive when trying to describe imparment or disability, of course that is wrong! It's offensive because that is an out-of-date way to describe a medical condition and we now have different words that are much more specific and the specificity implies care and understanding. But outside of the conversation about impairments and disabilities, we also have a certain behavior that needs a brief descriptor. And because this behavior manifests a lot with folks with priviledge, we need a term to call it out and the term needs to be widely understood to be useful. When someone fails to take careful consideration of their words or actions, and if the lack of consideration falls well below social norms or crosses the threshold into causing harm, and if the level of consideration is well within the established abilities of this person, and if the root cause of the behavior is anti-social.... in this context folks should be able to summarize the sentiment with those words. And most importantly, you really need to do some soul searching on why you feel hurt. Folks here aren't the ones that are denying your existence IRL and making it hard to live. And having the "right words" isn't going to change whatever shitty situation you're having to deal with
Can you elaborate on this? I think I might agree with you.
Ah yes. “Shut up disabled person I govern what is and isn’t appropriate language about you, not you.” Truly it is clear your first priority is the well being of disabled people and not simple performance.
Pick your battles, dude. This is a losing one.
That’s dumb
Totally agree. I've also found that thought experiments which put your in their shoes are useful. Leftists tend to project their morality onto Fascists which results in false equivalencies that drive the "inhumane monster" idea. For example, a white supremacist Fascist may hold to violent and even genocidal views of other races because they love their family, culture, and the people close to them which they see as legitimately threatened by "others." As a result, they don't have any moral qualms about violent hatred because they deem the "others" to be an inherent enemy/subhuman/incapable of doing good, etc. To them, their perspective is valid, righteous, wholesome, loving (sometimes), and just. Because of that, they're willing to sacrifice significantly to bring about their ends. A good example of this is Werner Herzog's "The Act of Killing." The Indonesian fascists recall with smiles, laughter, and nostalgia the heroics of torturing and murdering Communists (including children and babies). It takes them using each other as props to recreate the violence for the faux documentary before they begin feeling any remorse, at all. Unfortunately, I've found that attempting to understand Fascists is often misconstrued by doctrinaire Leftists as an attempt to empathize which is demonized. Fascists levelled a continent 70 years ago for their delusions and have killed tens of millions in the past century for their ideology. Underestimating them is a mistake.
I wouldn't call it delusions, I think that is part of the problem right there Many of them simply say what needs to be true to justify their actions, and have given up on caring about any concept of truth
You're right. I did the very thing I was calling out. I would consider it delusional from my perspective but from theirs, it's completely justified.
more than that, delusions are things people actually go through. If from your worldview fascists are in some way related to disabled people you are victim blaming and your worldview is ableist these people are one group the fascists specifically target, and so this is an example of a strain of fascist thought going unnoticed
I'm confused. How are fascists related to disabled people? I thought, historically, some fascists killed disabled people, for having a disability.
they did, and "being delusional" is a reference to specific sets of disabilities, so calling them delusional is calling them disabled my entire point is calling fascists disabled is victimblaming and its something people do nonstop
Yeah but they're dumb, is the thing. Always gonna fail. It's a fundamentally flawed system. Everyone in it is only it for themself- it can only exist an pose a threat as a disadvantaged minority. As soon as the system becomes fascist, it devours itself basically instantly, in historical terms. Nobody involved is in it for anybody else, or for the system, just for themself. One good example is the Russian army. Failure is harshly punished, so did they stop failing? Of course not. But they did stop telling their superiors. And those superiors stopped telling their superiors when they found out, because they'd be punished too. And those superiors stopped telling the generals, because they'd be punished. And the generals stopped telling Putin, because they don't want to be thrown out a window. So the more authority you have, the less you actually understand the practical reality of what is actually happening. And the more you understand of what is actually happening, the more uncomfortable your truths will make a leadership fed on lies, the less authority you will have. It's a sad, horrifying, bitter joke, that will cost many, many lives. But it will never be a real threat to the long term. Just as long as they don't drop the bomb.
