Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
Before the 2000, I would have agreed. But global warming is not just something we can ignore anymore. It will have repercussion beyond what people expected 100 years ago. The situation demands urgency now.
Global warming is sadly factual and will be accelerated by the rise of AI. The geopolitical situation, if that happens will be apocalyptic. The same way we knew about Trump, we can already predict the consequences of capitalism and the rise of fascism within this framework.
I understand but what are we supposed to do if we see something unethical being said ?
Dismissing sadly doesn't work. People keep saying f-up shit and they won't understand why. But you are right in the sense that we should adjust the shot in function of people.
No no don't worry, I'm speaking in the general sense as in as the globality of my political ennemies see me.
OK so I need to share something a little bit shamefull : My memory is shit
We might have discussed something about capitalism yesterday, I probably already forgot. Remembering on internet takes too much from me, I just can't. It's already hardcore for me to remember names (on the nakama thread, I remembered so little that I had conversations with 20 people at once while I was interacting like I was talking to 2 or 3.... which is why people started to hate my guts lmao)
This is why I reply sentences by sentence to avoid forgetting stuff
I generalize a lot because I can't remember the views of everyone. (this can create the sense that there are two many contradictors so I'm tring to be careful with that)
I think I remember.
Exactly
Well nevermind:
Sorry but this is really hypocritical so I'll be a little bit spicy :
With your thinking process we never change anything mate. Because indeed, there are always cases and exceptions.
But what you do not understand, (probably by Interest perhaps?) is that your case is a fallacious one. In reality, we are the one asking that kind of things. We are the ones who are suffering NOW (either because of the police, either because of medical institutions, either because of racism, there are hundreds of reasons)
And it is people like you, who decided that the horrors of this system were not bad enough for themselves to get angry, who think they know everything because they read marx 3 times to debunk it perfectly in front of the first dumb radical leftist they would find and because they have eaten all the history books on the planet... it is people like you that are staying IN OUR WAY to prevent us from changing stuff that actually would help people RIGHT NOW
So your thinking process: "but how about those who would be affected now", in the fear of the unknown that you never cared to understand more deeply that the theory books, is actually the fear of moving the status co and a way to defend the institutions that are actually harming and killing people right now.
Because the people who are suffering RIGHT NOW are the people who are asking for the end of capitalism RIGHT NOW.
This is why I've been angry with you since the moment I've stepped foot on that forum Van.
> You know stuff. GOOD.
> But you decided that the system was not bad enough.
> You decided to ignore the reality of the condition of existences of all the marginalized or perhaps decided that their suffering was also not bad enough
> And you decided to play the game of the system.
I was still a liberal at the time and I could already see right through your vision through your words because it leaks through your behavior here. You know, but you don't care enough.
And if you think you care, then it means that you don't know enough.
Because anyone who understands everything about the materiality of the reality of the marginalized and who actually would care deeply, would be unraged right now and, listening to the world of scholars would actually listen and call for an immediate revolution.
"but you are not taking into account that people can think differntly".
NO I DON'T CARE.
It's not a question of opinion, it's a question of survival. There have been THOUSANDS OF THOUSANDS of Scholars and researchers but also activists and concerned people who worked on those subjects and ALL OF THEM are pointing toward one simple conclusion:
We must end capitalism right now, because people are suffering RIGHT NOW.
You fear communism? Fine, be an anarchist.
You don't trust anarchism? Fine, be a communist.
You are not sure? Fine, just learn about marxism and intersectionnality
We will deal with the details LATER. We first need to do the minimum to start the end of capitalism. THEN we will think about the best way to end it completely among all these options.
On this forum, this means understanding why you should listen when I tell you that it is a problem to let far rightist just develop their rethoric while fascists are destroying the world. If they want to speak, no problem, but there must be more solid rules on things regarding racism, sexism, transphobia, genocides etc.
I don't care about your fear of the unknown or the fact that you think that it is too radical. The planet and fascist are about to cook us alive. We need to move now. In all spaces. This means tackling what we know are major problems. And if adjustment are needed, we can do that.
As you can see, it is not me who focuses on the end point. It is you. I don't care about the end point right now. I'm telling you exactly to do what you sent me : Act for people who can suffer NOW.
There is no "most of the world". So explain yourself better. The world is not collectivist.
I don't.
Global warming is sadly factual and will be accelerated by the rise of AI. The geopolitical situation, if that happens will be apocalyptic. The same way we knew about Trump, we can already predict the consequences of capitalism and the rise of fascism within this framework.
I understand but what are we supposed to do if we see something unethical being said ?
Dismissing sadly doesn't work. People keep saying f-up shit and they won't understand why. But you are right in the sense that we should adjust the shot in function of people.
No no don't worry, I'm speaking in the general sense as in as the globality of my political ennemies see me.
OK so I need to share something a little bit shamefull : My memory is shit
We might have discussed something about capitalism yesterday, I probably already forgot. Remembering on internet takes too much from me, I just can't. It's already hardcore for me to remember names (on the nakama thread, I remembered so little that I had conversations with 20 people at once while I was interacting like I was talking to 2 or 3.... which is why people started to hate my guts lmao)
This is why I reply sentences by sentence to avoid forgetting stuff
I generalize a lot because I can't remember the views of everyone. (this can create the sense that there are two many contradictors so I'm tring to be careful with that)
I think I remember.
Exactly
Well nevermind:
Sorry but this is really hypocritical so I'll be a little bit spicy :
With your thinking process we never change anything mate. Because indeed, there are always cases and exceptions.
But what you do not understand, (probably by Interest perhaps?) is that your case is a fallacious one. In reality, we are the one asking that kind of things. We are the ones who are suffering NOW (either because of the police, either because of medical institutions, either because of racism, there are hundreds of reasons)
And it is people like you, who decided that the horrors of this system were not bad enough for themselves to get angry, who think they know everything because they read marx 3 times to debunk it perfectly in front of the first dumb radical leftist they would find and because they have eaten all the history books on the planet... it is people like you that are staying IN OUR WAY to prevent us from changing stuff that actually would help people RIGHT NOW
So your thinking process: "but how about those who would be affected now", in the fear of the unknown that you never cared to understand more deeply that the theory books, is actually the fear of moving the status co and a way to defend the institutions that are actually harming and killing people right now.
