***Official Political Discussion Thread***

whywesteppin

Supporter
16,049
23,896
Joined Mar 27, 2004
That adorable avatar must mean something, a signal of some sort. Is this the siganl that the storm is coming and Q is about to unmask all the libby pedos, have them rounded up, killed and replaced with holograms.
It's a sign that Sleepy Joe Biden is a wussy -- he's too PC to grab a *****.
 

Methodical Management

Staff member
Co-Founder
6,372
20,743
Joined Dec 8, 1999
2.) The example of two coworkers being encouraged, by capital, to not unionize because they have a different sexual orientation is a concept endorsed by most socialist LGBT+ people. The example I used is an amalgamation of examples of “rainbow capitalism” that I have been taught.
Just because you want them to unionize together doesn't require you to be dismissive of their difference. Acting like their perspectives and needs are “fundamentally the same” and differences can be essentially ignored is akin to "colorblindness."

As Lorde puts it, "Without community there is no liberation, only the most vulnerable and temporary armistice between an individual and her oppression. But community must not mean a shedding of our differences, nor the pathetic pretense that these differences do not exist."
"Difference must be not merely tolerated, but seen as a fund of necessary polarities between which our creativity can spark like a dialectic. Only then does the necessity for interdependency become unthreatening."


As a student of history, you know full well that divided labor movements fail. Targeting the "lowest common denominator" in this instance means centering around straight, White, able, cisgender Christian men, and letting them take up all the oxygen in the room. When that happens, the last thing you ought to do is take a look at your gentrified movement and say, "how can we educate the people who aren't here about their best interests?"

Your pitch to that hypothetical second generation bisexual Vietnamese-American woman who has never felt safe in public over constant threats you do not face cannot be that she doesn't understand how the true locus of her oppression is the capitalist's yoke.


Why is it that the compromise must be "set your other issues aside and focus on our common cause" and not "if you're not committed to full equality for everyone, you need to suck it up because none of us may be truly free until we are all free?"

The movement for racial inequality in this country hasn't ignored class. Why should the movement for class inequality ask everyone else to take a back seat?

Exhibiting scorn for "identity politics" comes across like chiding those fighting for basic survival rights for failing to sufficiently tether their liberation to yours, when you haven't asked the same of yourself or your movement.

It takes a lot of nerve for anyone who would use the phrase "oppression Olympics" to build a hierarchy of hierarchies and declare classism the most brutal oppression of all. (And without acknowledging the additive and interrelated nature of varying forms of oppression.)


As long as White men are seated at the head of the table, setting a place for everyone is an empty gesture.

To borrow an oft-stolen phrase from Flavia Dzodan, your socialism will be intersectional, or it will be worthless.


Do you really think that capital does not nor will ever reinforce the public and psychological wages of whiteness, being male, and being cishet and use false solidarity with PoC, women, LGBT people?
I referenced this in a previous conversation in this thread, and was essentially told that, because Du Bois wrote a century ago, he is less relevant to a discussion of racial inequality in the US than the dogma of a White man who died in London before Du Bois was even born. (And you wonder why people don't want to engage.)

You can go back and read it if you'd like.

Mind you, I am not saying that the ostensible audience for all this corporate wokeness is or will be swayed but well off white liberals could be nudged away from sympathy for large scale labor or community organizing. In the case of the former, corporate media loves talking about how Trump is the result of working class whites despite the fact that it was more we’ll off whites who were his base. The trick is to conflate white racism with the working class and if there ever is a sectoral strike among all warehouse workers, corporate media can center white warehouse workers to dismiss the entire movement. In the case of the latter, the neoliberal mayor of Seattle dismissed the George Floyd protests as mostly being done by white men.

As it becomes harder and harder to defend capitalism with utilitarian arguments, capital will increasingly rely on presenting itself as the woke alternative to socialism, which it will present as always being one and the same with white socialism.
If you're worried that Amazon is going to fool people into thinking that they're more “woke” than you are, Amazon is not the problem.
 
9,042
17,785
Joined Jan 16, 2011
I 10000% agree with this quote. Libbie elites are smarter, more rational, and morally superior to everyone else. That's why they are un-American!

REAL America was built on being dumb, irrational, and morally bankrupt. TRUE Americans are stupid. These LIBBIE SCUMS threaten the HERITAGE of the US of A.

1593561076992.png



Here's the tweet:

Yeah...
We can't save this ship.
 
4,896
9,381
Joined Jun 28, 2004
Methodical Management Methodical Management

My concern is bosses/capitalists using their wealth, political influence, media control, autocratic control over the work place to use the language and symbols of racial, gender, orientation based struggles in order to divide workers and manufacture consent among white liberals. Most oppressed people won't buy it, some will, there are black Republicans and gay Republicans after all, but most will not buy it. My worry is that more marginalized parts of a broad coalition could get confused, discouraged and cleaved from each other not to mention people, who are ambivalent about labor struggles being nudged into siding with management.

The antidote is to periodically say that we have a lot in common especially our shared exploitation as workers. The ability to say that and not be accused of trying to crush, dismiss or silence people's identity would be very, very helpful. Of course, we also need gay people working at different workplaces to work in concert to champion their interests as gay people and the same for women and people of color and disabled people. Moreover, people who are more privileged better lend their support. I'd also say that massive challenges to capital don't have to come first. Indeed, identitarian based organizing and direct action creates better activists for other struggles.

I should not have to keep saying it but it's just a fact that we need the ability to form broad based coalitions to demand that capital make concessions. In order to have the resources to specifically address problems of all sorts of marginalized groups we need to expropriate the ill gotten gains of capital. We have to form up and we can have solidarity with marginalized identities while acknowledging our commonality as workers. The two are not in opposition to each other, The two need each other.
 
Top Bottom
  AdBlock Detected

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks some useful and important features of our website. For the best possible site experience please take a moment to disable your AdBlocker or head over to our upgrade page to donate for an ad-free experience Upgrade now