Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 ) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Intersectionality! A great term coined by Kimberle Crenshaw. I think the thing about understanding our experiences moving through the world is that we have no choice but to accept that, that experience is invariably linked to multiple parts of our identity, right? So being a woman, that’s queer and is Black and working class are parts of one of my friend’s identity that cannot be separated. Her experience moving through the world is impacted by all of those things and often, all of those things at the same time. Her experience of racism is unique in the gendered nature. Her experience with sexism is unique because of her experiences as a Black Woman (misogynoir). Etc etc. Anyway. People! Fabbers! Do you think about the intersecting parts of your identity and how they impact your experience moving through the world? Do you think about or notice and respect other people’s? Please don’t come here to troll "Fuck sake Steve, it's Friday...... I believe, as I've got older I notice much more about other people, I've become more of a watcher and listener. I often pick up on things from what people don't say, how they react to phrases and conversations, their body language. Often I've picked up on trauma that no-one else is aware of. Me, I'm complex. From a base level, what people see and think of me, compared to the real me. And at times I don't even know who the real me is. My life has been one of constant change, something based on circumstance or situation, sometimes who I want (or need) to change to. God knows if that answers the question. Maybe I'm just babbling here...... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does wealth inequality count? I feel wealth inequality trumps everything else. And I think the powers at be constantly push race/gender narratives to stop us looking at wealth inequality 60 years ago a guy could raise 3 kids and support his wife in a house they owned on a simple job Now both parents need to work to afford even the bare minimum We’re all in the same boat. And we’re fighting about who gets the most room. Whose taking an unfair share of our life raft as we slowly sink And billionaires are watching from their yacht as we fight amongst ourselves " Absolutely wealth counts and I’d fit it in the class thing for the sake of discussion here while acknowledging class is more than just wealth and economics. I think class and economic position is important. Not more important than any other. And worth acknowledging that racism for example is something that poor Black folk will experience. And it will make their experience as poor people different to a White person for example. Maybe just in the sense that it’s another layer of inequality. As Angela Davis says- racism and capitalism are linked. You can’t solve racism with just anti capitalism. I think intersectionality just encourages us to acknowledge the difference in experience. It doesn’t need to say what is impacting us more or what is a worse form of oppression. Just that we cannot ignore difference. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Lemme see where I am on the wheel.
Woman
White
Able bodied
Middle class upbringing
Working class adult
Level 8 educated
Some of these bring privilege, others not so much | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does wealth inequality count? I feel wealth inequality trumps everything else. And I think the powers at be constantly push race/gender narratives to stop us looking at wealth inequality 60 years ago a guy could raise 3 kids and support his wife in a house they owned on a simple job Now both parents need to work to afford even the bare minimum We’re all in the same boat. And we’re fighting about who gets the most room. Whose taking an unfair share of our life raft as we slowly sink And billionaires are watching from their yacht as we fight amongst ourselves " I do sort of agree that it likely does trump the other issues at the end of the day, however it’s important not to ignore them and maintain the push for progress on race/gender/sexuality issues in conjunction with economic justice as the other factors are compounding ones and you can be accused (perhaps incorrectly) of bigotry against the marginalised groups if you over focus on generally improving things the working class - possibly because most people’s perception of a “working class” person is still very white, straight and male despite that not actually being the case for most. I’m not that well read on it but “class reductionism” is the term used for what you’re talking about, seemingly often in the context of people criticising it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Legend Steve
Lemme see where I am on the wheel.
Woman
White
Able bodied
Middle class upbringing
Working class adult
Level 8 educated
Some of these bring privilege, others not so much "High up but not high enough babe | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Legend Steve
Lemme see where I am on the wheel.
Woman
White
Able bodied
Middle class upbringing
Working class adult
Level 8 educated
Some of these bring privilege, others not so much
High up but not high enough babe "Ikr? Pass me my abba platforms! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does wealth inequality count? I feel wealth inequality trumps everything else. And I think the powers at be constantly push race/gender narratives to stop us looking at wealth inequality 60 years ago a guy could raise 3 kids and support his wife in a house they owned on a simple job Now both parents need to work to afford even the bare minimum We’re all in the same boat. And we’re fighting about who gets the most room. Whose taking an unfair share of our life raft as we slowly sink And billionaires are watching from their yacht as we fight amongst ourselves I do sort of agree that it likely does trump the other issues at the end of the day, however it’s important not to ignore them and maintain the push for progress on race/gender/sexuality issues in conjunction with economic justice as the other factors are compounding ones and you can be accused (perhaps incorrectly) of bigotry against the marginalised groups if you over focus on generally improving things the working class - possibly because most people’s perception of a “working class” person is still very white, straight and male despite that not actually being the case for most. I’m not that well read on it but “class reductionism” is the term used for what you’re talking about, seemingly often in the context of people criticising it!" I’m at a point where I think we should stop caring as much as the media wants us to What more good can telling people to stop being racist or be nice to woman really do? If you don’t already know these things, nothings gonna change you However, we can fix wealth inequality. We can drastically improve the average persons life. There’s still huge changes to be made. And I truly believe wealth inequality is at the heart of many issues. Living in poverty brings out the worst in people. Scarcity mindset is at the heart of why some people have immigrant, hate people that need to collect benefits. It’s created a “me against you” mindset because we think there isn’t enough for everyone. But there is, just a few hoard it Remember the Wall Street protests? The 99% stuff? Funny how that just suddenly died out of nowhere It’s almost like our government and media is paid and bought by the rich to push ideas that keep us fighting each other If we all woke up and saw how hard they were fucking us, their would be blood in the streets Im a big fan of hip hop and Akala had a line I’ll never forget “yeah they say you are British, that great patriotism they feed us, when in reality you have more in common with immigrants with your leaders” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does wealth inequality count? I feel wealth inequality trumps everything else. And I think the powers at be constantly push race/gender narratives to stop us looking at wealth inequality 60 years ago a guy could raise 3 kids and support his wife in a house they owned on a simple job Now both parents need to work to afford even the bare minimum We’re all in the same boat. And we’re fighting about who gets the most room. Whose taking an unfair share of our life raft as we slowly sink And billionaires are watching from their yacht as we fight amongst ourselves I do sort of agree that it likely does trump the other issues at the end of the day, however it’s important not to ignore them and maintain the push for progress on race/gender/sexuality issues in conjunction with economic justice as the other factors are compounding ones and you can be accused (perhaps incorrectly) of bigotry against the marginalised groups if you over focus on generally improving things the working class - possibly because most people’s perception of a “working class” person is still very white, straight and male despite that not actually being the case for most. I’m not that well read on it but “class reductionism” is the term used for what you’re talking about, seemingly often in the context of people criticising it! I’m at a point where I think