Because the people who are suffering RIGHT NOW are the people who are asking for the end of capitalism RIGHT NOW.
This is why I've been angry with you since the moment I've stepped foot on that forum Van.
> You know stuff. GOOD.
> But you decided that the system was not bad enough.
> You decided to ignore the reality of the condition of existences of all the marginalized or perhaps decided that their suffering was also not bad enough
> And you decided to play the game of the system.
I was still a liberal at the time and I could already see right through your vision through your words because it leaks through your behavior here. You know, but you don't care enough.
And if you think you care, then it means that you don't know enough.
Because anyone who understands everything about the materiality of the reality of the marginalized and who actually would care deeply, would be unraged right now and, listening to the world of scholars would actually listen and call for an immediate revolution.
"but you are not taking into account that people can think differntly".
NO I DON'T CARE.
It's not a question of opinion, it's a question of survival. There have been THOUSANDS OF THOUSANDS of Scholars and researchers but also activists and concerned people who worked on those subjects and ALL OF THEM are pointing toward one simple conclusion:
We must end capitalism right now, because people are suffering RIGHT NOW.
You fear communism? Fine, be an anarchist.
You don't trust anarchism? Fine, be a communist.
You are not sure? Fine, just learn about marxism and intersectionnality
We will deal with the details LATER. We first need to do the minimum to start the end of capitalism. THEN we will think about the best way to end it completely among all these options.
On this forum, this means understanding why you should listen when I tell you that it is a problem to let far rightist just develop their rethoric while fascists are destroying the world. If they want to speak, no problem, but there must be more solid rules on things regarding racism, sexism, transphobia, genocides etc.
I don't care about your fear of the unknown or the fact that you think that it is too radical. The planet and fascist are about to cook us alive. We need to move now. In all spaces. This means tackling what we know are major problems. And if adjustment are needed, we can do that.
As you can see, it is not me who focuses on the end point. It is you. I don't care about the end point right now. I'm telling you exactly to do what you sent me : Act for people who can suffer NOW.
There is no "most of the world". So explain yourself better. The world is not collectivist.
Bro, we all have you on ignore. 
Based on your materialist world view, how could you say that me sharing my experiences, even if they clash with your perceived notions of 'right', are somehow unethical?
I have never advocated for outright cruel ends...
Christ. Never mind. Let's refrain from this particular part of the topic. I fear you may spark my annoyance.
I'm obviously being sarcastic. I literally responded to him, so how could I be ignoring him - hence it wouldn't have been everyone.
Aight fella, this is where you take a chill for a hot second. The issue is a lack of patience, and this time it is on your end. Think of achieving fundamental change as a gradual process with many steps. At each step you need to approach things in a slightly different manner.
Your words are effectively 'let's skip to the end, regardless of the collateral damage'. You want your ultimate end now, regardless of the cost. Unfortunately, the first, second, and third order consequences of not following the correct process of change could potentially cause millions of unnecessary deaths.
He has explicitly demonstrated care for those who would be left behind by your accelerationist mindset.
I have never advocated for outright cruel ends...
Christ. Never mind. Let's refrain from this particular part of the topic. I fear you may spark my annoyance.
I'm obviously being sarcastic. I literally responded to him, so how could I be ignoring him - hence it wouldn't have been everyone.
Aight fella, this is where you take a chill for a hot second. The issue is a lack of patience, and this time it is on your end. Think of achieving fundamental change as a gradual process with many steps. At each step you need to approach things in a slightly different manner.
Your words are effectively 'let's skip to the end, regardless of the collateral damage'. You want your ultimate end now, regardless of the cost. Unfortunately, the first, second, and third order consequences of not following the correct process of change could potentially cause millions of unnecessary deaths.
He has explicitly demonstrated care for those who would be left behind by your accelerationist mindset.
You said it yourself, words have an effect. It works both ways. Some words, even if not directed at one person can destroy someone. And even if it does not, it can destroy the fabric of the tolerance of the entire system and its moderation (in this case), meaning that a rethoric can indirectly put people in danger by simply existing and by increasing the level of potential oppression of a system.
Ethics are about trying to find a way toward the happyness of the collective. If the collective let unethical rethorics spread, it stops being an ethical collective., We can't really only think individually.
I'm overthinking it a bit on purpose to make a point. This space can be a very good source of politicization.
I don't remember what you said. I couldn't tell you right now. I can only trust the way I judged the situation back then. Perhaps I was too zealous, it's very possible.
Don't worry, it was not an attack lol
There is no chilling possible sadly. It's a question of survival for all.
Now, there is a few things to deconstruct here:
What does "accelerationism" means to you?
A lot of people care. But caring alone, is not enough. Caring without looking at the reality of those who are in danger is useless. I also cared when I was a thinking that people should get a permit to make families. Yet, my care was shallow. I'm not saying that Van is doing that, I'm trying to demonstrate that caring takes us so far.
If we can understand the reality of people who are in danger, then caring stops becoming a charity and starts to become a movement of change.
At what point does patience should stop being an excuse to take things to the next level ? 100 deaths? 1000 death ? 10000 death ?
Patience is the weapon of those who can wait.
Millions if not billions of people can't wait. They don't have this luxury. So what should we do? Tell them "bite your tongue we are coming in X years"? or should we rather try to find a way to transform society collectively right now?
You might be thinking that I'm advocating for a complete immediate revolution. But very few actually do, I'm not advocating for that. I know that a revolution of this caliber is probably the best way for all activists to end themselves quickly.
What I'm advocating is for the organisation of society toward that change. This is what people like Van refuse or question.
Abolishing the police is not a revolutionnary act, it's an exemple of a measure toward change. The problem of Van is that is seems to think that abolishing the police is an end goal.
