#political ideology | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

racefortheironthrone · 2 months

Note

Do you think that intersectionality hurts or advances activism; for example let's say a climate change organization calling for a ceasefire?

Both.

In its positive aspects, intersectionality is grounded in reciprocal solidarity. It is an ideological and philosophical position that we are all connected and "no man is an island, entire of itself...Any man's death diminishes me/Because I am involved in mankind."

It is also a very pragmatic understanding that there aren't enough of us to win on our own. In addition to the concrete analysis of political struggle that we all share common enemies and have overlapping interests, the fractured nature of human society and identities means that coalition-building isn't a choice, it's a necessity.

In its negative aspects, intersectionality results in this weird, toxic narrowing of social movements to a point where only the most oppressed people possible are allowed to be in charge and make decisions and speak for the movement, and everyone else is a guilt-ridden privileged outsider who needs to shut the fuck up and lower their hands and listen and not make it about them - but only after they donate their time and money.

This is pretty much the opposite of what intersectionality was originally meant to convey: the whole point is that everyone exists in different positions on the various axes of oppression, discrimination, etc. (and these positions can change pretty damn quickly), and thus depending on the issue, certain people might have more of a lived experience and need to be listened to and have greater needs and need to have their agenda items prioritized, and who those people are going to be is fluid and dynamic rather than fixed.

And this brings us back to my earlier thing about reciprocal solidarity. I completely reject the notion that I exist within social movements solely as an ally to other people, because in truth I participate in these movements in no small part because I need help from other people on a whole host of issues. However, I remain in coalition when it comes to other issues (especially those in which my personal constellation of intersectionality puts me in a position of relative privilege), both out of a humanistic understanding that their lives and needs are equally important and out of that pragmatic understanding that if I help them on their stuff, they'll return the favor when it comes to my stuff. And over time, the experience of being in coalition will expand people's mindsets on issues that don't directly affect them and get them to act in solidarity more consistently.

And that's what I think is so good about social democracy and similar movements that have a comprehensive political "line" or policy agenda, because if we sit down and engage in good faith in democratic coalition-building negotiations where everyone understands what they are getting and what they are giving and that everyone gets a say but not an exclusive one, then we short-circuit this kind of toxic, self-destructive behavior and can move on to doing the work that needs to be done.

#political ideology #social movements #political theory #intersectionality #activism #political science #social democracy

75 notes · View notes

philosophicalconservatism · 1 year

Text

Political and social ideologies do not deliver what they promise, but what they prioritize. In light of that reality, perhaps it can be said that the ideology of Socialism does indeed “work” after all. What is Socialism's highest priority? It is not liberty, nor is it the best interest of “the working class”. The greatest priority of Socialism is the elimination of “inequality”, which actually means: the destruction of the wealth and productivity of the rich. Thus under Socialism everyone becomes equally poor. And the working class become much poorer than they had been, because the capital and productivity of the wealthy which lead to a higher compensation and quality of life is gone.

What wealth remains is controlled by the political leaders. But if that is the case, it would seem to some people that we had not eliminated inequality at all. Yet those people do not understand that the Socialist is only concerned about inequality amongst the common citizens. The political leaders don’t count. If they do count, then he must change his entire calculus for creating an equal society. The state cannot hold all the cards.

#socialism #conservative #political ideology

64 notes · View notes

potuzzz · 10 months

Note

So what do you think of Soviet Mass Deportations (see Operation Priboi)? Are they somehow all CIA propaganda? Or were all of the deported evil and it was totally justified? In general, what's your take on Soviet annexation of the Baltics? Was it just a prolonged liberation? Maybe the countries were totally willing?

Hey buddy listen I'm a rapper I work in a sweaty ass kitchen I'm a psycho genius failson I literally would be homeless if not for some systemic privileges and the goodwill of others. I pass that on as much as I can. It haunts me if I don't. I am blursed. And listen listen. I'll be honest with you. I've never even heard of Operation Priboi. I'm not an encyclopedia. I carry something that is good but it is exhausting. I'm clocking out from reading books and shit. Contentious source, but, as they say, "Out of the movement, into the masses!" I'm fucked up so bad right now.

Anyways anyways stfu stfu BRIEF BRIEF.