we should stop caring as much as the media wants us to What more good can telling people to stop being racist or be nice to woman really do? If you don’t already know these things, nothings gonna change you However, we can fix wealth inequality. We can drastically improve the average persons life. There’s still huge changes to be made. And I truly believe wealth inequality is at the heart of many issues. Living in poverty brings out the worst in people. Scarcity mindset is at the heart of why some people have immigrant, hate people that need to collect benefits. It’s created a “me against you” mindset because we think there isn’t enough for everyone. But there is, just a few hoard it Remember the Wall Street protests? The 99% stuff? Funny how that just suddenly died out of nowhere It’s almost like our government and media is paid and bought by the rich to push ideas that keep us fighting each other If we all woke up and saw how hard they were fucking us, their would be blood in the streets Im a big fan of hip hop and Akala had a line I’ll never forget “yeah they say you are British, that great patriotism they feed us, when in reality you have more in common with immigrants with your leaders”" I've been wanting to quote Akala since the last thread. Fire in the Booth parts 1-4. I totally agree that poor white people are so justifiably terrified of more limitation of resources that they simply cannot be in a mindset to think critically. And that's what they want to create - a state of panic that ensures that people cannot see the wood for the trees and eseentialy vote against their best interests. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No. I'm too busy thinking about how I'm paying my bills every month." Ironic | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No. I'm too busy thinking about how I'm paying my bills every month. Ironic" Not really. I do think it becomes the oppression Olympics. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No. I'm too busy thinking about how I'm paying my bills every month. Ironic Not really. I do think it becomes the oppression Olympics. " Except the winners never secure any lucrative sponsorship deals? My comment about it being ironic is because its funny you, a woman, probably with other marginalised identities too, sit thinking about how to pay your bills and dismissing why said identities might leave you in said position. It's not going to pay this month's light bill, but it might inspire you to take what power you have and initiate what change you can. Might be as simple as voting for a different local MP within the same party you always vote because they want to create change that will actually improve your quality of life. It's not even altruism. It's selfishness. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"To put it in an easy way, intersectionality is the notion that parts of our being interact with other parts to shape our experiences. Some of our identities are seen socially as higher up the hierarchy and others lower. So to give an example, if you are able bodied you will experience life in a certain way. If you have a disability your experience will be different. Same for race. And age. And wealth. And education. Diametrically opposed experiences would be a white middle class able bodied man with a private education and family wealth. Compared to a black woman who is disabled with no education and no wealth. Somewhere in the middle are white women, being a woman being seen as being more negative than a man. Black men, black being seen as more negative than white. A disabled wealthy white woman. A rich Asian man. You get the gist. So all of these things contribute to make our experiences personalised to us and mean that we should talk about and learn about all the things that affect us and each other and not solely focus on just one of the above " Spot on. My maleness, age, education, sexuality and able bodied status prop up the points I lose for blackness thankfully  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"To put it in an easy way, intersectionality is the notion that parts of our being interact with other parts to shape our experiences. Some of our identities are seen socially as higher up the hierarchy and others lower. So to give an example, if you are able bodied you will experience life in a certain way. If you have a disability your experience will be different. Same for race. And age. And wealth. And education. Diametrically opposed experiences would be a white middle class able bodied man with a private education and family wealth. Compared to a black woman who is disabled with no education and no wealth. Somewhere in the middle are white women, being a woman being seen as being more negative than a man. Black men, black being seen as more negative than white. A disabled wealthy white woman. A rich Asian man. You get the gist. So all of these things contribute to make our experiences personalised to us and mean that we should talk about and learn about all the things that affect us and each other and not solely focus on just one of the above Spot on. My maleness, age, education, sexuality and able bodied status prop up the points I lose for blackness thankfully "Tbf, your blackness suits you. You’d look weird white | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
I’ll start a Faf thread.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m at a point where I think we should stop caring as much as the media wants us to What more good can telling people to stop being racist or be nice to woman really do? If you don’t already know these things, nothings gonna change you However, we can fix wealth inequality. We can drastically improve the average persons life. There’s still huge changes to be made. And I truly believe wealth inequality is at the heart of many issues. Living in poverty brings out the worst in people. Scarcity mindset is at the heart of why some people have immigrant, hate people that need to collect benefits. It’s created a “me against you” mindset because we think there isn’t enough for everyone. But there is, just a few hoard it Remember the Wall Street protests? The 99% stuff? Funny how that just suddenly died out of nowhere It’s almost like our government and media is paid and bought by the rich to push ideas that keep us fighting each other If we all woke up and saw how hard they were fucking us, their would be blood in the streets Im a big fan of hip hop and Akala had a line I’ll never forget “yeah they say you are British, that great patriotism they feed us, when in reality you have more in common with immigrants with your leaders”" I’d argue that making you apathetic about fixing intersectional issues is exactly what the powers that be want… there is still so much to be gained from efforts to reduce racism/sexism/etc, and as long as they are still prevalent there will always be fractures and infighting in any wider movement for economic justice. Giving up on current day racists and sexists as lost causes just allows those fractures to get bigger - those people may be wrong but they deserve a chance at reform and becoming part of the solution. I agree that all the other issues are deliberately used to distract and divide us, however just because you and I realise this is happening doesn’t mean everybody else does or that they will instantly drop everything they care about when they do. It’s all well and good to say “we can fix wealth inequality”, but at the end of the day that is the very last thing that the rich want to happen and will throw the kitchen sink at preventing - unifying everybody under one banner sounds great but it’s drastically more difficult and complicated than it sounds and the most realistic route is to fight on whichever fronts it seems like you can make the most ground on at any given point in time. Sure that sounds hard but it’s the right thing to do, and goes a long way towards building that unified movement by encouraging people to fight for camps other than their own. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does wealth inequality count? I feel wealth inequality trumps everything else. And I think the powers at be constantly push race/gender narratives to stop us looking at wealth inequality 60 years ago a guy could raise 3 kids and support his wife in a house they owned on a simple job Now both parents need to work to afford even the bare minimum We’re all in the same boat. And we’re fighting about who gets the most room. Whose taking an unfair share of our life raft as we slowly sink And billionaires are watching from their yacht as we fight amongst ourselves I do sort of agree that it likely does trump the other issues at the end of the day, however it’s important not to ignore them and maintain the push for progress on race/gender/sexuality issues in conjunction with economic justice as the other factors are compounding ones and you can be accused (perhaps incorrectly) of bigotry against the marginalised groups if you over focus on generally improving things the working class - possibly because most people’s perception of a “working class” person is still very white, straight and male despite that not actually being the case for most. I’m not that well read on it but “class reductionism” is the term used for what you’re talking about, seemingly often in the context of people criticising it! I’m at a point where I think we should stop caring as much as the media wants us to What more good can telling people to stop being racist or be nice to woman really do? If you don’t already know these things, nothings gonna change you However, we can fix wealth inequality. We can drastically improve the average persons life. There’s still huge changes to be made. And I truly believe wealth inequality is at the heart of many issues. Living in poverty brings out the worst in people. Scarcity mindset is at the heart of why some people have immigrant, hate people that need to collect benefits. It’s created a “me against you” mindset because we think there isn’t enough for everyone. But there is, just a few hoard it Remember the Wall Street protests? The 99% stuff? Funny how that just suddenly died out of nowhere It’s almost like our government and media is paid and bought by the rich to push ideas that keep us fighting each other If we all woke up and saw how hard they were fucking us, their would be blood in the streets Im a big fan of hip hop and Akala had a line I’ll never forget “yeah they say you are British, that great patriotism they feed us, when in reality you have more in common with immigrants with your leaders”" I agree with much of what you say. But as Crenshaw also says, ignoring differences amongst groups (working class for example or women for another), more frequently contributes to tension among groups (see White Woman, listen by hazel Carby which is accessible online). We have more in common and a common enemy but the best way, imo, to effective action is to acknowledge difference and support one another. The idea that racism isn’t a class issue for example isn’t helpful. Class solidarity to me means acknowledging the differences to ensure resistance for ALL. Etc etc | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Intersectionality! A great term coined by Kimberle Crenshaw. I think the thing about understanding our experiences moving through the world is that we have no choice but to accept that, that experience is invariably linked to multiple parts of our identity, right? So being a woman, that’s queer and is Black and working class are parts of one of my friend’s identity that cannot be separated. Her experience moving through the world is impacted by all of those things and often, all of those things at the same time. Her experience of racism is unique in the gendered nature. Her experience with sexism is unique because of her experiences as a Black Woman (misogynoir). Etc etc. Anyway. People! Fabbers! Do you think about the intersecting parts of your identity and how they impact your experience moving through the world? Do you think about or notice and respect other people’s? Please don’t come here to troll "Isn't that just life? Charge it to the game steve | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I agree with much of what you say. But as Crenshaw also says, ignoring differences amongst groups (working class for example or women for another), more frequently contributes to tension among groups (see White Woman, listen by hazel Carby which is accessible online). We have more in common and a common enemy but the best way, imo, to effective action is to acknowledge difference and support one another. The idea that racism isn’t a class issue for example isn’t helpful. Class solidarity to me means acknowledging the differences to ensure resistance for ALL. Etc etc " Agreed - solely gunning for the root cause does sound like the right path but it’s a complicated world and your potential allies will always have their own priorities no matter how much you believe in it. If you offer support in all directions you’ll maximise how much you receive in return. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also think- how depressing to think we can’t solve racism or sexism " That’s where my mindset comes from We can’t. They are concepts, ideas that live within peoples head and hearts. You’ll never truly fix those things Wealth inequality isn’t. We can solve that. It’s numbers, house prices, cost of living, bank balances, minimum wages, effect tax structures and strategies. We can absolutely fix that. If we magically fixed racism tomorrow, could you afford a house? Would your shopping be any cheaper? Would your student debts disappear? I don’t think we should ignore anything But at the minute it feels like we’re focusing on certain things too much, and certain things too little, and I think that’s by design | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it interesting how quickly people adopt phrases, words, concepts and labels. I honestly don’t care about “intersectionality” and I won’t be hopping on the next faux-intellectual buzzword either " The term is literally as old as you are  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also think- how depressing to think we can’t solve racism or sexism " Not right here right now. I like to think we're getting there. Although to be fair, I don't have skin in either game, my perceptionhere could be blinkered. Maybe it's more that I hope we are, opposed to we actually are? I'm certainly seeing more in awareness in the working world. Maybe not in society as a whole. My wish..... that I could "fix" every fucking problem in the world. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I agree with much of what you say. But as Crenshaw also says, ignoring differences amongst groups (working class for example or women for another), more frequently contributes to tension among groups (see White Woman, listen by hazel Carby which is accessible online). We have more in common and a common enemy but the best way, imo, to effective action is to acknowledge difference and support one another. The idea that racism isn’t a class issue for example isn’t helpful. Class solidarity to me means acknowledging the differences to ensure resistance for ALL. Etc etc Agreed - solely gunning for the root cause does sound like the right path but it’s a complicated world and your potential allies will always have their own priorities no matter how much you believe in it. If you offer support in all directions you’ll maximise how much you receive in return." So your motivation should be to support things for the purpose of personal gain? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was part of the consultation team representing local government when central government asked Oxford University to define "deprivation". Interestingly Ethnicity was not part of definition, but Social Class was a strong contender. Yet the Conservative Government took Social Class out of The Equality Act as a 'Protected Characteristic' (written by Labour but finalised and adopted by the Conservatives). No one would argue the issue isn't complex. Personally, I look at the components using 'bi-cultural competence'. So for example, an Asian male colleague has a habit of turning is back on me (e.g. when we are co-presenting or in the pub). He does it to all women but not men. So I know it's because I am a woman, not because of my ethnicity or trans." I was part of the consultation team representing local government when central government asked Oxford University to define "deprivation". Would the government just possibly get the answer to that question by asking those who live in the huge housing estates in this green and pleasant land? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also think- how depressing to think we can’t solve racism or sexism " We just chip away. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That’s where my mindset comes from We can’t. They are concepts, ideas that live within peoples head and hearts. You’ll never truly fix those things Wealth inequality isn’t. We can solve that. It’s numbers, house prices, cost of living, bank balances, minimum wages, effect tax structures and strategies. We can absolutely fix that. If we magically fixed racism tomorrow, could you afford a house? Would your shopping be any cheaper? Would your student debts disappear? I don’t think we should ignore anything But at the minute it feels like we’re focusing on certain things too much, and certain things too little, and I think that’s by design" Don’t get me wrong, I 100% agree that some people focus too much on certain issues without focus on the root causes (the whole “we need more black female CEOs” thing), I’m just saying that you’ll get nowhere by going too far the other way, and that a healthy balance of attempts to address all issues is required to keep everybody on board and feeling like they aren’t just being used (rightly or wrongly). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it interesting how quickly people adopt phrases, words, concepts and labels. I honestly don’t care about “intersectionality” and I won’t be hopping on the next faux-intellectual buzzword either " This buzzword I think is actually older than me though I’m not certain | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it interesting how quickly people adopt phrases, words, concepts and labels. I honestly don’t care about “intersectionality” and I won’t be hopping on the next faux-intellectual buzzword either This buzzword I think is actually older than me though I’m not certain" It could be 10,000 years old. It still doesn’t change the fact that it’s only come into popular use recently | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also think- how depressing to think we can’t solve racism or sexism That’s where my mindset comes from We can’t. They are concepts, ideas that live within peoples head and hearts. You’ll never truly fix those things Wealth inequality isn’t. We can solve that. It’s numbers, house prices, cost of living, bank balances, minimum wages, effect tax structures and strategies. We can absolutely fix that. If we magically fixed racism tomorrow, could you afford a house? Would your shopping be any cheaper? Would your student debts disappear? I don’t think we should ignore anything But at the minute it feels like we’re focusing on certain things too much, and certain things too little, and I think that’s by design" You can’t fix wealth inequality without fixing racism. They’re two sides of the same coin. Otherwise there’d be no racial differences in wealth. There’d be no difference in access. All of those things don’t go away. Access to education, to good education. Opportunities for employment. All those things are not solved by wealth inequality. You simply have to be anti racist to be a true anti capitalist or truly against wealth inequality. You have to adopt a view where you acknowledge the difference amongst those most impacted by economic inequality. It is one of the greatest flaws of most Marxist thought imo. That it doesn’t acknowledge well enough these factors. Well black Marxists do but you know what I mean | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So your motivation should be to support things for the purpose of personal gain?" I meant in terms of support for the other poster’s desire for a wider movement on economic issues, not direct personal support. Unrelated to what I was saying but there are plenty of good arguments for fighting for justice on all these issues from a “selfish” standpoint - making your neighbour richer makes them less likely to rob you, making society less racist would reduce your likelihood of being victim to gang violence etc etc - it’s not necessarily what motivates me but they can be good ways to win over people who roll their eyes at arguments based on empathy and everyone singing kumbaya etc ha | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it interesting how quickly people adopt phrases, words, concepts and labels. I honestly don’t care about “intersectionality” and I won’t be hopping on the next faux-intellectual buzzword either This buzzword I think is actually older than me though I’m not certain It could be 10,000 years old. It still doesn’t change the fact that it’s only come into popular use recently " Or only come to your awareness recently? Stay woke | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I agree with much of what you say. But as Crenshaw also says, ignoring differences amongst groups (working class for example or women for another), more frequently contributes to tension among groups (see White Woman, listen by hazel Carby which is accessible online). We have more in common and a common enemy but the best way, imo, to effective action is to acknowledge difference and support one another. The idea that racism isn’t a class issue for example isn’t helpful. Class solidarity to me means acknowledging the differences to ensure resistance for ALL. Etc etc Agreed - solely gunning for the root cause does sound like the right path but it’s a complicated world and your potential allies will always have their own priorities no matter how much you believe in it. If you offer support in all directions you’ll maximise how much you receive in return." Literally! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it very unhealthy to think of myself as being marginalised because I'm a woman. That leads to the victim mentality. I do plenty in my day to day life to improve my existence and those of others whether that be through the MP I vote for or volunteering in my local community. " I too vote and volunteer and my day job is supporting the sector that provides support to marginalised and vulnerable groups. But if acknowledging the ways that oppression/ discrimination impact me and others is unhealthy then put me on the ward. I’m dying. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Intersectionality! A great term coined by Kimberle Crenshaw. I think the thing about understanding our experiences moving through the world is that we have no choice but to accept that, that experience is invariably linked to multiple parts of our identity, right? So being a woman, that’s queer and is Black and working class are parts of one of my friend’s identity that cannot be separated. Her experience moving through the world is impacted by all of those things and often, all of those things at the same time. Her experience of racism is unique in the gendered nature. Her experience with sexism is unique because of her experiences as a Black Woman (misogynoir). Etc etc. Anyway. People! Fabbers! Do you think about the intersecting parts of your identity and how they impact your experience moving through the world? Do you think about or notice and respect other people’s? Please don’t come here to troll
Isn't that just life? Charge it to the game steve"You bastard 
Nicely done | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Intersectionality! A great term coined by Kimberle Crenshaw. I think the thing about understanding our experiences moving through the world is that we have no choice but to accept that, that experience is invariably linked to multiple parts of our identity, right? So being a woman, that’s queer and is Black and working class are parts of one of my friend’s identity that cannot be separated. Her experience moving through the world is impacted by all of those things and often, all of those things at the same time. Her experience of racism is unique in the gendered nature. Her experience with sexism is unique because of her experiences as a Black Woman (misogynoir). Etc etc. Anyway. People! Fabbers! Do you think about the intersecting parts of your identity and how they impact your experience moving through the world? Do you think about or notice and respect other people’s? Please don’t come here to troll
Isn't that just life? Charge it to the game steve
You bastard
Nicely done "I disagree but nicely done | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What annoys me about the word intersectionality is that it just means everything is related to everything else which isn't exactly rocket science, so as it used now, it has become a word that smug pseudo-intellectuals (and living in Oxford I know quite a lot of those) use to separate those who are supposedly switched on to inequality and inclusivity from those who in their view aren't. So really just another trendy word which will eventually be replaced by another." Maybe but much like the term racism, it didn’t exist at one point and when making legal arguments in court, Crenshaw realised this and coined the term. It’s done much good! Sure it’s used in the sense that you say but the existence of the word is more helpful than not. You say it’s not rocket science but until the I think 80s or 90s when Crenshaw wrote her essay on it, it wasn’t widely accepted as truth and there was no one word for it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I dunno how you thought this was going to go, Steve. Have you considered starting a Substack or something about it? (other platforms are available etc)" This thread, I knew. The last thread I did last night I enjoyed. I joked around mostly. It was fun. I slept like a baby. This thread hasn’t angered or upset me though. I’ve got more important shit and I already know how the lounge is
