#and funny enough this is not against people who actually support the abolition of all colonizer countries in the world

[fortunatelychaoticphantom]

I recently found out that Native People in the American continent have their own name for it, which is Abya Yala.

Anyway, wouldn't it be nice if we started to support their right for self determination and freedom from the oppression of colonial rule? Wouldn't it be nice if we support the complete and immediate abolition of all colonizer countries, which are *checks notes* every single country in the American continent plus the island ones? Wouldn't it be nice if we started telling all the settlers, conquistadors and immigrants to Go Back To Where They Came From? Wouldn't it be nice if we started chanting in the streets and online for the cleansing of the continent from all non-Native people? Wait, that sounds kind of extreme, doesn't it? But what if it rhymed? Everyone knows that if it rhymes it's true and justified right? So maybe the American continent should be free, you know, maybe from shore to shore... no, no. From sea to sea, that's it! What a great cause! And great causes are worth fighting for by all means, right? Obviously, I do not support violence at all, but like wouldn't it be justified if Native People were to become violent in their fight for freedom? I mean, think of the history for a moment, what brought them to this moment? And could you blame them? After all, shouldn't freedom be fought for by all means necessary? Wouldn't you support their claim?

Anyway.

From Sea To Shiny Sea Abya Yala Will Be Free.

#wouldn't it be nice if this becomes a trend #this is a 100% a post against idiotic westerners that call jews colonizers in their ancestral homeland #and funny enough this is not against people who actually support the abolition of all colonizer countries in the world #you people are still antisemitic idiots who know nothing about jews or our history but at least you are consistent which i can respect #but like i also don't see you hopping on the first flight back to where you came from so what's stopping you darlings? #and just to be clear since i support every people's right for self determination including both the palestinians and the jewish people #i would support every single native nation's claim for independence #but unlike you self righteous westerners i actually don't support violence and not just when it's convenient for me #so this is both a joke and a hundred percent serious but like i said obviously sans the violence #i would support negotiations and reparations but never war #and i would never ever support terrorism #so why would you? #jumblr #jewish things #free abya yala #from sea to shiny sea abya yala will be free #abya yala #social issues #politics #us history #american history #history

[papirouge]

Regarding the last post you reblogged (American Christians not caring about Middle Eastern Christians); back when my country of origin finally revolted against the communist government a lot of western protestant churches started sending missionaries to convert people away from Orthodoxy. Not a lot of people wanted to convert so my parents have stories of missionaries offering to only financially support the poor who were willing to convert.

What's mind boggling is that these prots looked at all of the faithful who were persecuted, imprisoned, tortured, killed, sent to labour camps in Siberia purely for being religious and that wasn't enough for them to see us as brothers and sisters in Christ. Not that they could do anything against the communist government but it's funny that they suddenly cared for people's souls when THEY wouldn't have a chance of being persecuted for their beliefs.

"not that they could do anything against the Communist government" but don't Usamerican evangelicals have a pathological hate boner against Communism though? I mean, Communism have a know beef with religion as far as I know. Those protestants had the opportunity to match their action to their beliefs and take stance against communism and help their Christian brothers against Communism anti Christian dictatorship, amirite? 🙃

Anti communists always stroke me as pathological cowards, anyway. Like how can you be so obsessive and scared of some hollow political movement that hasn't been a thing since decades? 💀 This screams persecution complex and paranoia (there's no wonder they love labeling "communism" literally ANYTHING remotely critical of capitalism or liberalism: to make the threat of Communism bigger than what it actually is)

I always said that when God backed up people, they could really change the world. That's how Ghandi or MLK defeated the biggest empire of their generation by their non violent yet radical world changing actions. I genuinely believe God was behind the abolition/civil rights movement. That's what Romans 13 is actually about and that so little Christians conflate with passivity against government evilness (tbh very few people properly understand Romans 13)