What I have learned through many, many repeated experiences is that most bad things that one hears about AES (Actually Existing Socialism) are as follows (estimate):

30% Complete Insane 100% Made Up Psyop Bullshit

45% Contextless Half-Truths, Gross Exaggerations, Lies of Omission, etc.

25% Truth! That is literally, at its worst, perfectly on par with the standards of human existence and peer behavior.

I'll continue being honest, Soviet being in the Eastern Bloc is not something I ever deep dived into (and as alluded to earlier I am done deep diving). But I know enough to say this:

Neo-Nazism has always held a strong presence--and has been, since WW2, it never stopped--in the Baltic states. This should be your first thought before ever engaging with ANY opinions about the Soviet Union, in general (much of it is widespread) but particularly pertaining to these countries.

Quick aside--I really need you to play a game with me, and just entertain the idea that the USSR was a socialist country, the very first of its kind.

Okay, now seriously. What is the opposite of socialism, or anarchism, or (assumedly, could totally be wrong) whatever generally leftist idea of a better world you subscribe to? It's fascism. What is fascism? It's a fucking psychotic evil beast. It lies and shit. It just makes up shit. These fuckers would torture you, my friend. They're sick. They're very hurt individuals whisked away by an egregore of what can simply be described as evil incarnate.

Yeah, old and new CIA propaganda is everywhere. They are the same as fascists only they've had a LOT of funding from the biggest, most violent empire in human history and have (until recently lol losers) maintained a very cold calculated deathly efficient but imaginative way of doing things. Their propaganda campaigns have been constant and constantly evolving. Social engineering is not a secret. The CIA plainly and openly admits the shit they do. The echoes of damage that this empire has inflicted on those within its field of sway emotionally mentally psychically and even physically will bounce around like wicked cancer cells long after the Agency is claimed and repurposed.

Honestly, knowing what I know, I would guess the most likely answer is, yes, it could be CIA propaganda. More likely, it is Baltic Nazi propaganda, not unlike the kind floating from Ukraine now, not unlike the kind that fascists and other right-wing / capitalist elements used in Ukraine 100 years ago trying to spin this idea of the evil homosexual Bolshevik Menace that sought to purposefully starve its own civilians (for ha-ha's I guess?). The difference is, 100 years ago, people would hear insane shit from Ye Olde Ron DeSantis and dismiss it on the basis that the speaker is insane and evil. But after 100 years now liberal academics, the cutesy kind that you feel like you can trust, well they look back and say "zomg Ye Olde Ron DeSantis? That sounds like a name that I can trust!" And they party popper whippets or do the dougie or yass queen chipotslay or whatever the fuck Gen Xers who belong on BuzzFeed do. And now the thing that was an insane lie with clear politically-charged motivations 100 years ago arrives at today as something that studies in reputable universities have in their bibliographies.

If I had to guess, I would say the reality was the Soviets deported 99 Nazi fascist rapist murdering traitor fucks, as literally anyone should do its literally more humane than The Wall you evil bastards, *ahem* , 50 capitalists, 20 Oops We Made a Mistake!, 20 normal people who had been misled by foreign elements into, say, color revolution-type activities, 5 Anarchists who were being little pouty terrorists, 4 dogs (disease), 3 cats (lolz), 2 tonnes of eggs (To India, With Love), a partridge and a pear tree. Then, well, some Nazis were mad they got kicked out of the party for being Insane and Evil, so they say, hey. They just kicked, like, 500 of us out. All innocent people. I can't believe they would send 1000 of us into other countries--I mean the wilderness. They sent 5000 of us into the wilderness. They ate our babies too. Hey you know I, you know, the Nazi Guy, your buddy, I have pictures of when they massacred 10,000 babies on live television, and...

Yeah, that's how things go. Again and again and again.

You know who would absolutely tell you they WEREN'T willing participants of socialism? Yeah.

What sort of people come from socialist countries with bad things to say? In theory. Seriously, play make believe with me here. It's interesting, here in the West we will get people from Cuba, China, the Soviet Bloc, Venezuela, all sorts of places. The sort that really like the American Mythos, the kind who open businesses, the kind who say they miss a deposed King or a Nationalist President who was in power before...yeah, you dig?