I used to write a blog. But I don’t anymore | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What annoys me about the word intersectionality is that it just means everything is related to everything else which isn't exactly rocket science, so as it used now, it has become a word that smug pseudo-intellectuals (and living in Oxford I know quite a lot of those) use to separate those who are supposedly switched on to inequality and inclusivity from those who in their view aren't. So really just another trendy word which will eventually be replaced by another. Maybe but much like the term racism, it didn’t exist at one point and when making legal arguments in court, Crenshaw realised this and coined the term. It’s done much good! Sure it’s used in the sense that you say but the existence of the word is more helpful than not. You say it’s not rocket science but until the I think 80s or 90s when Crenshaw wrote her essay on it, it wasn’t widely accepted as truth and there was no one word for it. " It interests me that "oh these words go in and out of fashion" only ever seems to apply to terms on the left, not on the right. If "intersectionality" can be dismissed because it wasn't in wide use in the 1980s, should we dismiss "go woke go broke" and other such inanity for similar reasons? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So your motivation should be to support things for the purpose of personal gain? I meant in terms of support for the other poster’s desire for a wider movement on economic issues, not direct personal support. Unrelated to what I was saying but there are plenty of good arguments for fighting for justice on all these issues from a “selfish” standpoint - making your neighbour richer makes them less likely to rob you, making society less racist would reduce your likelihood of being victim to gang violence etc etc - it’s not necessarily what motivates me but they can be good ways to win over people who roll their eyes at arguments based on empathy and everyone singing kumbaya etc ha" I find it very manipulative and exploitative. “Hey I dislike this group. So let me manipulate all these different minority groups to help me bring down this other group”. I’m not a fan of that thinking and it seems to happen a lot now. People don’t genuinely care about causes, they just just care about bringing down someone else and they’ll exploit others to achieve that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I dunno how you thought this was going to go, Steve. Have you considered starting a Substack or something about it? (other platforms are available etc) This thread, I knew. The last thread I did last night I enjoyed. I joked around mostly. It was fun. I slept like a baby. This thread hasn’t angered or upset me though. I’ve got more important shit and I already know how the lounge is
I used to write a blog. But I don’t anymore"I just don't know what the point of this is other than more of the usual shit, then | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I dunno how you thought this was going to go, Steve. Have you considered starting a Substack or something about it? (other platforms are available etc) This thread, I knew. The last thread I did last night I enjoyed. I joked around mostly. It was fun. I slept like a baby. This thread hasn’t angered or upset me though. I’ve got more important shit and I already know how the lounge is
I used to write a blog. But I don’t anymore
I just don't know what the point of this is other than more of the usual shit, then "Hey! Fluffy mentioned an intersectional thread and it got me thinking. I was happy to post it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What annoys me about the word intersectionality is that it just means everything is related to everything else which isn't exactly rocket science, so as it used now, it has become a word that smug pseudo-intellectuals (and living in Oxford I know quite a lot of those) use to separate those who are supposedly switched on to inequality and inclusivity from those who in their view aren't. So really just another trendy word which will eventually be replaced by another. Maybe but much like the term racism, it didn’t exist at one point and when making legal arguments in court, Crenshaw realised this and coined the term. It’s done much good! Sure it’s used in the sense that you say but the existence of the word is more helpful than not. You say it’s not rocket science but until the I think 80s or 90s when Crenshaw wrote her essay on it, it wasn’t widely accepted as truth and there was no one word for it. " Stephen who is Crenshaw? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I dunno how you thought this was going to go, Steve. Have you considered starting a Substack or something about it? (other platforms are available etc) This thread, I knew. The last thread I did last night I enjoyed. I joked around mostly. It was fun. I slept like a baby. This thread hasn’t angered or upset me though. I’ve got more important shit and I already know how the lounge is
I used to write a blog. But I don’t anymore
I just don't know what the point of this is other than more of the usual shit, then
Hey! Fluffy mentioned an intersectional thread and it got me thinking. I was happy to post it"lol fair enough. I just kind of think it's pearls before swine a bit (it's an expression it comes from the Bible everyone calm down) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What annoys me about the word intersectionality is that it just means everything is related to everything else which isn't exactly rocket science, so as it used now, it has become a word that smug pseudo-intellectuals (and living in Oxford I know quite a lot of those) use to separate those who are supposedly switched on to inequality and inclusivity from those who in their view aren't. So really just another trendy word which will eventually be replaced by another." Yeah definitely something to be said for not just using terms to signal your own esotericism (oops another fancy word ha), education inequality is an issue too after all… but it’s definitely a worthwhile term to have as shorthand when you’re talking about the subject, and I’d argue more specifically than “everything is related” it’s about promoting the idea that people shouldn’t just focus on issues that directly affect themselves. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What annoys me about the word intersectionality is that it just means everything is related to everything else which isn't exactly rocket science, so as it used now, it has become a word that smug pseudo-intellectuals (and living in Oxford I know quite a lot of those) use to separate those who are supposedly switched on to inequality and inclusivity from those who in their view aren't. So really just another trendy word which will eventually be replaced by another. Maybe but much like the term racism, it didn’t exist at one point and when making legal arguments in court, Crenshaw realised this and coined the term. It’s done much good! Sure it’s used in the sense that you say but the existence of the word is more helpful than not. You say it’s not rocket science but until the I think 80s or 90s when Crenshaw wrote her essay on it, it wasn’t widely accepted as truth and there was no one word for it. Stephen who is Crenshaw?" Kimberle Crenshaw. She coined the term intersectionality | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What annoys me about the word intersectionality is that it just means everything is related to everything else which isn't exactly rocket science, so as it used now, it has become a word that smug pseudo-intellectuals (and living in Oxford I know quite a lot of those) use to separate those who are supposedly switched on to inequality and inclusivity from those who in their view aren't. So really just another trendy word which will eventually be replaced by another. Yeah definitely something to be said for not just using terms to signal your own esotericism (oops another fancy word ha), education inequality is an issue too after all… but it’s definitely a worthwhile term to have as shorthand when you’re talking about the subject, and I’d argue more specifically than “everything is related” it’s about promoting the idea that people shouldn’t just focus on issues that directly affect themselves." I think - as someone doing academic adjacent stuff - using terms like "intersectionality" to try to virtue signal erudition is like showing off that you know the spelling list from a few grades above you. It's largely entered public discourse (even if some people hate it and wish it would fuck off). It's just not that impressive - and most people who are engaged in academic adjacent debates just roll with it. I think it's only those who are not involved who object - or those who have political objections. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also think- how depressing to think we can’t solve racism or sexism That’s where my mindset comes from We can’t. They are concepts, ideas that live within peoples head and hearts. You’ll never truly fix those things Wealth inequality isn’t. We can solve that. It’s numbers, house prices, cost of living, bank balances, minimum wages, effect tax structures and strategies. We can absolutely fix that. If we magically fixed racism tomorrow, could you afford a house? Would your shopping be any cheaper? Would your student debts disappear? I don’t think we should ignore anything But at the minute it feels like we’re focusing on certain things too much, and certain things too little, and I think that’s by design You can’t fix wealth inequality without fixing racism. They’re two sides of the same coin. Otherwise there’d be no racial differences in wealth. There’d be no difference in access. All of those things don’t go away. Access to education, to good education. Opportunities for employment. All those things are not solved by wealth inequality. You simply have to be anti racist to be a true anti capitalist or truly against wealth inequality. You have to adopt a view where you acknowledge the difference amongst those most impacted by economic inequality. It is one of the greatest flaws of most Marxist thought imo. That it doesn’t acknowledge well enough these factors. Well black Marxists do but you know what I mean " I don’t think you can solve either without solving the other And ones definitely easier to fix then the other, and it’s the one that not only gets the least attention, it’s the one (in my opinion) that would create the biggest improvements in living standards for everyone I wonder how much less isms there would be in society if all our cups were full and we weren’t working ourselves to death for the bare minimum For me, and maybe I’m too logical for my own good, I can’t see a clear path to fixing racism. I don’t think we ever will. I do however see paths to fixing wealth inequality because it’s a real, tangible problem. Wealth inequality doesn’t exist within people’s heads or hearts. If the right people with the right ideas were in charge, we could fix wealth inequality this year. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also think- how depressing to think we can’t solve racism or sexism That’s where my mindset comes from We can’t. They are concepts, ideas that live within peoples head and hearts. You’ll never truly fix those things Wealth inequality isn’t. We can solve that. It’s numbers, house prices, cost of living, bank balances, minimum wages, effect tax structures and strategies. We can absolutely fix that. If we magically fixed racism tomorrow, could you afford a house? Would your shopping be any cheaper? Would your student debts disappear? I don’t think we should ignore anything But at the minute it feels like we’re focusing on certain things too much, and certain things too little, and I think that’s by design You can’t fix wealth inequality without fixing racism. They’re two sides of the same coin. Otherwise there’d be no racial differences in wealth. There’d be no difference in access. All of those things don’t go away. Access to education, to good education. Opportunities for employment. All those things are not solved by wealth inequality. You simply have to be anti racist to be a true anti capitalist or truly against wealth inequality. You have to adopt a view where you acknowledge the difference amongst those most impacted by economic inequality. It is one of the greatest flaws of most Marxist thought imo. That it doesn’t acknowledge well enough these factors. Well black Marxists do but you know what I mean I don’t think you can solve either without solving the other And ones definitely easier to fix then the other, and it’s the one that not only gets the least attention, it’s the one (in my opinion) that would create the biggest improvements in living standards for everyone I wonder how much less isms there would be in society if all our cups were full and we weren’t working ourselves to death for the bare minimum For me, and maybe I’m too logical for my own good, I can’t see a clear path to fixing racism. I don’t think we ever will. I do however see paths to fixing wealth inequality because it’s a real, tangible problem. Wealth inequality doesn’t exist within people’s heads or hearts. If the right people with the right ideas were in charge, we could fix wealth inequality this year. " the right people with the right ideas were in charge, we could fix wealth inequality this year. Please elaborate on this hypothesis | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also think- how depressing to think we can’t solve racism or sexism " Do you mean in the UK or globally? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think my referencing academics has pissed people off! "always | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also think- how depressing to think we can’t solve racism or sexism Do you mean in the UK or globally? " Either. I’m thinking UK because I live here. But racism and sexism are global issues | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it very unhealthy to think of myself as being marginalised because I'm a woman. That leads to the victim mentality. I do plenty in my day to day life to improve my existence and those of others whether that be through the MP I vote for or volunteering in my local community. " I think its unhealthy to delude yourself that you are not marginalised because of your gender. Comforting perhaps, but deluded. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also think- how depressing to think we can’t solve racism or sexism That’s where my mindset comes from We can’t. They are concepts, ideas that live within peoples head and hearts. You’ll never truly fix those things Wealth inequality isn’t. We can solve that. It’s numbers, house prices, cost of living, bank balances, minimum wages, effect tax structures and strategies. We can absolutely fix that. If we magically fixed racism tomorrow, could you afford a house? Would your shopping be any cheaper? Would your student debts disappear? I don’t think we should ignore anything But at the minute it feels like we’re focusing on certain things too much, and certain things too little, and I think that’s by design You can’t fix wealth inequality without fixing racism. They’re two sides of the same coin. Otherwise there’d be no racial differences in wealth. There’d be no difference in access. All of those things don’t go away. Access to education, to good education. Opportunities for employment. All those things are not solved by wealth inequality. You simply have to be anti racist to be a true anti capitalist or truly against wealth inequality. You have to adopt a view where you acknowledge the difference amongst those most impacted by economic inequality. It is one of the greatest flaws of most Marxist thought imo. That it doesn’t acknowledge well enough these factors. Well black Marxists do but you know what I mean I don’t think you can solve either without solving the other And ones definitely easier to fix then the other, and it’s the one that not only gets the least attention, it’s the one (in my opinion) that would create the biggest improvements in living standards for everyone I wonder how much less isms there would be in society if all our cups were full and we weren’t working ourselves to death for the bare minimum For me, and maybe I’m too logical for my own good, I can’t see a clear path to fixing racism. I don’t think we ever will. I do however see paths to fixing wealth inequality because it’s a real, tangible problem. Wealth inequality doesn’t exist within people’s heads or hearts. If the right people with the right ideas were in charge, we could fix wealth inequality this year. " Lots of implications I don’t agree with here. Racism is real and the impacts of it, the consequences of it are real. Not just in our heads and hearts. Anyway- my response is, many isms would still exist because we have now for centuries lived on the basis of these isms. Our understanding of so many things are invariably linked to these isms. And like has been said, only through education (and other means ofc) is it possible to solve them. An anti capitalist revolution would help, sure. But like I said, any anti capitalist movement worth anything is anti racist or anti isms anyway. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone care to hear the opinion of a heterosexual, educated, affluent, able-bodied, cisgender male? I'm a homeowner too. And married. No? I'll see myself out. "Speak your truth | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone care to hear the opinion of a heterosexual, educated, affluent, able-bodied, cisgender male? I'm a homeowner too. And married. No? I'll see myself out. "Probably the funniest retort of the thread so far! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I dunno how you thought this was going to go, Steve. Have you considered starting a Substack or something about it? (other platforms are available etc) This thread, I knew. The last thread I did last night I enjoyed. I joked around mostly. It was fun. I slept like a baby. This thread hasn’t angered or upset me though. I’ve got more important shit and I already know how the lounge is
I used to write a blog. But I don’t anymore
I just don't know what the point of this is other than more of the usual shit, then "Sorry, my bad | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone care to hear the opinion of a heterosexual, educated, affluent, able-bodied, cisgender male? I'm a homeowner too. And married. No? I'll see myself out. "The fact that you're able to recognise your advantages like that suggests you've given the matter more thought than many... J | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think my referencing academics has pissed people off! "Absolutely not! Academic studies have a place in society. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone care to hear the opinion of a heterosexual, educated, affluent, able-bodied, cisgender male? I'm a homeowner too. And married. No? I'll see myself out.
The fact that you're able to recognise your advantages like that suggests you've given the matter more thought than many...
