Jump to content

Lefty Internal Politics: How to Talk About This Stuff?


Recommended Posts

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.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

“Pride month is thankfully coming to an end.” Literally in the first three seconds of the video.

Proceeds to claim this particular month being unique due to the accusations of queer people grooming children(which every year gets), outrage at kink(which every year gets), and people identifying as non-humans(which may be dumb but has always happened to an infinitesimal degree).


the first example of “kink”  she’s chosen to give for outrage was just one man twerking where kids can see him.

The man isn’t even exposing his genitals, and it’s just one guy in one parade.

as much reason to get outraged at this then the women who dance as scantily clad at a kid rock concert. But still she infers that the parents who brought their kids to pride should be taken away for this.

 

Second one does show naked guys riding bikes.
The legality of Public nudity warrants discussion and not every instance of it is same level of sexual aggression as say a flasher at the park.

Cites Blair white(one of the GOOD trans people) who considers herself a man whose praised John Doyle, a man who self-identifies as an authoritarian, for his politeness during a discussion with her where he advocated for sodomy laws.

White did get demonized for showing some instances of nudity at pride on YouTube and says it bolsters her claim of pride not being for kids. Ever.

This is all less than five minutes in the video.

Now Having watched it completely it is in part an example of an obvious bigot trying to get the target of their bigotry to do their work for them by an allusion that it’ll eventually make them—the bigots—more receptive to at least some of the groups goals.


It’s an age old tactic that does unfortunately work to some extent. Himmler did enlist the National association of German Jews to push back against anti-nazi activists during some of their rallies and some “moderate” pleaded with the Jewish community to expunge the radical Jews they say we’re trying to destroy society, segregationists in the early 1900s trotted out elderly black people who were more servile as an example for younger black folk who wanted to upend the caste system they lived under. 
 

“If we act hysterical in response to any instance of a kid being near anything queer, and say it’s the worst thing ever then the people who say queer people are a threat to children(and really the public at large) aren’t so bad. We should also hyperventilate over the few edge cases that conform to at least some extent to the paranoia of the bigots(a gay couple abusing a child in their custody or care let’s say murders or sexually abuses the,) to show we are in fact reasonable.”

”If we act hysterical in response to any instance of a aryan boy being near anything kosher, say it’s the worst thing ever than the people who say Jewish people are a threat to children(and really the public at large) the people who say Jews are a threat to children(and civilization) aren’t so bad, doubly so if hyperventilate over the few anecdotes (real or imaginary) that fit their worst possible fears(Jewish perso  abuses kid, defrauds proud working German family rendering them destitute, etc etc).
 

 Though having said all that I have to enquire what your point was in posting the video?

Looking at what has gotten your approval on this thread I’m inclined to think it’s because you thought this obvious reactionary was speaking sense and/or at least progressives should listen to her advice moving forward on the method of their political advocacy. if you’re not of similar political stripe of this person I struggle to see a good reason for you to tell anyone to listen to her. 

Yeah it seems a reoccurring them throughout the video—her pulling comments from gay commentators to give credence to her theme of Pride going too far that the consensus  good old fashioned queer people(those queers you liked) are sick of it.


I usually do so hate it when people invoke their identity to bolster their political rhetoric.

Especially when they’re the type to(rightfully) recognize and talk about   how fucking stupid it is. 
 

How to talk about this stuff (in the topic heading). Did the guy twerking help, the naked guys on bikes, the pole dancing and stripper walk in a library, 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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Varysblackfyre321

1968 is generally considered the end of the era civil rights movement, with the assassination of Dr. King and passage of the Civil Rights/Fair Housing Act that year. Actions taking place in 1969 are in a new and different phase. Jacquelyn Dowd Hall has put forward an argument that the civil rights movement was one just one phase of the "Long Civil Rights Movement", which she says starts in the 1930s and extends it to the present day, but it's still a distinct era.

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, and none of the successes of the movement can be put down to organized violence (despite the romanticism around the Black Panthers, they had no legislative impact and only limited  positivecommunity impact [which is a shame, because the educational and health initiatives they put forward were good but got dragged down by the militant wing of the organization]).

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. 

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
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 by Ran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
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 by Varysblackfyre321
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
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 by James Arryn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...