I Re—sign

Leftists have been going back and forth between what is or isn’t antithetical to leftism since the first French derriere sat itself to the left of the king at the convention of the Estates General. Sometimes leftists agree to disagree, sometimes they literally start guillotining each other over the darndest things.

Mike Duncan is currently doing the Russian Revolution and I hate to be podcast guy eager to recapitulate details I learned last week, but the path from imperial monarchy to Leninism was at least ~90 years in the making, with thousands of intra and inter generational disagreements about how to effect change, from outreach and education of the peasants, to protest and agitation, to terrorism and assassination; it wasn’t like they only tried violence at the end as a last resort. Alexander II survived 5? assassination attempts before they blew him up on the 6th attempt. Gjge, that did all of assuring the next Czar was going to be a more reactionary douchenozzle.

Quick cite of the brothers Ulyanov. All the Ulyanov kids were apparently geniuses but the eldest Aleksandr was like the Cooper Manning/Joseph Kennedy of the family. But he became a passionate revolutionary and eventually tried to assassinate that next Czar, but he failed and they hanged him. Although his younger brother (allegedly) vowed to avenge him, the younger brother also came to think that trying to bring down the regime with bombs was a waste of time. That younger brother became the historical centrist pussy we know as Lenin.

And, punchline, while amazingly talented, Lenin, like basically every run-good Bro of History, benefited from events far beyond his control, like the Russians getting humiliated in WWI, and like the German High Command basically putting him on the train out of exile so he could go back to Russia to destabilize the country.

2 Likes

I respect your point of view here, I really do. But I do find it slightly misguided. I think the “violence is never the answer” is inherently wrong. I don’t think it should be the first option in most situations, but that I’m ok with more violence in a hockey or football game than most seem to be to fight fascism seems odd as well. America is inherently violent. Inequality is violent. The healthcare system is violent.

2 Likes

That’s what we’re doing, and no one is hypocritical. :heart:

3 Likes

This is a reasonable point of view, and I can see how the fact that I care so much about how this forum presents itself may come off as a demonstration of white male privilege. I believe it has more to do with wanting this to be a community that can effect change in the world on many issues (including a number of women’s issues), and thus wanting it to present itself in a way that allows it to do so… But I can see how it could be interpreted very differently.

I also allow for the possibility that it goes beyond an interpretation of white male privilege and is exactly that. I do my best to try to recognize my privilege, but I’m not perfect and I have blind spots.

I agree, but I also don’t know what I’m supposed to do. Domestic violence is generally invisible to men who are the “good guys” to the extent that it’s not like the people who do these terrible things talk to their buddies about it and confess. I recognize that, statistically, there’s a pretty high chance that some friend of mine has committed a violent act against a woman at some point… But nobody has ever said anything to me, I’ve never seen anything, etc, so I don’t know what I can do. I feel bad for that, it upsets me, but I also don’t have a solution. All I can say is that if you have any thoughts/ideas/suggestions on what you want the average guy to do in this regard, I’m all ears.

My first thought here is that it would be weird if a single man showed up to a domestic violence support group alone just to offer his support. I feel like it would come off as creepy, at best. I’d be very worried about making women feel uncomfortable in that situation. Do you disagree? On the other hand, if a woman I knew was a victim of it, knew someone who was, etc, and asked me to attend with her for moral support, I’d make it a priority to do so.

I’m assuming AGM stands for annual general meeting, and thus this was less of a support group and more of an organizing meeting. But, I still wonder what role I could play in helping such an organization given the above. Perhaps behind the scenes there are things that could be done?

I understand why you feel that way, and I think it’s fair to criticize this community for that and to feel like it’s a failure on our part. In some ways it is. I could also be wrong here, but I feel like if I made a thread about that, we’d all pretty much agree. I suppose we could discuss like what politically could be done to address the problem better, but in this regard I’m pretty sure there’s very little separation between the various Democratic candidates. So in my opinion that’s why it hasn’t happened, but maybe to make that assumption is bad and it’s a discussion that should be had.

Also, it makes me feel bad when I think/know people are hurting over a perceived lack of support when what’s really happening is a lack of public expression of support that exists. I recognize this and think about it a lot more on race issues and on women’s rights issues, but I hadn’t thought about it much with regard to domestic violence until now.

Usually threads start on here after high profile incidents, or after someone makes a comment that someone else is ticked off by. The second is very rare, usually results in widespread condemnation, and that’s that. The first is also very rare on domestic violence, because the vast majority of it is not publicized. I think there was a lot of discussion about it after the Ray Rice incident. So I hope I can speak for most people here in saying we definitely care about this, and would like to do what we can/should, and the absence of threads about it doesn’t mean that we don’t care. So while I think your criticism is warranted, I hope you don’t feel like we don’t care.