J"Perhaps the poster has recognised the harder he works the more advantage he achieves? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of implications I don’t agree with here. Racism is real and the impacts of it, the consequences of it are real. Not just in our heads and hearts. Anyway- my response is, many isms would still exist because we have now for centuries lived on the basis of these isms. Our understanding of so many things are invariably linked to these isms. And like has been said, only through education (and other means ofc) is it possible to solve them. An anti capitalist revolution would help, sure. But like I said, any anti capitalist movement worth anything is anti racist or anti isms anyway. " Is socialism or communism inherently not racist? If racism is something that’s existed in people before these concepts exists, how can any one particulars idea be any more or less racist then another? Capitalism is purely a free market where the means of production is privatised. Why can’t that exist without racism? Is capitalism racist? Or is any system racist when the people within it have racism in their head and hearts? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What annoys me about the word intersectionality is that it just means everything is related to everything else which isn't exactly rocket science, so as it used now, it has become a word that smug pseudo-intellectuals (and living in Oxford I know quite a lot of those) use to separate those who are supposedly switched on to inequality and inclusivity from those who in their view aren't. So really just another trendy word which will eventually be replaced by another. Maybe but much like the term racism, it didn’t exist at one point and when making legal arguments in court, Crenshaw realised this and coined the term. It’s done much good! Sure it’s used in the sense that you say but the existence of the word is more helpful than not. You say it’s not rocket science but until the I think 80s or 90s when Crenshaw wrote her essay on it, it wasn’t widely accepted as truth and there was no one word for it. It interests me that "oh these words go in and out of fashion" only ever seems to apply to terms on the left, not on the right. If "intersectionality" can be dismissed because it wasn't in wide use in the 1980s, should we dismiss "go woke go broke" and other such inanity for similar reasons?" Right wing ideology doesn't have fashionable buzzwords, and anybody who says otherwise is a woke snowflake remoaner cuck soyboy quisling traitor Marxist antifa commie pinko loony-leftie do-gooder. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What annoys me about the word intersectionality is that it just means everything is related to everything else which isn't exactly rocket science, so as it used now, it has become a word that smug pseudo-intellectuals (and living in Oxford I know quite a lot of those) use to separate those who are supposedly switched on to inequality and inclusivity from those who in their view aren't. So really just another trendy word which will eventually be replaced by another. Maybe but much like the term racism, it didn’t exist at one point and when making legal arguments in court, Crenshaw realised this and coined the term. It’s done much good! Sure it’s used in the sense that you say but the existence of the word is more helpful than not. You say it’s not rocket science but until the I think 80s or 90s when Crenshaw wrote her essay on it, it wasn’t widely accepted as truth and there was no one word for it. It interests me that "oh these words go in and out of fashion" only ever seems to apply to terms on the left, not on the right. If "intersectionality" can be dismissed because it wasn't in wide use in the 1980s, should we dismiss "go woke go broke" and other such inanity for similar reasons? Right wing ideology doesn't have fashionable buzzwords, and anybody who says otherwise is a woke snowflake remoaner cuck soyboy quisling traitor Marxist antifa commie pinko loony-leftie do-gooder." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wealth inequality doesn’t exist within people’s heads or hearts. " Sadly it does - not everybody’s, but the people who hold all the power. Look at all the west-induced wars, embargoes and regime-changes-via-death-squad that happened to socialist countries over the last century. Look at what they did to neutralise Corbyn and basically anyone else who argues for these things. It seems like the easiest fix but it’s the hardest. The rich will use everything in their power to keep things the way they are and will not go quietly. Voting in one PM or president with the right mindset may help to move things in the right direction but it’s not a magical fix that can be resolved in one penstroke - it’s a fight that will likely extend way beyond our lifetimes and requires a realistic assessment of what is possible in your time and how best to gather support for the cause. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I notice how many people outside of London view "intersectionality" as a new thing. That's a indication of their education system. Growing up in poor places with limited funding because you're outside of a city and the mines were closed down etc is an oppression of its own. A school where I live in London received twice as much per pupil than a school in Bolton. That directly impacts on the quality of education you receive. If you take the poorest area of London and then one up North, you'll see a vast difference is educational attainment simply because we get more social funding. This is why you won't see a Benefits Street type programme in Tower Hamlets despite the similar levels of wealth deprivation. " There’s major differences. I mean in the borough of Enfield alone there’s like 12 secondary schools. Some parts of the country have half that amount. But I don’t think people don’t know it because of their formal education. Growing up in London, I went to a secondary school that was mostly made up of Black students. As in we were the majority demographic. And that impacted what I learned out of the classroom. Like I said in the other thread, it’s true I didn’t learn about Leopold in secondary school from my teachers. But I learned about him in secondary school from my peers. That’s because he’s central to the experiences of those people. I have worked in schools up north and spoken to them about issues relating to prejudice and some of them have never seen it beyond the tv. Some of them didn’t know who various socially significant people were because they’re not taught in a textbook. Some of them had never heard of the term Islamophobia or antisemitism. When I worked in the primary and secondary schools in London, same aged kids, they knew these things but not because the teachers had told them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of implications I don’t agree with here. Racism is real and the impacts of it, the consequences of it are real. Not just in our heads and hearts. Anyway- my response is, many isms would still exist because we have now for centuries lived on the basis of these isms. Our understanding of so many things are invariably linked to these isms. And like has been said, only through education (and other means ofc) is it possible to solve them. An anti capitalist revolution would help, sure. But like I said, any anti capitalist movement worth anything is anti racist or anti isms anyway. Is socialism or communism inherently not racist? If racism is something that’s existed in people before these concepts exists, how can any one particulars idea be any more or less racist then another? Capitalism is purely a free market where the means of production is privatised. Why can’t that exist without racism? Is capitalism racist? Or is any system racist when the people within it have racism in their head and hearts? " There’s lots of stuff on racial capitalism and on how capitalism is inherently racist by quite a few people. I’ll pop some in here later. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of implications I don’t agree with here. Racism is real and the impacts of it, the consequences of it are real. Not just in our heads and hearts. Anyway- my response is, many isms would still exist because we have now for centuries lived on the basis of these isms. Our understanding of so many things are invariably linked to these isms. And like has been said, only through education (and other means ofc) is it possible to solve them. An anti capitalist revolution would help, sure. But like I said, any anti capitalist movement worth anything is anti racist or anti isms anyway. Is socialism or communism inherently not racist? If racism is something that’s existed in people before these concepts exists, how can any one particulars idea be any more or less racist then another? Capitalism is purely a free market where the means of production is privatised. Why can’t that exist without racism? Is capitalism racist? Or is any system racist when the people within it have racism in their head and hearts? There’s lots of stuff on racial capitalism and on how capitalism is inherently racist by quite a few people. I’ll pop some in here later. " If it’s in podcast or audio book I’d really appreciate that, I struggle with reading and (to touch on a thing you commented earlier) I think people can be put off a discussion when all they want is a human to human chat but instead get giving hours of reading homework | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone care to hear the opinion of a heterosexual, educated, affluent, able-bodied, cisgender male? I'm a homeowner too. And married. No? I'll see myself out.
The fact that you're able to recognise your advantages like that suggests you've given the matter more thought than many...