The end goal is a stateless and classless society. The police will be abolished LONG BEFORE that. It's not a "BIG" measure, it's a necessary one in the current age and can be balanced by other measure such as the creation of teams of professionnal intervention, better fundings to social services... etc
And it can be done in steps of course, we can start by defounding it for starters. The problem is that even this type of measure are already too much for liberals, and in the meantimes, people are dying by the violence.
The police is an example out of a hundred.
The cost are already here sadly. It's people dying. Removing the problems would cost less to the collective than people dying. It as simple as that.
Another thing to take into account is that there is no "correct process of change". Capitalism and liberalism led us to believe that progress must be slow, steady, one step at a time, without too much noise, without too much violence.
But what people forget overtime is that the reason why they can vote, why the women can work, why people have access to healthcare, why people can go on strike... is because people fought with strenght and often violence for their rights.
Understanding materialism and leftism means understanding that the power under capitalism will NEVER give willingly and will take EVERYTHING BACK at the first occasion. Do you think your current rights are set in stones? Wait for the next war. You will see everything disappear.
Social rights are a struggle. The power only understands power. It doesn't give unless it has to.
Progress is not a straight line. It's not a natural process of the world. It's something people fight for. It doesn't appear magically and does not continue endlessly toward the top. Sometimes we go backward. So when I argue with Van, I argue on this context.
Ethics are about trying to find a way toward the happyness of the collective. If the collective let unethical rethorics spread, it stops being an ethical collective., We can't really only think individually.
I'm overthinking it a bit on purpose to make a point. This space can be a very good source of politicization.
I don't remember what you said. I couldn't tell you right now. I can only trust the way I judged the situation back then. Perhaps I was too zealous, it's very possible.
Don't worry, it was not an attack lol
There is no chilling possible sadly. It's a question of survival for all.
Now, there is a few things to deconstruct here:
What does "accelerationism" means to you?
A lot of people care. But caring alone, is not enough. Caring without looking at the reality of those who are in danger is useless. I also cared when I was a thinking that people should get a permit to make families. Yet, my care was shallow. I'm not saying that Van is doing that, I'm trying to demonstrate that caring takes us so far.
If we can understand the reality of people who are in danger, then caring stops becoming a charity and starts to become a movement of change.
At what point does patience should stop being an excuse to take things to the next level ? 100 deaths? 1000 death ? 10000 death ?
Patience is the weapon of those who can wait.
Millions if not billions of people can't wait. They don't have this luxury. So what should we do? Tell them "bite your tongue we are coming in X years"? or should we rather try to find a way to transform society collectively right now?
You might be thinking that I'm advocating for a complete immediate revolution. But very few actually do, I'm not advocating for that. I know that a revolution of this caliber is probably the best way for all activists to end themselves quickly.
What I'm advocating is for the organisation of society toward that change. This is what people like Van refuse or question.
Abolishing the police is not a revolutionnary act, it's an exemple of a measure toward change. The problem of Van is that is seems to think that abolishing the police is an end goal.
The end goal is a stateless and classless society. The police will be abolished LONG BEFORE that. It's not a "BIG" measure, it's a necessary one in the current age and can be balanced by other measure such as the creation of teams of professionnal intervention, better fundings to social services... etc
And it can be done in steps of course, we can start by defounding it for starters. The problem is that even this type of measure are already too much for liberals, and in the meantimes, people are dying by the violence.
The police is an example out of a hundred.
The cost are already here sadly. It's people dying. Removing the problems would cost less to the collective than people dying. It as simple as that.
Another thing to take into account is that there is no "correct process of change". Capitalism and liberalism led us to believe that progress must be slow, steady, one step at a time, without too much noise, without too much violence.
But what people forget overtime is that the reason why they can vote, why the women can work, why people have access to healthcare, why people can go on strike... is because people fought with strenght and often violence for their rights.
Understanding materialism and leftism means understanding that the power under capitalism will NEVER give willingly and will take EVERYTHING BACK at the first occasion. Do you think your current rights are set in stones? Wait for the next war. You will see everything disappear.
Social rights are a struggle. The power only understands power. It doesn't give unless it has to.
Progress is not a straight line. It's not a natural process of the world. It's something people fight for. It doesn't appear magically and does not continue endlessly toward the top. Sometimes we go backward. So when I argue with Van, I argue on this context.
Before the 2000, I would have agreed. But global warming is not just something we can ignore anymore. It will have repercussion beyond what people expected 100 years ago. The situation demands urgency now.
Global warming is sadly factual and will be accelerated by the rise of AI. The geopolitical situation, if that happens will be apocalyptic. The same way we knew about Trump, we can already predict the consequences of capitalism and the rise of fascism within this framework.
I understand but what are we supposed to do if we see something unethical being said ?
Dismissing sadly doesn't work. People keep saying f-up shit and they won't understand why. But you are right in the sense that we should adjust the shot in function of people.
No no don't worry, I'm speaking in the general sense as in as the globality of my political ennemies see me.
OK so I need to share something a little bit shamefull : My memory is shit
We might have discussed something about capitalism yesterday, I probably already forgot. Remembering on internet takes too much from me, I just can't. It's already hardcore for me to remember names (on the nakama thread, I remembered so little that I had conversations with 20 people at once while I was interacting like I was talking to 2 or 3.... which is why people started to hate my guts lmao)
This is why I reply sentences by sentence to avoid forgetting stuff
I generalize a lot because I can't remember the views of everyone. (this can create the sense that there are two many contradictors so I'm tring to be careful with that)
I think I remember.
Exactly
Well nevermind:
Sorry but this is really hypocritical so I'll be a little bit spicy :
With your thinking process we never change anything mate. Because indeed, there are always cases and exceptions.
But what you do not understand, (probably by Interest perhaps?) is that your case is a fallacious one. In reality, we are the one asking that kind of things. We are the ones who are suffering NOW (either because of the police, either because of medical institutions, either because of racism, there are hundreds of reasons)
And it is people like you, who decided that the horrors of this system were not bad enough for themselves to get angry, who think they know everything because they read marx 3 times to debunk it perfectly in front of the first dumb radical leftist they would find and because they have eaten all the history books on the planet... it is people like you that are staying IN OUR WAY to prevent us from changing stuff that actually would help people RIGHT NOW
So your thinking process: "but how about those who would be affected now", in the fear of the unknown that you never cared to understand more deeply that the theory books, is actually the fear of moving the status co and a way to defend the institutions that are actually harming and killing people right now.
