Comment by roux [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net on Found a gem in the Blahaj modlog

Arguing that cracker is a slur is very “all lives matter” energy.

Also who here thinks that USSR or China are fascist pretending to be communist? Like what the fuck even is that?

USSR or China are fascist pretending to be communist

socialism TERF

Assigned socialist at birth.

just like the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei was socialist…

It doesn’t have the connotation of a slur, but it’s undeniably “a derogatory race-based term.” I don’t see how an in-person organization in the U.S. could be successful while allowing that, so it’s always struck me as extremely online that we do.

This is a case of “page of reactionary screed that includes one decent point made poorly,” and us being reflexively contrarian, which is 90% right when dealing with reactionaries but still leaves some considerable blind spots.

Nah. This guy already knows the counter argument and is itching to debatebro. Calling him a cracker and banning him is objectively correct

we should ban all crackers

So much for the tolerant left

I’m all for unceremoniously banning obvious reactionaries who are here in bad faith, but that’s not what I’m getting at.

Anyone who is not joining because of the word Cracker was never gonna join

There are plenty of people who are interested in socialism, but if they show up to a socialist org and get called a cracker they’ll leave. It’s an insult.

We’re talking about politics and organizing people, right? To succeed at those you have to get people to like you, or at least not insult them, no matter how right you are. “Anyone who takes issue when I insult them is unreachable” is extremely online.

There are plenty of people who are interested in socialism, but if they show up to a socialist org and get called a cracker they’ll leave. It’s an insult.

This also applies to pigpoopballs and you can pry my ppb from my cold dead hands.

What is the in-person equivalent to ppb?

Pooping on your own balls

The same; you need to have a hexbear equivalent of pocket sand;

pocket ppb!

pulls out creased photo

I suppose the question might be more: when wouldn’t you use PPB? If you’re familiar with Huey P. Newton, in an interview he gave the same year he was assassinated (RIP; Rest In Power) he spoke against what he referred to (and what I am suggesting is quite similar) as the dirty word movement. Is it really so difficult to accept one of the consequences of using some language, whatever it is, can be deleterious or on the whole considered by comrades to be less than helpful in specific circumstances?

With language, and what appear to be brainworms with most folk (the reasons why are justified, I’d never argue against or attempt to invalidate that; if I have I apologize, please let me know and I’ll offer a proper apology and ideally would like to listen & learn to prevent it) including comrades, stating a reasonable unwanted consequence is tantamount to “silencing expression”. Which it is of course, and if dialectics were employed, it is also harmful in ways which are considered by other comrades. What’s the major issue with what seems like invalidation of comrades’ concerns when it pertains to the material affects of specific kinds of communication?

I have some ideas, they don’t seem particularly respectful and are accusatory, which is why I’d rather hear what others have to say. I want to stay in that uncomfortable space of cognitive dissonance before reaching a dialect on the subject of interest.

I suppose the question might be more: when wouldn’t you use PPB? If you’re familiar with Huey P. Newton, in an interview he gave the same year he was assassinated (RIP; Rest In Power) he spoke against what he referred to (and what I am suggesting is quite similar) as the dirty word movement. Is it really so difficult to accept one of the consequences of using some language, whatever it is, can be deleterious or on the whole considered by comrades to be less than helpful in specific circumstances?

I have a carrot and stick philosophy to brainworms, if I see a person as genuinely potentially possible to talk to and turn then I engage with them in as friendly a way as I can possibly muster - earnestly demonstrating that I’m educated and worth listening to and a potential source of learning.

If however they are clearly not going to allow that to happen I use the stick.

My interaction with this person is not the last ever interaction this person will have with a communist. They will have others in future, and I prefer to give them the stick to deter behaviour they demonstrated in this conversation so that there is a greater chance of them engaging in a better way for a future comrade. I don’t view interactions in a vacuum, I view things hollistically. The general intent being that having an incredibly negative experience as a result of the way they engaged me results in them engaging with someone else in a different way.

There are plenty of people who are interested in socialism, but if they show up to a socialist org and get called a cracker they’ll leave. It’s an insult.

We aren’t a fucking org. No one is joining an org to come in and start swinging minute 1 about how akshually Stalin was Hitler unless they are joining an org that holds that stance to begin with. If someone does join an ML org and do that, they get what they fucking deserve.

But we are not an org, and them coming into some thread to take shots does not represent remotely the same opportunity to us that a new member does to an organizer.

I didn’t say we’re an org, and I didn’t say this asshole shouldn’t have been banned.

I said allowing race-based insults, even those directed at white people, is extremely online behavior. You can see this because it’s not tolerated in person.

It’s not tolerated in person with an org member. If you’re at a counterprotest or whatever and a PoC comrade calls a fascist on the other side of the line a cracker, there typically won’t be a disciplinary hearing over it. Your comment is useless equivocating because it completely obscures the variety of different group dynamics that appear in person. It’s not as though “cracker” was first said to a white person over AOL in the 90s.

i dont think its a slur, but he’s kinda right.

There are plenty of people who are interested in socialism, but if they show up to a socialist org and get called a cracker they’ll leave

I don’t think that’s a real scenario that’s worth worrying about. Where are these socialist orgs that these people are going to show up at and be called crackers right away? Its silly. That’s why I’m making light of it, because this is just an unserious concern

That’s too much of a determined take. Why not make a more appropriate (i.e. seems more likely) kinda claim:

Anyone who appears to be not joining because of the word Cr*cker was likely not going to join*

* without an amount of effort which could likely be better used elsewhere, towards materially marginalized groups, fomenting solidarity, organizing, etc.

NOTE: I try to give others a chance at least. Thankfully comrades such as yourself and others can operate more pragmatically rather than with naïvety and so can cover my blind spots

I dont think i got your last paragraph

honestly; i don’t either :'(

Kwame Ture was calling crackers for what they are every other day.

Arguing that cracker is a slur is very “all lives matter” energy.

A good measure of “not all men” energy too. White people need to learn to not identify with the construct of whiteness that makes white supremecy possible, just like men need to learn to not identify with the patriarchy.

yeah good point, don’t think i’ve seen femme presenting people take issue with it. tbh the woman or femme specific slurs are like at least an order of magnitude worse.

ya’ll just want to stick things together that don’t stick…
all lives matter is so far away from that

I think he was arguing that “everyone” ( ) thinks that they are that and therefore because “everyone” believes something that makes it true, which means hexbear are just trolls pretending to like the evil baddies just to mess with people.

It’s kind of interesting how they always seem to default to that kind of defence when they meet a radically different viewpoint to their own. They are so insular that they can’t even imagine a person disagreeing with them honestly, all disagreement must be lies and trickery.

It’s the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances’ admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

Found a gem in the Blahaj modlog(hexbear.net)

the_dunk_tank

!the_dunk_tank@hexbear.net

Community stats

Community moderators