And FWIW, not that it matters a ton since I may not be around anymore, but this is one reason why I’d like to see this forum have a lot more female posters. We definitely lack that perspective and it creates blindspots. Sometimes, despite the best intentions, you just need things pointed out to you.

So thanks for bringing this up.

My stance is not that it’s never necessary, it’s that violence should be a last resort.

But a last resort to what? Kids in cages? 30,000 gun deaths a year? Tens of thousands of preventable medical deaths a year? The Iraq war? Tens of millions drowning in debt while we have people worth tens of billions? Growing white supremacy? Trump not leaving office?
Like, it seems like your line for quitting here or more non passive resistance is “will actively have effect on my day to day life.” That’s fine. I’d be the same way if I lived in the USA. But it’s less of a moral line and more of a convenient one.

4 Likes

I do not want any of this to drive you away. But I would like to see you recognize that the give and take necessary for this community to exist means you’re not always going to get your way, and you don’t get to be the sole arbiter of what is and isn’t acceptable.

3 Likes

a domestic what, active shooter?

Exhausting the other means of addressing the problem. Both from a moral standpoint and a logical one. Violence is not going to speed up any of this, and non-violence is morally superior. The problem is getting enough people to take non-violent action to force change… But again, given that violence is counter productive, discussing it remains morally wrong and logically negative.

The quickest way to address these issues and enact change is politically through protest, volunteering, donating and voting. In many cases it involves winning primary elections to change the party from within, given that we’re in a first past the post system. Given that we have to operate within that structure, our ability to win 51% of the primary vote and 51% of the general election vote (or at least a plurality) is absolutely essential. As a result, advocating for violence or using violent rhetoric is a losing strategy on top of being morally wrong. The fact that it’s a losing strategy means that debating whether or not we can ever get enough people to become active enough politically to win peacefully on some of these issues almost doesn’t matter, because that’s still our best/only way to win.

So again, I loop back to violence being immoral until other options are exhausted AND other options being the only path forward.

Also, before anyone goes down the, “How can you say you need to avoid violent rhetoric to win 51% of the vote given Trump, Trumpism, etc,” the rules are different to turn out voters who might vote for a Democrat. The bad guys are voting for the bad guy, so he can be bad and get their votes. We’re trying to turn out the good guys, so we can’t do that shit, nor should we.

This is a much different thing than the rest of the list, so I separated it out. But for any number of reasons, the process of forcing him out would need to start peacefully… and our best hope would be non-violent demonstrations showing the mass of humanity that was opposed to his attempt at installing himself as dictator, which would hopefully/likely lead to Dems making a stand and the GOP either caving, SCOTUS taking care of it, and/or the Secret Service/FBI/military/whoever it would be simply arresting him in the Oval.

I regret that it comes across that way and it’s not at all how I feel. I also wouldn’t use the word non-passive. I’m all for active resistance, just non-violent. I’ve protested several times since Trump was elected. I’ve knocked on doors for a couple candidates. I’ve donated to candidates. I haven’t done enough, full stop. I’m embarrassed that I haven’t done more of all of the above… But I’m definitely for activism.

2 Likes

I don’t get to be the sole arbiter of what is and isn’t acceptable to this community, but I am the sole arbiter of what is and isn’t acceptable for me to associate with/support/stand for… and for better or worse, given that I was one of 5-15 people who played a significant role in our flight from 2p2 → Exiled → Unstuck, as long as I’m regularly posting here, I’m in some way associated with whatever the community is doing/allowing more than I would be as just one of 300+ posters.

1 Like

The problem is your definition of what violent rhetoric is, is substantially different than what it is for many others.

2 Likes

This post is an island of extreme talent in a sea of profound disability.

jk lol everyone’s contribution is worthwhile :heart:

2 Likes

Gimmie that

3 Likes

Well first off I don’t believe that, but, I do believe… something. I can’t quite articulate it yet.

Actually, I think I’m gonna skim one of the NBZ threads I think I missed.

Shot

Chaser

:heart: :older_man:

1 Like

A Golden Ticket to commune with the 27 Club.

In the context it was a man beating up a woman, but whatever, sure.

1 Like

the 27 + a low but recently double digit number club, if any cool cats kicked it at 38 lmk

Years ago, when the KC economy was booming, we called for travelers from other local unions nationwide to meet the manpower need. I hosted one cat from NYC at my house.

I lent him my car one night to go to Hooters or some shit. Fast-forward a few hours, I’m sound asleep, and his noisy entrance upon return went unnoticed for what it actually was by my drowsiness, and I charged the front door buck naked.

He later remarked, “Oh, you must be Irish, too. Small pe.”

I cut him off, “That’s enough singing, dirty work afoot.”