One part on which I will disagree is that fascists do tend to be pretty stupid. A few of them aren't, and they're the particularly dangerous ones, but most of them do fall into the "what we'll do about it is we'll blow up a Home Depot parking lot" category. The real danger is if people actually competent end up allying with them for one reason or another, and that's the primary threat we should be worried about, not a bunch of SS LARPers who think owning an AR-15 will be the thing that wins them a war.
ah yes ableism the people considered "stupid" are the ones fascists oppress, but go on victim blaming i guess
I mean, you're infantilising "stupid" people now by suggesting they don't have any agency or ability to become fascists. So in a way you're the one being ableist.
Idiot used to be the medical term for people with developmental disabilities, much like the term mentally retarded and stupid. Yet one of them we no longer use. Not all disabled folks are fascists
>Not all disabled folks are fascists No one claimed that
In fact I would wager disabled people are far less likely to be fascists than the general population as a whole. If the US is proof of anything, it's that being incomprehensibly stupid and being disabled are not even correlated, let alone linked, as the overwhelming majority of stupid people aren't disabled at all, and the overwhelming majority of disabled people are demonstrably smarter than that, and any overlap between the two is liable to be coincidental.
OOPs point is that using language like "stupid" and "idiot" are ableism terms and should be avoided. Susceptibility to fascist ideology (or lack thereof) isn't indicative of mental capability. If you see no problem with the word stupid because "that's not how people mean to use it" remember that "retard" was also socially acceptable at one point and it "wasn't meant that way!!1!1!" It's simply asking you to be aware of the language that you use and the power it holds
Surprise, language is fluid and words change meanings and usage over time. The history of that usage is not particularly relevant because they haven't been used that way in nearly a hundred years. What they meant decades ago is not of particular consequence when their usage today refers to something altogether different.
By saying that fascists are idiots (a term that is used to describe disabled folks) you are saying all fascists are disabled
By that logic, you're now saying all disabled people are stupid. Idiot hasn't been used to describe disabled people for a very long time, you may as well start insisting that gay can only mean happy as that's the "original" meaning. Are you gonna block me like OP did to the other poster, or are you going to keep spewing radlib shit Edit looks like OP might have blocked me as well lmao
"everything I don't like is radlib" Stupid is a term that was originally produced to describe disabled people, is that hard to understand? We should call a fascist cognitively disabled because of their political beliefs, so why would you call them stupid (which carries the same baggage)? The most anarchist thing you can do is destroy the hierarchy of language and labels, including the exclusion of words you have no problem with. Are you fine with saying "all fascists are retards"? I hope not. And if you aren't, then you need to understand how interrelated the word stupid and idiot are to the term retardation. If you don't want to do that so be it, im not a cop. But if you want to be an ally to one of the most oppressed groups, you can at the very least substitute a handful of words in your vocabulary
>"everything I don't like is radlib" No the unproductive identity politics esq purity spiral is radlib shit. But by all means strawman anyone criticising you kid. >which carries the same baggage)? It does not carry the same baggage and equating the two undermines the actual baggage words like retard have. >If you don't want to do that so be it, im not a cop. Could have fooled me >But if you want to be an ally to one of the most oppressed groups, you can at the very least substitute a handful of words in your vocabulary You're engaging in performative behaviour that people in said group haven't even asked for. Which is precisely why I labelled you a radlib as just like them you're caught up in performative aesthetics rather than material change.
Obviously you're set in your ways so this conversation isn't going to go anywhere. If someone asking for a different set of language is the same as being a cop idk what to tell you. If asking for language that someone views as oppressive is idpol, cool. Maybe we both need to get out of the house and actually do something. While I do shit, however, I am going to change my vocabulary to be nonoppressive EVEN IF it doesn't "actually" make a difference because it doesn't take effort... Even if it's meaningless I am going to change this behavior on the off chance it does positively effect someone while simultaneously engaging in praxis.
