Lefty Internal Politics: How to Talk About This Stuff?

[Varysblackfyre321]

35 minutes ago, gruff one said:

How to talk about this stuff (in the topic heading). Did the guy twerking help,

No more than anyone marching around.

What Would you prefer to see happen to them? Arrested, executed, hounded by more leftists in addition to the conservatives? 

I find people try to frame their visceral disgust certain things as being respondent to something higher.

35 minutes ago, gruff one said:

the naked guys on bikes

Eh I’ll give you that was yikes.

As yikes as a guy steaking during a baseball game.

 

35 minutes ago, gruff one said:

the chanting we're here for the children? I don't. Did the parade in Cyprus help? I don't know, but I don't think it did harm.

Do you think maybe the fact there are literally tens of thousands of parades with millions of participants hyper-fixating on the few cases where you think someone looks bad or harmful may be more harmful to lgbt rights and people’s general than incidents in isolation?

There have been gay couples who’ve raped and/or murdered their children incidents where one can go a adoption agencies or social worker didn’t do a competent job.

Constantly hyper-fixating on these edge cases as if they’re emblemic of gay adoption instead of an edge case doesn’t help gay people—it just helps fuel the moral panic around gay people being around children being too dangerous.
honestly I expect within a couple years we’ll hear more things to turne of “why won’t  good old gays would step up and say traditional families work best for kids and stop the radicals endangering kids.”

[Rippounet]

18 minutes ago, Ran said:

It is revisionism to suggest organized violence or even the threat of violence was a part of any mainstream civil rights organizations and leaders at that time, and none of the successes of the movement can be put down to organized violence

Radical flank effect.

Also, suffragettes.

For starters.

[Varysblackfyre321]

 

8 minutes ago, Ran said:

The civil rights movement was also characterized by nonviolent protest, as noted by the International Center of Nonviolent Conflict. It is revisionism to suggest organized violence or even the threat of violence was a part of any mainstream civil rights organizations and leaders at that time,

Hmm this seems to be injecting a bit of something that wasn’t in the tweet.

The contention wasn’t what tactics were the most used by mainstream figures—however you qualify that— or most effective—the contention is what tactics were used by people while they were trying to get civil rights.

23 minutes ago, Ran said:

The post-King riots definitely had a role in pushing through legislation in 1968, it's true, but they weren't "strategies" that were organized by anybody. 

This seems heavily to rely on pedantry.

You concede the violence through riot pushed through legislation (the CRA for one) but quibble that since it wasn’t organized by ‘mainstream’ organizations or leaders that one is right to say the civil rights movement didn’t use violence.

29 minutes ago, Ran said:

DR: the woman being put in her place on Twitter is not actually incorrect.

Yes if she stated what you did that ‘mainstream’ leaders and organizations of the civil rights movement practiced non-violence and didn’t attempt to use it as a cudgel against trans rights activism in general, she’d be totally a-okay.

[TrackerNeil]

On 6/15/2023 at 8:54 PM, DMC said:

Yes, actually, it is when it comes to political discussions.  Now, could we all be "polite" and "civil" in terms of political disagreements?  Sure.  You can ostensibly be polite and civil with those you strongly disagree with, but it still doesn't change the fact you're going to be just as condescending and dismissive of the others' opinions as the more blunt tack.  And frankly the "polite" form of discourse nauseates me because it's entirely disingenuous. 

When a man tells you the truth about the world, he's really just telling the truth about himself.

[Ran]

16 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yes if she stated what you did that ‘mainstream’ leaders and organizations of the civil rights movement practiced non-violence and didn’t attempt to use it as a cudgel against trans rights activism in general, she’d be totally a-okay.

The civil rights movement ended in 1968. A photo from 1969 is not responsive to the claim. The civil rights movement was organized along nonviolent lines. The riots were not "the civil rights movement", and the Fair Housing Act was going to pass regardless, it was just faster in the wake of King's death. It's like claiming King's assassination was a strategy of the civil rights movement, so I guess James Earl Ray was a hero of the movement?

Edited July 6, 2023 by Ran

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

Radical flank effect.

Also, suffragettes.

For starters.

MLK was careful in addressing  riots and more militant figures like Malcolm X. I think because he recognized  it’d cause needless infighting and he’d become a tool to bludgeon allies or potential allies

Matt Walsh, theocratic fascist, even understands sometimes launching into a righteous crusade against someone pushing for goal in a way you can’t or don’t want to can be detrimental.

Hence his comparatively lukewarm  treatment of Dave Rubin and Blaire white people he’d most ideally see killed for their degeneracy.

They can be used as “the good ones” to assuage the guilt of people who want to be bigoted or support bigots but don’t want to feel bad about it.