Missionary selectively offering financial support has also one of the reasons colonialism worked so well in Africa btw. By offering "privilege" to specific ethnies or group accepting their offer for conversion they bred division and resentment between people. Stupid rightoids/racialist like to act like ethnic wars as the evidence that races aren't meant to mix/migration flux being the devil, but when you have a brain and look more thoughtfully into History you'll notice there are always economic/political reason to ethnic wars. 2 of the most powerful countries of the world are China and Russia and they are both constituted of a variety of ethnicities (because they took the radical political actions to fight against this division - whether people like it or not, Communism greatly helped on that aspect) yet it doesn't stop them to thrive. Don't say that to racialists and race essentialists - but I digress.

American evangelical are 99% of the time full of it, and my tolerance to their antics is becoming lower by the days....

#answered

[alexsaxonexposed]

stormwitchfaerie This is such fucking bullshit. Comedians make fun of everyone and everything because if u take yourself and everything else too seriously this kind of cancelling bs happens. Leave people alone. Alex isnt even doing anything to hurt anyone. This has gotten way out of hand.

Comedians DO NOT GET A FREE FUCKING PASS TO MAKE JOKES ABOUT MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES.

I get it that you don't understand that transphobia isn't just murdering/assaulting trans people.

Do you know what I've been doing here? Helping trans fans, who are hurt by his actions. Because, yes, liking transphobic tweets and following transphobic people hurts his trans fans. Blocking them doesn't help either.

Funny how you ignored everything I said on that post. THIS ISN'T CANCELLING. Do the big letters help? Or can you still not understand it? He had an opportunity to explain himself and instead he blocked people and tried to pretend like it didn't happen

This is from GLAAD. Are you really gonna say that GLAAD is overreacting? Do you understand that even "jokes" against marginalized communities are not actually "jokes" to us?

This is only overreacting to you because you don't actually care about trans people. And since you don't I will say this more clearly. Get the fuck off my page because it clearly isn't for you.

stormwitchfaerie: He's literally doing nothing. These people arent even transphobic. Theyre making fun of the cancelling of people who

Liking tweets and supporting the platforms of awful bigotted people isn't doing nothing. Blocking people when they point out their disappointment in you liking a transphobic tweet and following transphobic people isn't doing doing nothing.

I literally don't know who told you this, but they lied to you. These people are transphobic and have done more than just make fun of cancel culture.

JK Rowling has been known for her transphobic views since before cancel culture was a thing. Also the fact that she's racist, antisemitic, homophobic, etc.

Dr Jordan B Peterson is literally well known as being part of the starting block of the alt-right pipeline. He is not the only person on his follow list that are a part of it. He's made his sexism, fatphobia, and transphobia extremely clear. Also that he's against climate change.

Ben Shapiro says that homosexuality and being transgender is a mental illness and a sin. When Elliot Page came out he referred to it as "pathetic, creepy, and disgusting." He is against same-sex couples adopting children. And so much more. These things are all transphobic and homophobic

Quillette/Claire Lehmann: Putting these two together because Lehmann founded Quillette and she pops up enough in Saxon's likes. Quillette is a magazine founded by Lehmann that was initially focused on science. Transphobic (poses the idea that "transgenderism is dangerous") and also against feminism because "men are the real victims." Someone once sent a fake article and they published it without fact checking. 

Glenn Greenwald: Transphobic: claimed that trans and non-binary people are actually cis lesbians who are being pressured to identify as trans/non-binary. Chelsea Manning, a trans woman, openly spoke out against him and he retaliated by publishing private DMs from her in his replies. Biphobic: categorizes bisexual relationships as "hetero-appearing" and "gay/lesbian-appearing."

Ian Miles Cheong: Transphobic--misgendered trans women, publicly shames non-binary as an identity in doubting its existence (Call of Duty once had an option for Male, Female, and Non-Binary and he publicly called it "historically inaccurate", etc). 