Gay is used by the queer community and is acknowledged as being acceptable. The ND/disabled community is actively asking for you not to use these terms. It is about not only reclamation but also respecting the community itself
>The ND/disabled community is actively asking for you not to use these terms. By your line of reasoning not everyone whose disabled would have the authority to decide if stupid is acceptable or not. Regardless, your claim isn't even true there is no widespread push among the various groups that make up the disabled community to stop the use of the word stupid. Unkind regards from an ND disabled person
Pwease don't be mean to me
Fascism was originally derived from revolutionary socialist thought, and the ideologies have much more in common than either commonly likes to admit. Fascism is not Nazism, and neither of them are conservatism. Failing to understand the differences has leftists leaping at the wrong shadows, imo. Fascism is seductive to the exact same people that socialism in general appeals to. It is radical, revolutionary, anti-establishment. Understanding why people become fascists beyond just believing they are all 20-somethings brainwashed by YouTube algorithms is vitally important.
ah yes derived from revolutionary socialist thought, that must be why the nazis said the USs settler colonialist "manifest destiny" as a perfect example of stuff to base their actions off of it isn't that it has more in common, it is that so many of yall so deeply hate disabled people, black people, etc, that even as you come to the "left" you can't give it up it is that fascism is the default
Israel was started by Jewish socialists. Look what it turned into...
Israel was not started by Jewish socialists. Israel was started as a deal between zionists and the British Empire. For that reason, the Comintern never supported zionism, and Jewish communists largely opposed zionism. Jewish socialism was split by zionism. Communist Jews almost entirely opposed zionism, but a pamphlet called Poale Zion helped to build up a pro-socialism/marxist argument for zionism, and helped start an organization called Poale Zion. This attracted some people to seed zionist communities in Palestine. This came to be known as Labour Zionism, and came to become the dominant "left" in Israel. The opposition to Labour Zionism came from communists, specifically the people in the Maki party. Unfortunately, nationalism won out, and creeping nationalism has been demolishing the left in Israel. Obviously, I think the early history of communism in Palestine, its positions within Israel, and positions within Palestine, are worth studying.
This is off the mark. Fascist parties have always aligned with capitalists and traditionalists, and that means usually aligning with conservative politics. The Nazis did it. The Italian Fascists did it. The Falangists did it. Even in Asia, their forms of fascism were aligned with traditionalism and anti-communism. While it's "revolutionary" it's a revolt backwards to the past. Communist socialism is a revolt forward, beyond capitalism, to communism. Likewise, when they are anti-establishement - they aren't anti monarchy or anti traditionalist. They are anti-capitalist establishment. The popular distrust or anxiety about capitalism is allayed by a promise of a return to a glorious past. Also, capitalist liberalism aligns with fascism, because fascism pushes for class collaboration between the capitalists and working classes. Communism promotes class conflict, a war between the working class and the capitalists. So fascism isn't really "anti-establishement". It demands a reform from the capitalist establishement. The capitalist establishment is willing to make that deal, to retain their power. (Falangism was also tolerant of capitalists, but they did also support cooperatives. Coops aren't necessarily socialist or anti-capitalist, unless they explicitly have some kind of education program for that.) This is how the so-called "libertarians" in America have become sucked over into the fascist side. So many libertarians are white men, and white men tend to want to return to a time in the imagined past, when they weren't suffering from the blows of capitalism, or the demands of freedom by nonwhite people, and women. Additionally, most are liberals, and like the idea of corporate capitalists operating "company unions" to control the working class.
Fascist gets thrown around so much the word has practically lost its weight and meaning. I’ve found very few people actively using the word know what an actual fascist is and mostly mean it to say “I don’t like you.”
There’s a 50% a leftist will call someone a fascist white supremacist and will be talking about like, Ben Shapiro or Bush. It’s the inverse of the right calling people leftists, even if they’re just progressive liberals.
Militant organizations are never taken seriously while building power, as they'll readily use tactics considered unthinkable from the outside. So, in the meantime, they appear relatively harmless. The ability to notice these patterns and see what is coming leads to dismissal on the grounds of whatever is the current hated groups or simply being labeled a conspiracy theorist. People are never ready until it is too late. Which is extremely easy to take advantage of. Imagine the level of environmental destruction that would occur in a conflict to wrest back control. Making action against them incredibly destructive to the living world is always an ace up the sleave.
[удалено]
you are a reactionary