Because the people who are suffering RIGHT NOW are the people who are asking for the end of capitalism RIGHT NOW.
This is why I've been angry with you since the moment I've stepped foot on that forum Van.
> You know stuff. GOOD.
> But you decided that the system was not bad enough.
> You decided to ignore the reality of the condition of existences of all the marginalized or perhaps decided that their suffering was also not bad enough
> And you decided to play the game of the system.
I was still a liberal at the time and I could already see right through your vision through your words because it leaks through your behavior here. You know, but you don't care enough.
And if you think you care, then it means that you don't know enough.
Because anyone who understands everything about the materiality of the reality of the marginalized and who actually would care deeply, would be unraged right now and, listening to the world of scholars would actually listen and call for an immediate revolution.
"but you are not taking into account that people can think differntly".
NO I DON'T CARE.
It's not a question of opinion, it's a question of survival. There have been THOUSANDS OF THOUSANDS of Scholars and researchers but also activists and concerned people who worked on those subjects and ALL OF THEM are pointing toward one simple conclusion:
We must end capitalism right now, because people are suffering RIGHT NOW.
You fear communism? Fine, be an anarchist.
You don't trust anarchism? Fine, be a communist.
You are not sure? Fine, just learn about marxism and intersectionnality
We will deal with the details LATER. We first need to do the minimum to start the end of capitalism. THEN we will think about the best way to end it completely among all these options.
On this forum, this means understanding why you should listen when I tell you that it is a problem to let far rightist just develop their rethoric while fascists are destroying the world. If they want to speak, no problem, but there must be more solid rules on things regarding racism, sexism, transphobia, genocides etc.
I don't care about your fear of the unknown or the fact that you think that it is too radical. The planet and fascist are about to cook us alive. We need to move now. In all spaces. This means tackling what we know are major problems. And if adjustment are needed, we can do that.
As you can see, it is not me who focuses on the end point. It is you. I don't care about the end point right now. I'm telling you exactly to do what you sent me : Act for people who can suffer NOW.
There is no "most of the world". So explain yourself better. The world is not collectivist.
I don't.
Global warming is sadly factual and will be accelerated by the rise of AI. The geopolitical situation, if that happens will be apocalyptic. The same way we knew about Trump, we can already predict the consequences of capitalism and the rise of fascism within this framework.
I understand but what are we supposed to do if we see something unethical being said ?
Dismissing sadly doesn't work. People keep saying f-up shit and they won't understand why. But you are right in the sense that we should adjust the shot in function of people.
No no don't worry, I'm speaking in the general sense as in as the globality of my political ennemies see me.
OK so I need to share something a little bit shamefull : My memory is shit
We might have discussed something about capitalism yesterday, I probably already forgot. Remembering on internet takes too much from me, I just can't. It's already hardcore for me to remember names (on the nakama thread, I remembered so little that I had conversations with 20 people at once while I was interacting like I was talking to 2 or 3.... which is why people started to hate my guts lmao)
This is why I reply sentences by sentence to avoid forgetting stuff
I generalize a lot because I can't remember the views of everyone. (this can create the sense that there are two many contradictors so I'm tring to be careful with that)
I think I remember.
Exactly
Well nevermind:
Sorry but this is really hypocritical so I'll be a little bit spicy :
With your thinking process we never change anything mate. Because indeed, there are always cases and exceptions.
But what you do not understand, (probably by Interest perhaps?) is that your case is a fallacious one. In reality, we are the one asking that kind of things. We are the ones who are suffering NOW (either because of the police, either because of medical institutions, either because of racism, there are hundreds of reasons)
And it is people like you, who decided that the horrors of this system were not bad enough for themselves to get angry, who think they know everything because they read marx 3 times to debunk it perfectly in front of the first dumb radical leftist they would find and because they have eaten all the history books on the planet... it is people like you that are staying IN OUR WAY to prevent us from changing stuff that actually would help people RIGHT NOW
So your thinking process: "but how about those who would be affected now", in the fear of the unknown that you never cared to understand more deeply that the theory books, is actually the fear of moving the status co and a way to defend the institutions that are actually harming and killing people right now.
Because the people who are suffering RIGHT NOW are the people who are asking for the end of capitalism RIGHT NOW.
This is why I've been angry with you since the moment I've stepped foot on that forum Van.
> You know stuff. GOOD.
> But you decided that the system was not bad enough.
> You decided to ignore the reality of the condition of existences of all the marginalized or perhaps decided that their suffering was also not bad enough
> And you decided to play the game of the system.
I was still a liberal at the time and I could already see right through your vision through your words because it leaks through your behavior here. You know, but you don't care enough.
And if you think you care, then it means that you don't know enough.
Because anyone who understands everything about the materiality of the reality of the marginalized and who actually would care deeply, would be unraged right now and, listening to the world of scholars would actually listen and call for an immediate revolution.
"but you are not taking into account that people can think differntly".
NO I DON'T CARE.
It's not a question of opinion, it's a question of survival. There have been THOUSANDS OF THOUSANDS of Scholars and researchers but also activists and concerned people who worked on those subjects and ALL OF THEM are pointing toward one simple conclusion:
We must end capitalism right now, because people are suffering RIGHT NOW.
You fear communism? Fine, be an anarchist.
You don't trust anarchism? Fine, be a communist.
You are not sure? Fine, just learn about marxism and intersectionnality
We will deal with the details LATER. We first need to do the minimum to start the end of capitalism. THEN we will think about the best way to end it completely among all these options.
On this forum, this means understanding why you should listen when I tell you that it is a problem to let far rightist just develop their rethoric while fascists are destroying the world. If they want to speak, no problem, but there must be more solid rules on things regarding racism, sexism, transphobia, genocides etc.