Kara Danksy: Transphobic. Profile is cut off, but I feel it illustrates everything perfectly: Feminist fighting for the sex-based rights of women and girls. Publicly speaking out about the 'gender identity' industry. All tweets my own. Furthermore, she published a book in November of 2021: "The Abolition of Sex: How the 'Transgender' Agenda Harms Women and Girls." The title speaks for itself.

All of these are transphobic actions and not the only ones that they have committed. They probably aren't even the only bigotted actions they've committed. And I'm sure you'll notice that none of these people are comedians. Although I should repeat that even if they were, comedians do not actually get a free-pass to say bigotted things as a joke. Especially when they are not a part of the punchline.

Their actions hurt the trans community. He hurt his trans audience. Instead of spewing bullshit and trying to defend a man that you will never meet and will never actually care about what you say, try listening and seeing why people are upset.

But since you seem incapable of understanding the fact that this type of behavior causes damage. I will help you out. Here's some fan reactions by both trans audience members and actual allies

(Side Note: if anyone that is in these photos would like them removed please let me know and I'll do it)

There's a lot more where that came from. Check out our Twitter. Since the likes are public you'll have no problem finding these and more if you scroll down a bit. https://twitter.com/SaxonExposed

And if you still have a problem and don't understand the accountability I'm searching for. Just get off my page. Just get off. It's simple. You don't care about what I, the other mod, trans fans, and actual trans allies are doing when we call him out on this shit. It'll save us all time if you just left.

I mean I'm gonna block you again, right after I post this. But again you can just leave and ignore us. That's what Alex is doing to the people who call him out anyway, take a page out of his book.

~ Lachesis

#Literally just leave if you choose to be this obtuse that you think any of the fucks that he follows aren't transphobic #a simple google search with their names and transphobia (and more) proves you wrong

[ava-candide]

Ross Poldark embarks on a political journey to Westminster in the upcoming series of Poldark.

Aidan Turner explains how his rebellious character has taken on the mantle of responsibility…

“Ross realises that an opportunity to get to London represents the only way he can make change happen. Cornwall is too far away from where the decisions are made and although Ross has a lot of influence there and people listen to him, change doesn’t happen fast enough. He is starting to realise that people are attracted to his energy and they listen to him because he is this bridge between the working class and the gentry; he is well educated but he understands the plight of the workingman.

“With the likes of George Warleggan (Jack Farthing) setting himself up in Westminster Ross realises that he needs to go to fight these kinds of people, not just George but what George represents. It is an important time in Britain; William Pitt has just gone into power at the age of 24, making him the youngest Prime Minister ever, William Wilberforce is pushing the bill to abolish slavery and to close some of the poor houses, to end child labour, there is a campaign to increase wages and the standard of living and these were all things that Ross cares about but it can’t be done from Cornwall so Westminster is where he needs to be.”

Aidan immersed himself within the history of the period as part of his research for this series…

“I have always found the political history of this period interesting, especially finding out about William Pitt and William Wilberforce and what they campaigned for. It’s hard to believe that there were so many people who were opposed to it all and who were trying to shut these conversations down. As an actor getting to make speeches about important matters like these, in this setting, it fills you with a sense of empowerment. You get an idea of what it would have been like at the time. It is surreal to be up there talking about backing Wilberforce in his bill to abolish slavery. It makes you realise that this all happened only a little over 200 years ago and that is really only a small blip in the scale of time.

“The actual slavery abolition act wasn’t passed until 1833 and even at that time there was huge opposition towards it, which is 40 years after Ross and Wilberforce present these ideas in the House of Commons. These men were also trying to eradicate capital punishment, which at the time was freely used for petty crime. I’ve done my fair share of research because when you are given these political speeches as Ross Poldark you want to know what is going on. It seems surreal to make those speeches and have people opposing what you’re saying. You just think, how could this not be the way forward, but that is what happened, these great people did get up and speak and rally support for these bills and thank God they did.”

This series we see Ross and his persistent rival, George Warleggan thrust against each other in a very different environment.