Again, remember. I'm generalizing. Like at least around 25% of people will probably have genuine grievances...poor bastards not realizing the grievances they're about to have here in the West. Propaganda from the United States affects good people across the entire globe. We were the uncontested global giant for 30 years straight, after all. Thankfully these days whenever I hear firsthand experience of things from the Global South it is sprinkled with goodness, like a Columbian song that sings "You don't need a green card! Be happy here!" or Haitians waving Russian flags in spite of the US glaring daggers at them.

Whatever the case, I support the Soviet "annexation" of the Eastern Bloc (though perhaps some, like the many old people who lived in Soviet countries who have expressed ever since 1991 that they miss it, did indeed want to try this socialism thing out) the same way I support the activities of a close neighbor I know who has illustrated themselves to me before to be a very trustworthy, kind, considerate, hard working person with a big heart but a firm demeanor. I would especially trust that person over my other neighbor, the one who has a tacky fascist Star Spangled flag and peeks underage girls from behind Oakleys while obsessively mowing their lawn, punching grandmas, and occasionally blasting shitty music. That guy. Yeah, no thanks.

Okay wrapping up this "brief" (laughing my fucking ass off) answer, I will just say that I have learned to just trust AES. It's not a blind trust, I myself fought against the plain truth quite annoyingly long, constantly allowing the new BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS TERRIBLE EVIL THING THE COMMUNISTS DID? I hadn't heard of completely disintegrate the 1000 good things I had learned and the 1000 other insane lies I had to have thoroughly debunked to my satisfaction either by others or by my own research. Geopolitics is a state of constant warfare, not of countries per se but of ideas. We are all fighting to be at the helm of the wheel of what to do with this great, massive, terrifying, beautiful thing: civilization, consciousness, history.

And, well, fascism is built to be a predator. It excels at con games. It has no qualms lying, especially to good-natured people who just want to do what is right and are a little too trusting because themselves are trustworthy.

Signing off.

15 notes · View notes

sher-ee · 10 days

Text

Elon Musk is a bigot and a white nationalist.

#tool #elon musk #bigotry #pronouns #White supremacy #political ideology #conspiracy elon

2 notes · View notes

notgoingwell · 2 months

Text

youtube

2 notes · View notes

toastiemcstrudel · 1 year

Text

A few flag re/designs of various religious anarchist schools of thought

Buddhist Anarchism

Christian Anarchism

Islamic Anarchism

Jewish Anarchism

Taoist Anarchism

#flags #vexillology #new flag #flag design #flag redesign #vexillography #design #redesign #political ideologies #political ideology #ideology #Buddhist Anarchism #Christian Anarchism #Islamic Anarchism #Jewish Anarchism #Taoist Anarchism #Religious Anarchism #Anarchism #Anarchy

15 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 2 years

Photo

#Seerut Chawla #trauma #identity #inner child #political ideology #ideology #personal responsibility #human behavior #religion is a mental illness

34 notes · View notes

dougielombax · 8 months

Text

Stop comparing political beliefs and ideology to religion.

WHY do so many people in Ireland do this shit?!

SERIOUSLY???!!!!!

It’s insulting!

I feel like I’m surrounded by stupid sheep!

#personal stuff #dougie rambles #vent post #political crap #fuck’s sake!#ireland #politics #political ideology #ideology #religion #false equivalency

6 notes · View notes

anotherchariotpulledbycats · 3 months

Text

Masterful work of propaganda on statists' part in convincing regular people that anarchists are just a bunch of entitled delinquent teenagers (You can see it everywhere with 'anarkiddie' this and 'bedtime abolitionist' that), when most figures in the political movement were -and are- grown-ass adults who died at an advanced age and never abandoned their beliefs.

Kropotkin drifted to anarchism around the age of 30 and continued on until he was 78. Makhno started when he was about thirty; Bakunin and Malatesta were in their late 20s. The only high-profile anarchist figure to start off in their teenage years was maybe Goldman, who died at the age of 70.

#chariotposting #history #anarchism #political ideology

1 note · View note

imkeepinit · 1 year

Quote

[It's] sometimes useful to be reminded: if “left” means “replace the market economy with some other form of social organization,” then there’s a lot of air-miles between most American liberals and “the left.”