I don't care about your fear of the unknown or the fact that you think that it is too radical. The planet and fascist are about to cook us alive. We need to move now. In all spaces. This means tackling what we know are major problems. And if adjustment are needed, we can do that.
As you can see, it is not me who focuses on the end point. It is you. I don't care about the end point right now. I'm telling you exactly to do what you sent me : Act for people who can suffer NOW.
There is no "most of the world". So explain yourself better. The world is not collectivist.
I don't.
If someone can't live without making medicine, then that medicine is objectively mandatory if they wanna live. It does not in any way suggest any fear or caution about changing the system so that the medicine becomes obsolete. You are simply jumping the gun and making assumptions again for the sake of your argument. What I typed doesn't say or imply that things must remain the way they are or that change isn't worth the risks.
Well you will excuse me the grammar. I didn't make any effort this time, it's 5 am. But you should understand, it's a simple matter of communication.
I did follow, I simply pointed out your hypocrisy and your fallacious argumentation. It pains me everytimes because you could be such a great ally and I know that you are smart as heck. You just have big preconception of leftism.
You are implying that my version of system change would imply a risk of suffering of people benefiting from the system on the argument that a change would be timely and they would need said benefit "right now".
There are two problems with this:
- First, your argumentation talks about something that people would need when we were actually talking about the abolition of the police. Which people do not need. And i'm sorry if that rubs you the wrong way, but most of what the police can do can be done by teams of professionnal of different sectors in a more pacific way.
---------------------
- Secondly, you are exagerating the potential risk in comparison to the actual present consequences of capitalism. Especially when we take into account the fact that people who are reflecting upon these transitions are more knowledgable and materialistically "educated" than all of us here combined.
And we risk less to create a shift now than to keep making capitalism flourish for 100 more years.
---------------------
- Thirdly what you do not take into consideration is that a lot of people who ask or try to create the most radical changes are the ones who are the most in need of the benefits of the system.
A lot of people are studients.. but the most radical, the most vocal and revolutionnary (in REAL life) are usually the ones who are the most marginalized by society. This is a logical result of the structure of capitalism and the orbiting dominations. The more society will push you at the bottom, the more you might try to fight back to survive. And usually all that is needed to create a revolutionnary is a spark of curiosity.
These people can be migrants or coming from subjugated colonies, usually racialized, often LGBTQI+, often intersex, often trans and often rejected by their families. These people are also often homeless, living with others or with the help of associations. Often sick too, often disabled. Most of them are in a form of precarity, some can live and help others, but the times are hard. Mental struggles, psychiatrized people, desocialization. People full of traumas, often internalized in institutions, often violented by said institutions. Often violented by most of their social circle. Most if not all of the women were abused, some raped, in childhood or in their adult years. Most of them were violented by the institutions of justice or the police. A lot of muslim too, always racialized and suffering from racism daily. Among them some lgbtqi+ too, rejected, laughed at, constantly doxxed. Perhaps I should speak also about the families of people in Gaza, the LGBTQI+ in sudan, the anti-imperialist of the colonies of France or other western countries, most of them communist or at the very least anti-imperialist. SHould I mention the sex workers, activists who have to face the attacks of the far right daily ? Should I mention palestinian activist who are targeted by the police and by far right association for apology of terrorism, trial that they can't tank because they are just random activist. All to push them into silence. Should I talk about the mads, people, usually anarchist, who are targeted because they don't fit the sanist narrative of the good sane activist and are doxes by the left and the right because they express how their skyzophrenic or psychosis mind function or when they are rejected by associations because we make them scared ? What about the working class ? People who can't work and can barely live ? People who find ways to teach others about politics despite their exploitation? Should I talk about the forgotten ? The few actual children made orphan by the system, put in institution without their consent and mistreated ? Little guyz and girl that know more about marxism or politics and institutions that I will ever learned about?
There are thousands of stories and these are only the one I can see from my recluded point of view.
People don't wake up one day and decide that a radical change is needed only because their mommy and daddy were an old timer communists in the old communist party of their region. They decide that a change is needed because they are ALL deeply impacted by the horrors of capitalism but WORST, they have brothers, sisters and peers that suffer the same, sometimes at the interactions of multiple dominations.
Sometimes people don't even have the time to be activist, they are found dead on the floor of their appartment with razor blade and pills all around them. Most of the time, we want to die because it's too hard to see all these horrors. So it is the priviledge and the duty of those who can speak or fight or learn, to speak or fight or learn and build the way for a radical transformation of society.
Like I told you, these people are survivors, from racism, from psychiatry, from patriarchy, from capitalism itself. They are not becoming radical angry leftists because it looks fun on a resume. This is not a game or friendly show.
These are the people who ask for the change, these are the people who need medecine, public services, help, the MOST. These are the people you don't hear the voice of.
People who need the benefit of the system are the one who need the system to change the most because the system is constructed in order to give them the minimum if not prevent them from accessing to these benefits structurally !
"Right now, not tomorrow". THESE are the people at risk from a revolutionnary change and trust me, they are not afraid of the transition.
---------------------
Like I said, you are scared about the immediate consequence for people, but you turn your eyes away from the urgency of the situations of actual people in suffering because you believe that what they ask is "too risky".
Is it "too risky" to ask people like you on forum to completely stop far-rightist from spreading their rethorics ? Is it too risky to systematically try to immediatly stop any person who would have a transphobic, sanist, eugenist, sexist or racist rethoric that you might not consider danrerous when we tell you that people could feel unsafe here by the sight of said rethorics ?
Is it too risky or do you consider that small action do not count? That it is not "real activism"?
So if small actions are not real activism, if violent actions are not real activism either, and if trying to make radical change is too risky.....
What the heck is "real activism" for you my dear real life moderator ?
I did follow, I simply pointed out your hypocrisy and your fallacious argumentation. It pains me everytimes because you could be such a great ally and I know that you are smart as heck. You just have big preconception of leftism.
You are implying that my version of system change would imply a risk of suffering of people benefiting from the system on the argument that a change would be timely and they would need said benefit "right now".