“It is always fun working with Jack but it is especially fun for us as actors to do it this time opposite each other in the House of Commons. It was nice to see him across the room and just think we have made it all the way from the first series, throwing ourselves around bars and taverns and now we are sitting in the House of Commons staring each other down. Those kinds of moments are always great.”

And Aidan enjoyed briefly filming in London…

“We shot exteriors for the Houses of Parliament which was a lot of fun. It was fun to be in London and made it feel very real. That day was also with James Wilby who plays Falmouth and we have a really good working relationship. The characters of Lord Falmouth and Ross have a growing relationship themselves, which is always fun to explore. Ross didn’t fully trust Falmouth at the beginning, I think Falmouth said something like ‘Ross you are about liberty, equality and fraternity and I am about fraternity, less about liberty and nothing to do with equality’ but slowly they begin to agree on things and Ross turns Falmouth around. They have this father son relationship which was enjoyable to play out and James is a great actor to work with.”

Ross has another rival this year, in the form of Monk Adderley (Max Bennett).

“Monk represents everything that Ross hates, he is corrupt and has likely acquired his political position through nepotism rather than hard work, Monk is mostly involved in politics for the social scene and rarely bothers to show up to the House of Commons. Ross and Monk immediately get off on the wrong foot and it is funny to play that situation where you just don’t trust someone from the get go – he doesn’t trust Ross and Ross doesn’t trust him. They clash straight away and whilst it is never really spoken about, they have this unsaid hatred for each other from the very beginning until it reaches a dramatic end.”

Aidan reveals Ross’s emotional reaction to the events that unfolded at the end of last series between Demelza and Lieutenant Hugh Armitage (Josh Whitehouse).

“Ross is not entirely sure what has or hasn’t happened with Hugh and Demelza but regardless, this affects him a lot because he realises there were more emotions involved than if it was just a fleeting attraction. He sees that Demelza has fallen for Hugh and he understands what this is about because he has been through the same experience with Elizabeth. He knows it is complicated and that there is a lot at stake.

“Ross doesn’t want to lose Demelza, he realises how fragile their relationship is and how awfully he has treated her and what it feels like to be at the other end of that, which is something he has never experienced before. Ross sometimes need those wake up calls as he is not always aware how he effects other people and it isn’t until something happens where the tables are turned and he is confronted with that same action himself that he realises what he has done.

“Emotionally Ross has always been inarticulate, he is not always sure how to talk about his feelings and this is difficult for him because he doesn’t know quite what to say. At heart he knows that Hugh is a good man and Demelza is someone he not only loves but also greatly admires so it is a wakeup call for him and it is very difficult. He is confused by all of that and he feels scared to lose her and his family, so it is a very tentative time.”

Aidan explains that audiences will see Ross and Demelza slowly working their way back to each other this series.

“This series they spend weeks apart whilst Ross is in London which was strange as they are usually together so often and during filming there were huge gaps where Eleanor and I didn’t see each other so it felt like it played out for real. When we did get back together, when Ross invites Demelza to London and they spend a week there together, it was lovely to reunite.

“It felt like their second honeymoon, they go out on boats and they go the Vauxhall pleasure gardens and to the theatre and meet up with friends and it felt like the early days of their relationship. They didn’t really get to do any of that in the first place so it felt like something was reignited there. It was nice for Ross to have fun again with Demelza, and to find that love again was important because that had been lost for quite a while. They have been through so much and they have allowed themselves to get really bogged down with life so much so that they forgot to have a good time in between but they find that again this series which was lovely.”

#aidanpics

[filosofablogger]

I’ve been asked if I have ended the Saturday Surprise feature.  No, I haven’t, it is only on temporary hiatus because I’m finding it impossible, with so many things happening right under our very noses these days, to step back and do a post about unique things and places.  However, it should return in a few weeks … perhaps I can enlist Jolly’s help.  Meanwhile, a number of things clogged my radar screen last night …

Meet Marjory Greene …

… the republican candidate from Georgia who is likely to win a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Her campaign ad showing her cocking a gun and threatening protestors is what earned her enough support to receive twice as many votes as the next highest candidate in Tuesday’s primary.  What the hell is it with Georgia and gun-toting politicians???  Remember these ads that helped propel Brian Kemp into the Georgia governor’s mansion?