I’m coming to the unwelcome realization many on far right have in some areas a more realistic view of politics than some people I share more in common with politically who think they can win through through simple, calm, polite dialogue, and appeals to shared humanity and more willing to work with fascists and sneer at the prospect of working with other leftists.

 

Edited July 6, 2023 by Varysblackfyre321

[Varysblackfyre321]

18 minutes ago, Ran said:

The civil rights movement ended in 1968

Again a bit pedantic no?

Would you feel much better if another militant group doing something violent was pictured a year earlier

Or would you dismiss it if it wasn’t mainstream?

20 minutes ago, Ran said:

The civil rights movement was organized along nonviolent lines. 

Can we agree it wasn’t an official hierarchical organization with a mission statement?

22 minutes ago, Ran said:

The riots were not "the civil rights movement",

Not in totality no. But a part.

24 minutes ago, Ran said:

and the Fair Housing Act was going to pass regardless, it was just faster in the wake of King's death. 

I mean hopefully that’d be the case.

26 minutes ago, Ran said:

It's like claiming King's assassination was a strategy of the civil rights movement,

Do you not think even apart of the rioters thought this would pressure government to act?

See I think intent matters with actions.

28 minutes ago, Ran said:

so I guess James Earl Ray was a hero of the movement?

You’ve started off with a reasonable position—‘mainstream’ (however you define it) civil rights figures and organizations didn’t use or promote violent tactics. 
That’s a true statement. It’s not reasonable to pretend synonymous with saying the civil rights movement was only that and that anything treat anything outside a coordinated act by a “mainstream” figure or organization counts.

Also Malcom X, I hate the man, was still mainstream civil rights activist by every metric I can see and really militant. 
 

[Conflicting Thought]

21 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Again a bit pedantic no?

Would you feel much better if another militant group doing something violent was pictured a year earlier

Or would you dismiss it if it wasn’t mainstream?

Can we agree it wasn’t an official hierarchical organization with a mission statement?

Not in totality no. But a part.

I mean hopefully that’d be the case.

Do you not think even apart of the rioters thought this would pressure government to act?

See I think intent matters with actions.

You’ve started off with a reasonable position—‘mainstream’ (however you define it) civil rights figures and organizations didn’t use or promote violent tactics. 
That’s a true statement. It’s not reasonable to pretend synonymous with saying the civil rights movement was only that and that anything treat anything outside a coordinated act by a “mainstream” figure or organization counts.

Also Malcom X, I hate the man, was still mainstream civil rights activist by every metric I can see and really militant. 
 

Why do you hate malcom x?

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, TrackerNeil said:

When a man tells you the truth about the world, he's really just telling the truth about himself.

Eh, he can also be telling you a truth about the world.

I don’t mean to detract from the spirit of your quote though, sometimes people do project their own inklings onto everyone and treat it as just as natural law.

And I do think people shouldn’t automatically treat aggression as being honest.

Thats how get people thinking Trump is just telling like it is when he says something heinous in a bombastic way.

though in my limited experience I think I’ve had the most honest dialogues with some people when they begin to detest me and rage

Sidenote I never thanked you for talking about Philly Pride Presents. It’s a good warning story for queer groups to be wary of divisive tactics like the ones ppp did(whether for money, an ideological disgust to anything that doesn’t comport to a milktoast  Middle class gay, or a sense of preservation through cutting off the trans).

[Varysblackfyre321]

16 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Why do you hate malcom x?

He spent most of his political career arguing for  black people to just get their own ethnostate( ethnostates and black people trying to get their own would more likely just make them more at the mercy of white America) and he was really sexist. even amongst Nation of Islam(which is really reactionary) he got complaints about his sexism.

 

[Week]

One persistent problem within Lefty Internal Politics is caring a whit for what centrists and right-wingers think about Lefty Internal Politics.

[Varysblackfyre321]

2 hours ago, Week said:

One persistent problem within Lefty Internal Politics is caring a whit for what centrists and right-wingers think about Lefty Internal Politics.

Eh it depends I think.

In terms of building public support for a party, group, figure I’d say Actual centrists(not just cowardly right wingers), like the dissatisfaced sorts who’ve a liberal inkling in some areas probably can and need to be appealed to.

But right-wingers?  To lesser extent I’m even fine with that depending on how it’s done.  So long as it’s not at the sacrifice of policy standards(don’t chuck human rights under the bus in order to appeal to reactionary white middle class cis-het men) for instance.

 

However it should be noted  the Democratic leadership have tried really hard to appeal to right wingers for decades  and all it produced was a country farther to the right economically and close to fascism. 