There are two problems with this:
- First, your argumentation talks about something that people would need when we were actually talking about the abolition of the police. Which people do not need. And i'm sorry if that rubs you the wrong way, but most of what the police can do can be done by teams of professionnal of different sectors in a more pacific way.
---------------------
- Secondly, you are exagerating the potential risk in comparison to the actual present consequences of capitalism. Especially when we take into account the fact that people who are reflecting upon these transitions are more knowledgable and materialistically "educated" than all of us here combined.
And we risk less to create a shift now than to keep making capitalism flourish for 100 more years.
---------------------
- Thirdly what you do not take into consideration is that a lot of people who ask or try to create the most radical changes are the ones who are the most in need of the benefits of the system.
A lot of people are studients.. but the most radical, the most vocal and revolutionnary (in REAL life) are usually the ones who are the most marginalized by society. This is a logical result of the structure of capitalism and the orbiting dominations. The more society will push you at the bottom, the more you might try to fight back to survive. And usually all that is needed to create a revolutionnary is a spark of curiosity.
These people can be migrants or coming from subjugated colonies, usually racialized, often LGBTQI+, often intersex, often trans and often rejected by their families. These people are also often homeless, living with others or with the help of associations. Often sick too, often disabled. Most of them are in a form of precarity, some can live and help others, but the times are hard. Mental struggles, psychiatrized people, desocialization. People full of traumas, often internalized in institutions, often violented by said institutions. Often violented by most of their social circle. Most if not all of the women were abused, some raped, in childhood or in their adult years. Most of them were violented by the institutions of justice or the police. A lot of muslim too, always racialized and suffering from racism daily. Among them some lgbtqi+ too, rejected, laughed at, constantly doxxed. Perhaps I should speak also about the families of people in Gaza, the LGBTQI+ in sudan, the anti-imperialist of the colonies of France or other western countries, most of them communist or at the very least anti-imperialist. SHould I mention the sex workers, activists who have to face the attacks of the far right daily ? Should I mention palestinian activist who are targeted by the police and by far right association for apology of terrorism, trial that they can't tank because they are just random activist. All to push them into silence. Should I talk about the mads, people, usually anarchist, who are targeted because they don't fit the sanist narrative of the good sane activist and are doxes by the left and the right because they express how their skyzophrenic or psychosis mind function or when they are rejected by associations because we make them scared ? What about the working class ? People who can't work and can barely live ? People who find ways to teach others about politics despite their exploitation? Should I talk about the forgotten ? The few actual children made orphan by the system, put in institution without their consent and mistreated ? Little guyz and girl that know more about marxism or politics and institutions that I will ever learned about?
There are thousands of stories and these are only the one I can see from my recluded point of view.
People don't wake up one day and decide that a radical change is needed only because their mommy and daddy were an old timer communists in the old communist party of their region. They decide that a change is needed because they are ALL deeply impacted by the horrors of capitalism but WORST, they have brothers, sisters and peers that suffer the same, sometimes at the interactions of multiple dominations.
Sometimes people don't even have the time to be activist, they are found dead on the floor of their appartment with razor blade and pills all around them. Most of the time, we want to die because it's too hard to see all these horrors. So it is the priviledge and the duty of those who can speak or fight or learn, to speak or fight or learn and build the way for a radical transformation of society.
Like I told you, these people are survivors, from racism, from psychiatry, from patriarchy, from capitalism itself. They are not becoming radical angry leftists because it looks fun on a resume. This is not a game or friendly show.
These are the people who ask for the change, these are the people who need medecine, public services, help, the MOST. These are the people you don't hear the voice of.
People who need the benefit of the system are the one who need the system to change the most because the system is constructed in order to give them the minimum if not prevent them from accessing to these benefits structurally !
"Right now, not tomorrow". THESE are the people at risk from a revolutionnary change and trust me, they are not afraid of the transition.
---------------------
Like I said, you are scared about the immediate consequence for people, but you turn your eyes away from the urgency of the situations of actual people in suffering because you believe that what they ask is "too risky".
Is it "too risky" to ask people like you on forum to completely stop far-rightist from spreading their rethorics ? Is it too risky to systematically try to immediatly stop any person who would have a transphobic, sanist, eugenist, sexist or racist rethoric that you might not consider danrerous when we tell you that people could feel unsafe here by the sight of said rethorics ?
Is it too risky or do you consider that small action do not count? That it is not "real activism"?
So if small actions are not real activism, if violent actions are not real activism either, and if trying to make radical change is too risky.....
What the heck is "real activism" for you my dear real life moderator ?
The world is collectivist
You Westerners don't understand that, in China for example house ownership is possible because of the "Six Purses" culture
And that culture is only possible if the two families approve of each other, meaning that in China even marriages are political alliances, and old people don't just "live the retired life" like Western Boomers do because of this
We can talk about the many other collectivistic systems found worldwide but the point is that in most of the world, you cannot be too selfish as your social security is your community
If your only definition of Collectivism is the economic one then your arguement is worthless
You Westerners don't understand that, in China for example house ownership is possible because of the "Six Purses" culture
And that culture is only possible if the two families approve of each other, meaning that in China even marriages are political alliances, and old people don't just "live the retired life" like Western Boomers do because of this
We can talk about the many other collectivistic systems found worldwide but the point is that in most of the world, you cannot be too selfish as your social security is your community
If your only definition of Collectivism is the economic one then your arguement is worthless
Accelerationism can exist both on the left and right wing of the political spectrum. It was formerly about utilising ideologies that advocated for the rapid capitalistic growth and technological development to collapse a status quo. Nowadays, I mean to accelerate and promote leftist ideologies to hasten the collapse of the status quo (an acceptable usage of the term).
Essentially, you want to hyper-charge/accelerate leftist policies to get the desired end as fast as possible, regardless of the lives lost along the way in favour of what you believe to be the lives that are being lost now. Maoist China tried the great leap forward, and we all saw how that went (15-55 million deaths).
Gradual change is the only real sustainable change.