Greene’s ad was actually removed from Facebook, a fact that she seems to wear like a badge of honour, and she did NOT win the primary, having received only 41% of the vote, less than the 50% needed to win.  There will be a run-off election in August against her contender, Dr. John Cowan.  But that didn’t stop Trump from congratulating her on her “win” …

And she thanked him …

Ms. Greene is exactly the type of person we DON’T need in Congress!  She is a supporter of the conspiracy-theorist group known as QAnon, a group flagged as a terrorist organization by the FBI.  Greene is listed on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “Hatewatch,” where she is described by the group as “an avid MAGA activist who frequently attends rallies or participates in protests that aim to vilify the federal government, American Muslims and transgender people.”  Just what we do NOT need in Congress, a blatant bigot!

She has received funding for her campaign from the likes of Matt Gaetz, Jim Jordan and Kevin McCarthy, to name a few … all uber right-wing republicans.  Given that the Georgia primaries were a complete fiasco with people standing in line for 7-8 hours waiting to vote, I’m not sure I trust the results, but according to polls, Greene is likely to win in her district, 75% of whom voted for Trump in 2016.  What a mockery of justice.

So wrong on so many levels …

The Oaf in the Oval Office is going to be hitting the campaign trail again starting next Friday.  Funny, that’s just about the only thing he has done … on our tax dollars, I might add … for three-and-a-half years!  We apparently hired him to be a campaigner and not much else.  His first rally will be held in Tulsa, Oklahoma on Juneteenth, the oldest nationally celebrated commemoration of the ending of slavery in the United States.

The date and the city are no coincidence, but rather further evidence of Trump’s racism.  Tulsa is the site of a race massacre 99 years ago that remains one of the worst acts of racial violence in US history. In 1921, hundreds of African Americans were killed when white mobs looted and burned what had been a thriving neighborhood known as “Black Wall Street.” That is the city where Trump fans will gather this year on the day honoring the abolition of slavery.

But, as if all that weren’t bad enough, while the coronavirus pandemic is still raging in much of the U.S. and we are currently at over 2.1 million cases and over 117,000 deaths, Trump is planning a rally in an indoor arena that has a capacity of 19,000 people.  Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt has said people still need to employ social distancing and “minimize time spent in crowded environments”.  Therefore … wait for it, you’re gonna love this one … Trump and his campaign are demanding that attendees sign a waiver that makes clear the campaign is not responsible if anyone gets ill from crowding with thousands of others in an enclosed space.

I truly hope that only his most fervent supporters attend the rally and that they have at least enough good sense not to bring their children!

Another hit to the LGBT community …

You would not have wanted to hear the words that came out of my mouth when I read last night that Trump has reversed even more protections for transgender people against sex discrimination in health care.  The reversal will allow healthcare providers and insurance companies that receive federal funding to refuse to provide or cover health care for trans people.

Trump and his henchmen have also moved to restrict military service by trans men and women, proposed allowing certain homeless shelters to take gender identity into account in offering someone a bed for the night, and concluded in a 2017 justice department memo that federal civil rights law does not protect trans people from discrimination at work.  Employment law that prohibits discrimination applies to everyone!  You cannot say that it is okay to treat someone poorly because they are trans!

You know what?  Trans people should stop paying federal income tax, for they are not receiving any benefit from it, under Trump law.  In fact, I would love to see a nation-wide tax rebellion, since we really no longer have any voice in what our government does and are not getting our money’s worth these days.