This kinda ties in with my problem with threads like this. Usually what’s given as a subject of contention that posters are framing that are serious and immediate addressing is fringe internet nonsense, hyper-specific edge stories, malding about private spats.
 

 it’s not enough that the most popular  ‘mainstream ‘left wing’ party has adopted their strategy of winning  through overtures of politeness  and appeals to shared values or the mainstream media aparatus has bent over backwards to frame even the worst of the right as people who’ve some admirable quality. That doesn’t matter because someone got canceled on Twitter or a company had DEI, or some guy put on a dress and read to children.

 I really want to be empathic.

I understand there are some legit horror stories on the left that could have been avoided if more practiced a bit more restraint and caution. 

[TrackerNeil]

5 hours ago, Week said:

One persistent problem within Lefty Internal Politics is caring a whit for what centrists and right-wingers think about Lefty Internal Politics.

Can you identify a centrist? I mean in modern life, someone famous. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

56 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

Can you identify a centrist? I mean in modern life, someone famous. 

Would you take Mitt Romney, Joe Manchin, Hochul?

[Larry of the Lawn]

13 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

Can you identify a centrist? I mean in modern life, someone famous. 

Joe Biden

[James Arryn]

On 7/5/2023 at 11:24 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

I do hope there’s more a push for public education to elucidate how in the civil rights movement there was a lot of diversity in tactics from pacifistic, to outwardly offensive, to outright militancy.

You can argue the efficiency of each tactic at certain times and to what level they’d be appropriate.

But notion the civil rights movement was MLK and all he did was walk around saying that one line, from that one speech has given a distortion and infantile view of political activism for so many liberals, and leftists and a cudgel for the right for why this particular progressive movement in contrast to the earlier ones is so terrible it needs to be stamped out quickly.

 

 

The vast majority of Americans at the time were even opposed to MLK’s walks, too. 
 

https://news.gallup.com/vault/246167/protests-seen-harming-civil-rights-movement-60s.aspx

It’s always been the same, lip service to the cause, opposition to anything that furthers the cause that in any way affects them or makes them uncomfortable when they’d rather be comfortable. Kaepernick vilified and black balled for doing something so awful that he’d been doing it on national television for several weeks before anyone even noticed, Ali most hated person in America, etc. ‘I fully support the right to protest…it’s part of what makes America so free…but not like that, that’s not the time, place, or way.’ should be a bumper sticker. 

There’s discussion here about whether or not America is moving left or right, and my own opinion is that Americans do not generally recognize how far to the right their center is to begin with, which partially explains all the confusion about which way it’s moving. The US could move steadily to the left for decades and still be very far to the right of the majority of its peers. (Remember they are not static either.)
 

Which may be a generally accurate summary of what has been happening, btw, though in this case ‘steadily’ would be better expressed as generally, as it’s in fits and starts with plenty of walking back under guises like ‘family values’ and ‘enough is enough, they go too far.’ Conservatives always think anything actually being done beyond platitudes is too far too fast. That’s kinda what defines conservatism. 

Edited July 7, 2023 by James Arryn

[TrackerNeil]

1 hour ago, Larry of the Lake said:

Joe Biden

I note that the White House web site contains a statement supportive of trans women in women's sports, a position with which most Americans disagree. So Uncle Joe doesn't seem to me very centrist on that issue. Then again, he opposed Defund the Police, which put him with the majority of Americans, including black ones, so I guess that is centrist?

The point I'm (slowly) making is that I'm not sure centrism is a real thing, meaning that I doubt there are very many people, in politics or outside of it, who consciously stake out positions equidistant from the extremes of the moment. I think it's what a leftie calls a Democrat who disagrees on one issue or another--I've seen this in progressive spaces more times than I can count. So the term "centrist" really doesn't tell me much about what position a person actually advocates.

 

[Week]

13 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Would you take Mitt Romney, Joe Manchin, Hochul?

Angus King, Sinema ...

I'd describe as socially liberal with conservative economics and politics.

(Sometimes)saying the 'right' things while not being willing to change the status quo. I.e., not removing the debt ceiling, not adding to/packing the court, putting some actual teeth in the DoJ instead of Merrick, etc.

[DanteGabriel]

Strangely, I hear "centrist" most often from (white male) right wingers to describe themselves. They don't believe in parties, just in good sense policies. Then it'll come out in further discussion that they've never voted for a Democrat, they think women make too much fuss about abortion access, and that minorities should quiet down and recognize how good they have it.

[JGP]

Feels like Centrist's become more of a dirty label for those more willing to accommodate political compromise. Or so it seemed in the Leftie circles I followed before I deactivated my Twitter.