Hard disagree. If you abolished the police before creating a society that coexists and self-governs, the entire system would devolve into wanton criminality. Eventually that would become the status quo. People would become more likely to be criminals, since there are experiments that show that under the right conditions, there is only a select portion of the population who won't bend to the current norm and remain within their values/principles (I'll try and find the study, but too tired right now). You could say this even supports your materialistic view of the world (environment influence behaviour), but you could just as easily say that people decide to follow of their own volition due to perceived notions of fairness.
Ultimately, without a stable society that can peacefully coexist, you cannot remove the police. We do not have that right now.
And my words could just as easily save someone from themselves, as they have in the past (I mentioned I've mentored people since then). You're the ascribing morality to people's personal stories, based on your wants for the world. That's all.
Essentially, you want to hyper-charge/accelerate leftist policies to get the desired end as fast as possible, regardless of the lives lost along the way in favour of what you believe to be the lives that are being lost now. Maoist China tried the great leap forward, and we all saw how that went (15-55 million deaths).
Gradual change is the only real sustainable change.
Hard disagree. If you abolished the police before creating a society that coexists and self-governs, the entire system would devolve into wanton criminality. Eventually that would become the status quo. People would become more likely to be criminals, since there are experiments that show that under the right conditions, there is only a select portion of the population who won't bend to the current norm and remain within their values/principles (I'll try and find the study, but too tired right now). You could say this even supports your materialistic view of the world (environment influence behaviour), but you could just as easily say that people decide to follow of their own volition due to perceived notions of fairness.
Ultimately, without a stable society that can peacefully coexist, you cannot remove the police. We do not have that right now.
And my words could just as easily save someone from themselves, as they have in the past (I mentioned I've mentored people since then). You're the ascribing morality to people's personal stories, based on your wants for the world. That's all.
Sorry, but still no. Capitalism is capitalism for a reason maty
You can have examples of collectivism here and there, of course there are and gladly, but they are the exceptions. The world is not collectivist. You can invent whatever you want and list however many collectivistic system you know, you won't erease the fact that capitalism rules the world.
It is your moral panic speak, that reactionnary wall and mindset that twist the world into something that is not. Capitalism is not an experience of thoughts, it's a reality lived by everyone. It's not a question of west or south, everyone EVERYONE lives under the exploitation system that is capitalism.
Now, you can of course argue that we human are collectivist in our core, and you would be right. We are a social spiecy, it's completely true. This doesn't mean that we use that trait for our systems. And this exactly the reason why you need to believe in collectivism.
You are collectivist in your core, this is a reality that we all share. You need it to survive, and yet, you live, like me, in a system of oppression, domination and exploitation that you defend. Make it make sense.
True.
Not really.
Accelerationnism, on the left at least, is the idea that if you let horrible political politics pass so that people will live harsher lives, then they will be more likely to revolt and either vote for a radical candidate OR to create a movement of revolution.
Accelerationnism is what this man did:
It is the strong ideal that people are born to be free and that anyone pushed under the worst condition will get angry.
But while it worked with Andor, it's not always the case. People actually often find reason not to fight and often try to defend the system that are oppressing them in order to survive even tho they are part of a marginalized population that will be the first target of the power in case it goes south. I've seen many case of that here.
My vision is opposed to accelerationnism. It is a vision of impatience and a lack of belief in others. On top of that, it is a vision that doesn't care if people will die or not. In the context of Andor, this vision could be justify to some degree, but not in ours. I know that change can only happen when the marginalized finally get a form of peace and they can rise to teach others.
What you are confusing me with is a revolutionnary. I am indeed one, or rather, I am heading toward becoming one. That is true and that is true that I want the change to happen more rapidely than most people.
But it is not at the risk of the lives of people, on the contrary, it's because the people are at risk the most that we need to create a change now WITH PATIENCE AND ORGANIZATION.
Reformism is the tool of the people who have the priviledges to ignore the actual present suffering of people under the fire of all domination systems.
It is the weapon of those who ignore willingly, it is the weapon of those who relativize the horrors, it is the weapon of those who do not see the full scope of the danger or think they are not bad enough.
I was call a fear monger while warning you about Trump. The reality is now before your eyes. There are thing that people, even with good intention, can't see because they don't have the right perspective. Because they don't live the same dominations.
I don't know enough about China so I won't comment this, especially because there is a massive form of dissinformation concerning this country in the west. But what you do not see are the death of capitalism itself. You are turning a blind eye, probably thinking that it is not that bad.. You see this number ? Multiply it by 10.
I see and I can tell you, it's bad enough.
This is why the police must not be abolished alone. The conditions of crimes must be as well.
The police fixes the consequences of our society. It is mostly doing jobs that can be taken care of by other means. Especially with interventions. Give me all the way the police is indispendable and I will tell you how we can get rid of that.
Do you think the police is necessary for SA ? It's not. In fact it works AGAINST women.
Do you think the police is necessary for drugs ? It's not. In fact there are other ways to deal with drugs than sanctions. People are not addict out of pleasure.
Do you think the police is necessary for crimes ? It's not. Most biggest criminals are never arrested.
Do you think prison are necessary ? THEY ARE NOT. They are various ways to deal with people other than getting rid of them and torturing them in prison. (yes, I'm a prison abolitionner too).
Leftist are not some dumb people who wake up one day thinking .. "wait, should I say that we must abolish the police today?". No.
We are people following documentations, researches, experts, scholars, thinkers, essays, demonstrations, logic.. of people who have worked one this subject for sometimes more than one hundreds years !!
We you get afraid because I speak about something a bit radical, you do not see the entire thinking process behind it. A thinking process that goes beyond anything society has even care to distribute. When you simplify my words based on the most surface level demonstrations, you underestimate the comprehension of all these scholars who sometimes put their lives on the line to distribute such understanding.
Revolutionnaries are not some angry punks without morals who can't think. They are expert thinkers at the understanding of society.
Do not underestimate them. Do not simplify their thinking.
I know it's not easy to accept. I don't mind this rejection, I'm here to push the possibilities. So it's not a jab at you or anyone when I say that you do not understand how necessary it is. I was like you, thinking that it was too radical. But I was blind to the reality of the horrors of the world. The real horrors, the the moral panics shared by mainstream media or far rightists.