And I close with the latest ad from The Lincoln Project …

Bits Of This ‘N That I’ve been asked if I have ended the Saturday Surprise feature.  No, I haven’t, it is only on temporary hiatus because I’m finding it impossible, with so many things happening right under our very noses these days, to step back and do a post about unique things and places.  

#coronavirus #discrimination against trans people #Juneteenth #LGBT rights #Marjory Greene #The Lincoln Project ad #Tulsa Oklahoma

[notsoterriblymisanthropic]

Back in the old days, I used to worry sometimes, when doing a talk, that there were cops present, and I might be breaking this or that law by, you know, inciting to riot or whatever, until one days a cops walked up to a friend of mine and asked: Hey, how long is that guy gonna stay speaking…and what the hell is he talking about? Ha, cops, us, different worlds, don’t even hear what we are saying. Add to that that today, we are apparently no more important than three Moroccan kids hanging out: only one sad cop car showed up. Anyway, thanks for hanging out here on this wind torn island of relative political awareness, I hope to send you back to reality and its many joys and horrors in a few moments after dousing you in some big words and hollow phrases. It will be up to you to make them a reality. So I think we can conclude we don’t want our particular G20 arrestant in jail. But is there perhaps more we want? Will we ever be satisfied? No. We are insatiable. Does Peike deserve to be free because he is a fellow anarchist, or because of what he did or did not do in the streets of Hamburg? Does he deserve freedom because we may feel solidarity with the participants of the demo he was at, that was attacked by water cannon, baton and pepper spray? Does he deserve freedom because he is such a friendly guy, such a joy of a person to hang out with? All of that may be true, but it isn’t quite the point here, I think. He deserves to be free because living creatures do not belong in cages. And why is it that we still have to debate that? Why do we still have to protest this shit? What do we want, what is an attractive vision for us to live together? Let’s see…Freedom, or Repression? Jails or grassy fields? Laws and prisons and police, or dealing with our problems as real human beings? How is that even a debate? How is it not self-evident that being against repression is the right thing and the fun thing, while being for repression is fucking pathetic? The point is not to ask for such a grotesque thing as a more ‘proportional’ punishment. Freedom is the point. Talk, debate, argue, break fences, break Laws, of the mind and of the State. Come to the demo in your most decent outfit. Come to the demo dressed in black. Come in a clowns costume for all I care. Come peaceful. Come militant. Come funny. Come filled with love. Come filled with anger. Or you know what, don’t come to the demo at all but go out there and spray paint the walls, organize a prisoner support group, write a beautiful and personal letter to Peike or someone else the assholes are trying to crush. Be kind, be courteous, share stuff, bake cookies, squat houses, get real about direct action and decide what is in your power to do. The bottom line has to be and has always been, as we say it in Dutch. “Alle arrestanten onmiddelijk vrij!” All prisoners need to be released, yesterday.  Also, do not limit yourself to prison abolition. I think, just assuming, that Peike would be happy if you fight racism, borders, sexism, heteropatriarchy, your boss or the Grey Blanket and the Boredom of Business as Usual. Now let’s see that we organize in such a way as to make these hollow phrases a lived reality. So that we can see face to face with those people we miss and that are locked up for a thousand bullshit reasons. So that we can go bake apple pie or lie around in the grass or read a book instead of hanging out on political meetings where some idiot was dragged onto the stage to talk Utopia without actually doing anything. But achieving something real will not prove very difficult if everyone does a bit of the work. If the, shall we say ten percent of the people who have any affinity with radical freedom had done just a word here and there, a little bit of breaking a fence, a little bit of de-arresting, a little bit of being very clear in stating that the threat of putting people in cages is a perverted basis for living together, if we all would have just kept on ruggedly sprinkling sand into the machine, Peike and the others would not have to be freed, because jails would have already been an absurdity from the Dark Ages. The judge who sentenced Peike had an interesting word of warning for all of us. He specified police officers are no free game, free shooting material for the Spassgesellschaft. I thing in my limited understanding of German that this would translate roughly to the Society of Joy, although he may have meant it to sound less appealing. Now I don’t know what herr Krieke wants instead of a Society built in Joy, but it cannot be much good. So let’s give him what he accuses us of. Let’s lay the First Stone in this monument to human empathy and pleasure tonight and let’s continue building the Monument until it stands solid and vital enough to wipe away the joyless and sterile Knastgesellschaft: the prison society. So let’s infuse these hollow words with enough love for each other and hate for the system. Let’s go out and build the Spassgesellshaft.