David Frum

#quote #David Frum #political terminology #political ideology #politics

3 notes · View notes

racefortheironthrone · 4 months

Note

Do you think that fascism arises from economic crises?

It's a bit more complicated than a unicausal explanation, but I would argue that they are a necessary but not sufficient factor.

There is an old phrase on the Left that "anti-semitism is the socialism of fools;" which sometimes results in a kind of vulgar Marxist variety of conspiracy theory in which all forms of hatred and bigotry are the result of malign forces in the ruling class trying to distract and divide and inclulcate false consciousness among the masses.

According to this train of thought, all forms of discrimination and oppression are the result of capitalism, and once the Revolution comes, then racism and sexism and homophobia, etc. will all come tumbling down and we will all live in unity and equality and harmony. I think this particular school of thought is badly misguided and has been responsible for quite a bit of the Left's historical weaknesses and blindspots.

However, I think there is something to the idea of the original saying, in that I think a lot of the impetus for reactionary movements comes from an inchoate feeling that something is wrong with society and culture, that is turned into not just incorrect but malicious explanations of what the problems are and what the causes of those problems are, in order to radicalize people into joining hateful movements. It's not that different from how ideological frameworks function normally in a Geertzian sense, just done for darker and more violent purposes.

Here's where I think the economy comes in. It is true that there are always going to be some people with extreme reactionary beliefs, but how welcoming society is to their recruitment and other activities does I think depend on how many people are feeling desperate and let down by traditional sources of authority and willing to give "alternative" voices a hearing. Often but not always, the state and direction of the economy has a lot to do with this feeling of desperation - it's not an accident that in recent decades, we've seen the flourishing of reactionary politics following major recessions or in places that have been on the economic decline.

Again, this isn't a 1:1 thing, nor are a lot of the converts among the poorest and most desperate in society, but I do think that general impressions about the state of the economy are a major component of the motivating sense of desperation, alienation, and a breakdown of trust in institutions.

#political theory #political ideology #fascism #marxist theory #anti-semitism #social democracy

40 notes · View notes

i-merani · 2 years

Text

The reason why you hear batshit takes from people on both sides of left-right political ideology is because the opinions you see are overwhelmingly of young people who might have done the reading but have never considered to actually critically engage with presented ideas. There is certain experience that is needed to actually sit with the text, to discuss it with others, to see yourself how your lifestyle fits (or doesn't fit) into that specific ideology. The disturbingly shallow and reductive understanding of centuries old philosophies, the inability to visualize how they translate into modern-day policies, has created an alarmingly large group of people who will be susceptible to actual extremist ideas without even realizing it.

#we have a dire situation here #politics #political ideology #political philosophy #right wing politics #left wing politics #mine

5 notes · View notes

adamreno · 2 years

Text

Why I fail to be politically active (despite my privilege)

Disclaimer: the following view is not a defense of inaction, it is an explanation of inaction as I currently understand it. I am not advocating political apathy. My view is intended to help me become active and start a conversation.

Introduction In wake of Trump, George Floyd, and continuous climate crises, I hear people asking me to get involved in politics or social change. Advocates worry and claim that if people fail to take action, rights will be eroded and evils like racism will persist. It is as though the house we all live in is on fire and those still sleeping are being roused to wake, to take notice and help put out the fire.

(Artwork below created in collaboration with DALL-E 2)

And you know what, I buy that idea. I do not think social issues will not resolve themselves. Or, at very least, to expect that they will does not seem like a good strategy. Moreover, it seems right to say that the more people who become meaningfully engaged in an issue the better chance it will have of being solved.

Now, these claims may be false, and if someone thinks they are I encourage them to let me know how, but for the purposes of this article I will take them for granted. Social causes, like efforts to root out systemic racism, need help from more people if they are to be successful. Which means, from the standpoint of this strategy, those who willingly remain on the sidelines are an impediment to the goal of justice.

(Artwork below created in collaboration with DALL-E 2)

What I’ve just articulated is an understanding I took away from a college course of mine. The classed emphasized the need for privileged people like me to use their unearned resources to be become allies, to “willing to act with, and for, others in pursuit of ending oppression and creating equality”. To that end my professor encouraged us to go figure how we could each do our part to bring about a better world. But I found this call to action puzzling and somewhat frustrating. I want to do my part to bring about a better world, but I and others I know regularly struggle to look after our own priorities…

So with some defensiveness I asked my professor how being an ally was supposed to work in a context where people are already struggling to tend to their own lives. In response they asked me how much time we were all spending on our phones.