I'm here for you if you have questions. I don't mind. But it's important to understand that this thinking process is not something made by people who didn't think or do not have any patience. it's the opposite. These people are the masters of patience.
I disagree but that's another subject.
You can have examples of collectivism here and there, of course there are and gladly, but they are the exceptions. The world is not collectivist. You can invent whatever you want and list however many collectivistic system you know, you won't erease the fact that capitalism rules the world.
It is your moral panic speak, that reactionnary wall and mindset that twist the world into something that is not. Capitalism is not an experience of thoughts, it's a reality lived by everyone. It's not a question of west or south, everyone EVERYONE lives under the exploitation system that is capitalism.
Now, you can of course argue that we human are collectivist in our core, and you would be right. We are a social spiecy, it's completely true. This doesn't mean that we use that trait for our systems. And this exactly the reason why you need to believe in collectivism.
You are collectivist in your core, this is a reality that we all share. You need it to survive, and yet, you live, like me, in a system of oppression, domination and exploitation that you defend. Make it make sense.
True.
Not really.
Accelerationnism, on the left at least, is the idea that if you let horrible political politics pass so that people will live harsher lives, then they will be more likely to revolt and either vote for a radical candidate OR to create a movement of revolution.
Accelerationnism is what this man did:
It is the strong ideal that people are born to be free and that anyone pushed under the worst condition will get angry.
But while it worked with Andor, it's not always the case. People actually often find reason not to fight and often try to defend the system that are oppressing them in order to survive even tho they are part of a marginalized population that will be the first target of the power in case it goes south. I've seen many case of that here.
My vision is opposed to accelerationnism. It is a vision of impatience and a lack of belief in others. On top of that, it is a vision that doesn't care if people will die or not. In the context of Andor, this vision could be justify to some degree, but not in ours. I know that change can only happen when the marginalized finally get a form of peace and they can rise to teach others.
What you are confusing me with is a revolutionnary. I am indeed one, or rather, I am heading toward becoming one. That is true and that is true that I want the change to happen more rapidely than most people.
But it is not at the risk of the lives of people, on the contrary, it's because the people are at risk the most that we need to create a change now WITH PATIENCE AND ORGANIZATION.
Reformism is the tool of the people who have the priviledges to ignore the actual present suffering of people under the fire of all domination systems.
It is the weapon of those who ignore willingly, it is the weapon of those who relativize the horrors, it is the weapon of those who do not see the full scope of the danger or think they are not bad enough.
I was call a fear monger while warning you about Trump. The reality is now before your eyes. There are thing that people, even with good intention, can't see because they don't have the right perspective. Because they don't live the same dominations.
I don't know enough about China so I won't comment this, especially because there is a massive form of dissinformation concerning this country in the west. But what you do not see are the death of capitalism itself. You are turning a blind eye, probably thinking that it is not that bad.. You see this number ? Multiply it by 10.
I see and I can tell you, it's bad enough.
This is why the police must not be abolished alone. The conditions of crimes must be as well.
The police fixes the consequences of our society. It is mostly doing jobs that can be taken care of by other means. Especially with interventions. Give me all the way the police is indispendable and I will tell you how we can get rid of that.
Do you think the police is necessary for SA ? It's not. In fact it works AGAINST women.
Do you think the police is necessary for drugs ? It's not. In fact there are other ways to deal with drugs than sanctions. People are not addict out of pleasure.
Do you think the police is necessary for crimes ? It's not. Most biggest criminals are never arrested.
Do you think prison are necessary ? THEY ARE NOT. They are various ways to deal with people other than getting rid of them and torturing them in prison. (yes, I'm a prison abolitionner too).
Leftist are not some dumb people who wake up one day thinking .. "wait, should I say that we must abolish the police today?". No.
We are people following documentations, researches, experts, scholars, thinkers, essays, demonstrations, logic.. of people who have worked one this subject for sometimes more than one hundreds years !!
We you get afraid because I speak about something a bit radical, you do not see the entire thinking process behind it. A thinking process that goes beyond anything society has even care to distribute. When you simplify my words based on the most surface level demonstrations, you underestimate the comprehension of all these scholars who sometimes put their lives on the line to distribute such understanding.
Revolutionnaries are not some angry punks without morals who can't think. They are expert thinkers at the understanding of society.
Do not underestimate them. Do not simplify their thinking.
I know it's not easy to accept. I don't mind this rejection, I'm here to push the possibilities. So it's not a jab at you or anyone when I say that you do not understand how necessary it is. I was like you, thinking that it was too radical. But I was blind to the reality of the horrors of the world. The real horrors, the the moral panics shared by mainstream media or far rightists.
I'm here for you if you have questions. I don't mind. But it's important to understand that this thinking process is not something made by people who didn't think or do not have any patience. it's the opposite. These people are the masters of patience.
I disagree but that's another subject.
So you live alone I presume ? Did you rejected your entire social spectrum too ? Do you plan to live in a place where you don't have to see human ever again ? And I also presume that you don't feel scared to be alone and seeing nowone all you life then ? That would be surprising, but perhaps you surpassed your own genetic code and social needs ? This is what you are saying, right ? Rejecting what we are (collectivist and social beings) to be more than just animals ?
Or perhaps you think that collectivism has nothing to do with the fact of being social ? Which would be also strange since it precisely a system where our sociality is at the center.
People are really not thinking ahead sometimes..
Or perhaps you think that collectivism has nothing to do with the fact of being social ? Which would be also strange since it precisely a system where our sociality is at the center.
People are really not thinking ahead sometimes..
Only part I fully agree with. Rape gang scandal in the UK resulted in almost no arrests, especially proportionately to the crimes committed. Personally, I don't even advocate for their arrests. Rapists deserve execution after trial determines them guilty.
Meanwhile we have like the most arrests for mean words being said online. Part of the reason why I didn't try to become a police officer - our priorities are completely screwed.
Meanwhile we have like the most arrests for mean words being said online. Part of the reason why I didn't try to become a police officer - our priorities are completely screwed.