Speech given at a gathering in solidarity with G20 prisoner Peike

#anarchism #prisoner solidarity #NoG20 #Peike

[inherentsleep-blog]

Commentary on ‘Socialism and man in Cuba’ p1

START (note - this is VERY old, from when I was in HS. It’s here only to preserve it)

Guevara starts this by going right into the defence of socialist states.

“A common argument from the mouths of capitalist spokespeople, in the ideological struggle against socialism, is that socialism, or the period of building socialism into which we have entered, is characterized by the abolition of the individual for the sake of the state. I will not try to refute this argument solely on theoretical grounds but rather to establish the facts as they exist in Cuba and then add comments of a general nature.”

I don’t think, after reading all of this, that Guevara actually understand the criticism that’s being leveled against transitional socialist states. In fact, he doesn’t seem to actually understand what individualism is, or what is meant by ‘a society is forced to give up individualism’. To start, very basically, having named and personally powerful leadership within a government is not individualism.

“We put our trust in him — individual, specific, with a first and last name — and the triumph or failure of the mission entrusted to him depended on that individual's capacity for action.” While he is correct that this is collective action based on an individual’s capacity for action (henceforth agency) this is not what a society refers to as individualism. If it was, cults of personality with high ranking army figures gaining their own cults would be considered the most individualist of societies. While dictatorships can be individualistic, they are plainly not inherently so.

What is described is instead the personalisation of politics, wherein powerful people protected by networks of support, personal charisma, force and wealth are the leaders of society and control greater portions of it, contrasted do depersonalised politics where institutions run the country, and in a final stage no single person holds leadership, but instead the bureaucracy rules. A democratic version of this could have people simply voting for a given ‘party’ or ‘action platform’.

Depersonalisation of politics was an important movement through the 19th and 20th centuries, and it allows more stable government as the institutions hold far longer-term networks of patronage without the personal dominance or connection.

Guevara continues in the same vein.

“Every one of the combatants of the Sierra Maestra who reached an upper rank in the revolutionary forces has a record of outstanding deeds to his or her credit.”

Right, and that’s lovely, but that’s actually describing a mediocratic society, where competent actors who do good things are promoted. Perhaps you’re describing an ideal military society. It still isn’t individualism, or an individualist society. Mediocracy is not an inherent requirement of individualism.

Whatever, the defence just seems weird. While he didn’t have Wikipedia or Google to help him confirm in 1959, anarchist and liberal concepts of individualism were very well established by this time, and his lack of understanding of them seems just strange. It’s ok not to be an individualist, Marxist-Leninist isn’t traditionally an individualist movement and I would say that any movement that builds itself on collective action probably is less individualist then one that doesn’t.  Moving on.

FIRST HEROIC STAGE

“This was the first heroic period, and in which combatants competed for the heaviest responsibilities, for the greatest dangers, with no other satisfaction than fulfilling a duty.” You know, that sounds a lot like bullshit. A claim that something is done just for the fulfillment of a duty, especially something not routine, very dangerous and requiring a massive time investment instantly sets off alarms in my head. There can be altruistic reasons, there can be selfish reasons, there can be reasons that are both but to claim it’s for duty is… yea.

“In the attitude of our fighters could be glimpsed the man and woman of the future.”

Lying to themselves? Because like… I really don’t think it’s a real attitude.

“Finding the method to perpetuate this heroic attitude in daily life is, from the ideological standpoint, one of our fundamental tasks.”