From my perspective the implicit suggestion was that the reason we were not more engaged was because we were not using our time wisely. That if we spent less time on our phones, we would have more time to devote to social justice.

I found this suggestion frustrating, for me it had echoes of the “just quit” ethos in folk addiction psychology that I have come to loath, which says the addiction is a simple choice. On top of that it was activating some old hurts around my privilege and shame that I detail in an earlier blog. But beyond my difficult emotions, I respectfully disagree. Political inaction in my own life, or in other peoples lives, is not simply due to time constraints, I think it is due to bandwidth constraints.

Bandwidth Constraints Bandwidth is a term I first heard by Sam Harris and it is often thrown around to describe one’s capacity to to do something. My goal in this blog is to offer an analysis of the concept that will be useful in explaining why I fail to be more politically active and some steps that might help me in that regard.

When I talk about political action, I do not mean any kind of political action. I mean strategic political action. I am taking strategic political action if I am doing X because of Y for the purpose of Z based on analysis of A. I make this distinction because I could see that someone might want to consider a wide range of actions, like shopping at a store, to be political. In other words, the kind of political action I am interested in is action that is inherently intentional. Intentional action being action distinct from action that is habitual or conditioned. For example when I quit a bad habit, I engage in conscious and concerted effort to change myself, but when I practice habits that are already ingrained, like drinking water throughout the day, no intentionality is required.

So when my Professor advised me to consider spending less time on my phone, it seemed as though they were neglecting the difference between an ingrained habit and an intentional behavior. Spending time on my phone and being politically active. To use a cooking analogy, I don’t think the ingredients that makeup the habit of me using my phone can simply be swapped out to get politically active. That spending less time on my phone will translate to fighting against racism or climate change.

I think that intentional action requires an altogether different set of resources, that set of resources is what I term ones bandwidth and I hypothesize that the following resources are necessary for one to have bandwidth, the ability able to perform intentional action: Time, Energy, Motivation, Focus, Guidance, Tools, Emotional regulation, and Infrastructure.

I’ve suggested that time was not sufficient for intentional behavior, but clearly it is necessary. If I simply to busy with other things, without enough time to be intentional, then I won’t be. However, I must also have energy. My economic privilege leaves me with plenty of free time, but I deal with a form of chronic fatigue, which often leaves me to exhausted to do much of anything. However, even if I had enough time and energy, my rocket Still won’t get off the ground without motivation. I need reasons to do something and the actual felt desire when the time comes.

Now, suppose I am fully rested, have motivation, but I can’t focus due to my ADHD. It seems to me that I will not be able to be intentional in this scenario either.

Furthermore, it seems right to say that even if I have time, energy, and focus, I still need guidance. By guidance I simply mean some sufficient understanding of what it is that I am trying to do and how to do it. If I did not know what to write I wouldn’t get any writing done. Having a clear idea of what task or behavior I am attempting makes all the difference when trying to execute it successfully. The following clip below from limitless (watch first minute only) illustrates this point. In the clip, you get to see him before insight and after insight thanks to the drug NZT.

youtube

I also need the right tools, if my goal is to write a paper, but I have no pens, paper, etc. then I will not be achieving anything. Tools may also include skills such as critical thinking or research habits, etc. Moreover, I think we also need emotional regulation: say I am energized and focused holding the right tool in the right place with a clear idea of what you need to do, but I am too scared of failing, of making a mistake. Well then I will not be able to get started and actually do what you set out to do. I further justify my claims about the need for tools and emotional regulation with the following scholarly source:

youtube

Finally, it would seem that for long term goals such as ending systemic racism or slowing climate change I also need what I call infrastructure, a set of processes that keep me supplied with bandwidth for whatever goal I am pursuing. Here I am referring to things like routines, schedules, incentives, and self-care practices, the everyday habits that make sure I have the time, energy, focus, motivation, guidance, tools, and emotional regulation I need to get something accomplished within a longer stretch of time.