Right, and I’m back to thinking there is a particular problem in that the utopian ideal of man doesn’t actually exist.

“In the history of the Cuban Revolution there now appeared a character, well defined in its features, which would systematically reappear: the mass. This multifaceted being is not, as is claimed, the sum of elements of the same type (reduced, moreover, to that same type by the ruling system), which acts like a flock of sheep.”

Right, and you’re back to talking about collectivism, because you’re doing the whole in-group/out-group thing where even actors taking individual actions, if done for a group goal instead of a personal goal are back to being not individualists again. That isn’t to say that collective gain can’t be the same as personal gain, but it’s about the reasoning to the action.

Wait, I think I see what he’s thinking. He’s thinking that a bunch of people all doing something on their own (their duty) towards a collective goal is individualist. I suppose that could be true, so long as membership of the mass isn’t dictated by that very collective action. If membership to the group is based on doing group activities, you’re not longer looking at individualists because inherently at some point group gain and personal gain are going to come into conflict.  

“It is true that it follows its leaders, basically Fidel Castro, without hesitation. But the degree to which he won this trust results precisely from having interpreted the full meaning of the people's desires and aspirations, and from the sincere struggle to fulfill the promises he made.”

…right then. You are very much not individualist, and either don’t know what the word means or are just spewing bull, but I’m going to give the benefit of the doubt.

I think, however, something is missing from this.

There is no mention of dissent, anywhere. What if two members of the mass want something different, or have different “desires and aspirations”? It is, of course, ignored.

PARTICIPATION OF THE MASSES

“…it [the mass] was hardened in the battles against various groups of bandits armed by the CIA;…”

That’s some high level Latin America right there, your political opponents are both CIA tools AND bandits? He’s probably right about CIA armed though, I just found the full accusations funny.

“Nevertheless, the state sometimes makes mistakes. When one of these mistakes occurs, one notes a decline in collective enthusiasm due to the effect of a quantitative diminution in each of the elements that make up the mass.”

Wait, has he redefined individualism to mean having moral now? No one expresses dissent, they just work at what they don’t want to do less hard. I can’t see any way for this to backfire, especially with small or compounding mistakes. But we know Cuba never made those, right?

“Clearly this mechanism is not enough to ensure a succession of sensible measures.”

Great, he understands that suppression of debate and conflicting opinions means that you can end up missing small problems, particularly when you only react by critical mass of outrage (which is expressed only by lack of enthusiasm, as Guevara is implying.)

“In this Fidel is a master. His own special way of fusing himself with the people can be appreciated only by seeing him in action. At the great public mass meetings one can observe something like the dialogue of two tuning forks whose vibrations interact, producing new sounds. Fidel and the mass begin to vibrate together in a dialogue of growing intensity until they reach the climax in an abrupt conclusion crowned by our cry of struggle and victory.”

You’re right back to ignoring dissenting opinions. This isn’t to say you should listen to them every time, but most better systems, like you describe you need, understand that the ‘will of the people’ can be split or contradictory or whatever else. More then ignoring it, Guevara is just literally pretending it doesn’t exist. Maybe he’s just going a little deep on rhetoric.

“Some phenomena of this kind can be seen under capitalism, when politicians appear capable of mobilizing popular opinion. But when these are not genuine social movements — if they were, it would not be entirely correct to call them capitalist — they live only so long as the individual who inspires them, or until the harshness of capitalist society puts an end to the people's illusions.”

…literally what? There are all kinds of social movement in society in general. Some are, as suggested, broken up, but there are many that are successful or make changes of a kind you don’t seem to care about. Does he just define social movement exceptionally narrowly? Even then, many reform based social movements stuck under capitalism. Or does he not consider literacy and print culture a social movement, does he not consider religion, does he not consider things like veganism?

It’s also somewhat funny in hindsight, as Marxist-Leninism prove to be one of the less durable ideological movements.

I have to be done for now, and Holy Christ I’m like 1/6th of the way done.

#sleeppolitics