A quick note: the bandwidth criteria I have laid out is meant to be useful, not exhaustive. If you do have additional components please share them with me.

Bandwidth constraints applied I will now apply the bandwidth criteria to my professor’s push for me to become an ally.

In class they gave me a list actions a person can take to bring about social change. Let’s evaluate one of them: voting, to better understand my formula for intentional action.

I have voted since I was 18, but I have never voted in an election based on an understanding of the issues, either locally or nationally. I have always deferred to my party preference or to my the views and advice of friends. If I were to vote in a manner consistent with ending racial injustice, I think it is fair to say that I would need to do go out of my way to do some research.

What is keeping me from doing that research? Well I feel overwhelmed, like I can’t do it. The issues involved are so complicated and I have other things going on. My ADHD leaves my attention scattered. Plus, I also don’t feel very much motivation. After all what difference will it really make? I also do not have confidence I could keep it up for the long term. On top of that my chronic fatigue often leaves me with little energy.

My intention is not to complain, but to instead highlight the actual crux of my inaction. To reveal, that it is not too much time on my phone that keeps me from being politically active, but instead a lack of the following resources: emotional regulation (overwhelm), focus (ADHD), energy (fatigue), guidance (not knowing how to research something so complicated), motivation (not appreciating why it is valuable) and structure (a system to maintain my bandwidth).

The utility of such an analysis is that each constraint identified picks out a specific area in which I may develop. • I can process my overwhelming feelings within my self or someone in my life equipped to help. • I can reflect on and analyze my situation with more detail and get specific advice from someone who has walked the path I am interested in. • I can find people or resources to inspire and compel me and reflect on my reasons for taking action. • I can build habits to make sure I have the bandwidth I need to be successful. • I can work on caring for my ADHD and fatigue.

Objection: Choices, not constraints, hold you back My Professor may agree with what I’m saying. I emailed them for my clarification about their comment: “how much time are you spending on your phone”, and they seemed to acknowledge that behavior change is not straightforward. That it requires motivation and guidance and is aided by having support. So perhaps a more charitable interpretation of their phone comment is to see it as nudge to consider my priorities, to take a hard look at how I am allocating my resources, and see if there are any opportunities to align them better with the goals of justice.

It reminds me of something my friend said when I was discussing these issues with them. I was in Las Vegas to celebrate my graduation and my growth, but was lamenting how inactive I was politically. In response they pointed out that I had made a choice to be in Vegas, shedding light on the fact that I was not making a choice to be politically active.

I think these points about priorities have merit, I do struggle to prioritize the work of justice, to make intentional choices about how to bring about a better world, but that still leaves the question: why do I fail to make these choices? Or, what are the specific aspects of my life that leave me acting without intention in the political arena?

So, again, while I agree that choices and priorities are relevant, they lack precision. You see choices, if they are to be made, cannot exist in a vacuum, like all actions, they must have a base, a substrate…a foundation, somewhere from which they spring. In my own experience those who are politically active are often: 1) acting out of necessity because they are directly affected by some issue, 2) have relationships with people who are and/or 3) are educated about the importance of taking some specific action. And that, is just not where I’m at right now.

So I find it more instructive to tell myself that I fail to prioritize political action— to do things like educate myself, donate, and vote wisely—because I lack bandwidth: the guidance, motivation, energy, focus emotional regulation, and structure I would need.

Conclusion I find my analysis uplifting, because for years I have wondered in frustration: why, if I am so privileged, am I not able to be politically active? What’s wrong with me? And now I have a sense of why, and its not because I am not choosing to do so or because I am a bad person or just not trying hard enough, it is because of my bandwidth constraints. Constraints that I can identify, investigate and ideally innovate upon.

I’m curious how readers may apply this analysis to their own challenges. Having often heard many people say they “should” being doing more whether it with their health or creative pursuits I wonder: do you really have the bandwidth to do more?

On my own path of ally work, I recognize that one way I can start getting the resources I need is by following some advice from that same professor: to build support systems around my political action work, much like I would with a mental health issue, to find people and groups to help me guide me, keep me regulated, motivated. So that is my next step. If you want to help me do some research for this upcoming election or just help me stay motivated please reach out.

#privilege #philosophy #Political inaction #political ideology #Youtube

5 notes · View notes