J
Perhaps the poster has recognised the harder he works the more advantage he achieves?"Nah, I'm here to tell you that has absolutely not been the case. I've had doors opened for me because of who I am my whole life, in ways that people who don't match me on even one of those criteria don't benefit from. Privilege is real, don't ever let people tell you it isn't. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I wonder Pickles - does lifestyle come into it? As in, we’re all filthy perverts on Fab and therefore likely to have more liberal views on related topics. We’re not a protected characteristic in law by virtue of our membership, but we’re (loosely) a gang." Sorry to jump on you felix but this is a great point. I was born in London and lived there until 7 then moved to Sussex. My world of being one of four white kids in my class went to one of being only white kids in my class. I kept asking where everyone else was! So then growing up and all of my adulthood living in predominantly white areas I am surrounded (not by choice) with white people. Being on fab is the first community I’ve found as an adult where literally every type of person is here. And it’s great. There are so many people here that I wouldn’t come across in my daily life and I love being able to have that interaction. Even wi th the trolls and idiots | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of implications I don’t agree with here. Racism is real and the impacts of it, the consequences of it are real. Not just in our heads and hearts. Anyway- my response is, many isms would still exist because we have now for centuries lived on the basis of these isms. Our understanding of so many things are invariably linked to these isms. And like has been said, only through education (and other means ofc) is it possible to solve them. An anti capitalist revolution would help, sure. But like I said, any anti capitalist movement worth anything is anti racist or anti isms anyway. Is socialism or communism inherently not racist? If racism is something that’s existed in people before these concepts exists, how can any one particulars idea be any more or less racist then another? Capitalism is purely a free market where the means of production is privatised. Why can’t that exist without racism? Is capitalism racist? Or is any system racist when the people within it have racism in their head and hearts? There’s lots of stuff on racial capitalism and on how capitalism is inherently racist by quite a few people. I’ll pop some in here later. " Side note: there's been an interesting discussion (on Substack incidentally) about the intersection of capitalism and fascism. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’ll be honest and own up to reading about half way down the thread and giving up. All my life I have struggled to find such topics interesting as it feels like school to me. But I’m willing to learn and contribute. I do understand the premise, albeit only on the surface. I have just about every privilege one could name with the exception of being comprehensively edumacated. Where I grew up really wasn’t very diverse compared to now and I have never really experienced or witnessed oppressive behaviour first hand. I wonder Pickles - does lifestyle come into it? As in, we’re all filthy perverts on Fab and therefore likely to have more liberal views on related topics. We’re not a protected characteristic in law by virtue of our membership, but we’re (loosely) a gang." Swingers are actually known for being very Conservative and that's why they often clash with the Poly and kink communities. For instance, the conversation "WhY nO bI GuYs?" Is given the time of day here. This site has the label "transsexual" still in use. And let's remember, most of the sex people seek on here is hardly transgressive and a lot of men suffer from such severe performance anxiety that they can't actually fuck anyone other than their wives anyway. This is not a Liberal crowd by any means... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe I’m being naive but if capitalism is just the privatisation of trade and business, I’d hope someone could point out how that’s inherently racist itself without needing a book Nothing within capitalism says anyone of any race or gender can’t own their business. It’s the people within it that make it racist That’s like saying football is racist because once upon a time we didn’t let black people play. The rules of football don’t have racism within them “ Capitalism as an economic system is not inherently racist, but its historical implementations and structures have sometimes led to disparities and systemic issues that disproportionately affect certain racial groups. It's essential to address and mitigate these issues to promote a more equitable society within a capitalist framework.”" It’s not *inherently* racist, but racism is used as a tool by capitalists to increase their own capital. Slav3ry in the US was done for economic reasons (free labour) not racist ones - racism was simply used to justify it by convincing people that black people were lesser beings which made it ok. Shadows of that still exist today in the US - the drug war was deliberately targeted at black and hippy communities to break up progressive movements, allowing right wing (pro inequality) policies to advance to where they are now. Black people are disproportionately imprisoned in the US and private prisons profit from their forced labour (slav3ry is technically still legal for prisoners over there). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I wonder Pickles - does lifestyle come into it? As in, we’re all filthy perverts on Fab and therefore likely to have more liberal views on related topics. We’re not a protected characteristic in law by virtue of our membership, but we’re (loosely) a gang. Sorry to jump on you felix but this is a great point. I was born in London and lived there until 7 then moved to Sussex. My world of being one of four white kids in my class went to one of being only white kids in my class. I kept asking where everyone else was! So then growing up and all of my adulthood living in predominantly white areas I am surrounded (not by choice) with white people. Being on fab is the first community I’ve found as an adult where literally every type of person is here. And it’s great. There are so many people here that I wouldn’t come across in my daily life and I love being able to have that interaction. Even wi th the trolls and idiots " I'm going to hop on this too, as personally I was surprised to find there was a tendency towards the exact opposite around these parts - I too expected a strongly tolerant, possibly left-leaning overall environment, but hanging around forums I've encountered an alarming amount of intolerance and outright hatred. It's why I don't actually participate very often, I always end up disagreeing with someone strongly enough to earn a forum ban
I've also had my eyes opened to how many intersectional factors can change a person's experience or perception just in the mini-community of Fab itself. From the often discussed differences between a single males experience Vs a single woman, to the fetishization of race/ethnicity. These are issues and experiences that would never have occurred to me from a position of relative privilege. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’ll be honest and own up to reading about half way down the thread and giving up. All my life I have struggled to find such topics interesting as it feels like school to me. But I’m willing to learn and contribute. I do understand the premise, albeit only on the surface. I have just about every privilege one could name with the exception of being comprehensively edumacated. Where I grew up really wasn’t very diverse compared to now and I have never really experienced or witnessed oppressive behaviour first hand. I wonder Pickles - does lifestyle come into it? As in, we’re all filthy perverts on Fab and therefore likely to have more liberal views on related topics. We’re not a protected characteristic in law by virtue of our membership, but we’re (loosely) a gang. Swingers are actually known for being very Conservative and that's why they often clash with the Poly and kink communities. For instance, the conversation "WhY nO bI GuYs?" Is given the time of day here. This site has the label "transsexual" still in use. And let's remember, most of the sex people seek on here is hardly transgressive and a lot of men suffer from such severe performance anxiety that they can't actually fuck anyone other than their wives anyway. This is not a Liberal crowd by any means..." My guess (based on observation only) would be libertarian with a side of hypocritical. "I want what I want, leave me alone, but down with that other stuff I don't like" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe I’m being naive but if capitalism is just the privatisation of trade and business, I’d hope someone could point out how that’s inherently racist itself without needing a book Nothing within capitalism says anyone of any race or gender can’t own their business. It’s the people within it that make it racist That’s like saying football is racist because once upon a time we didn’t let black people play. The rules of football don’t have racism within them “ Capitalism as an economic system is not inherently racist, but its historical and structures have sometimes led to disparities and systemic issues that disproportionately affect certain racial groups. It's essential to address and mitigate these issues to promote a more equitable society within a capitalist framework.”" It’s more that capitalism relies upon the exploitation of others and that means that in western societies built on racism, that built their wealth on racism, they’re invariably linked. Also there’s the fact of racial inequality in labour markets for example. If you’re paid less, in a society like ours that increases your risk of health and social inequalities. That’s racism and that’s capitalism. Capitalism breeds competition. It thrives on it. That’s how you see the things that underpin the theory of how the Irish became white in America. By collectively organising to work for less to prevent black people getting jobs and to monopolise your place in the labour market. Also then threatening action when faced with the prospect of working with Black people. People want cheapest labour in search of profit. There’s also the links to the transatlantic trade. I went to a talk that explored it in more detail and obviously gave a proper deeper look
I mean inherent as in, it relies on it. Racism is central to how it was made in the modern world. The birth of modern capitalism is impossible to separate from racism. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’ll be honest and own up to reading about half way down the thread and giving up. All my life I have struggled to find such topics interesting as it feels like school to me. But I’m willing to learn and contribute. I do understand the premise, albeit only on the surface. I have just about every privilege one could name with the exception of being comprehensively edumacated. Where I grew up really wasn’t very diverse compared to now and I have never really experienced or witnessed oppressive behaviour first hand. I wonder Pickles - does lifestyle come into it? As in, we’re all filthy perverts on Fab and therefore likely to have more liberal views on related topics. We’re not a protected characteristic in law by virtue of our membership, but we’re (loosely) a gang. Swingers are actually known for being very Conservative and that's why they often clash with the Poly and kink communities. For instance, the conversation "WhY nO bI GuYs?" Is given the time of day here. This site has the label "transsexual" still in use. And let's remember, most of the sex people seek on here is hardly transgressive and a lot of men suffer from such severe performance anxiety that they can't actually fuck anyone other than their wives anyway. This is not a Liberal crowd by any means..." Oh, that's interesting. I hadn't really thought of it like that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I wonder Pickles - does lifestyle come into it? As in, we’re all filthy perverts on Fab and therefore likely to have more liberal views on related topics. We’re not a protected characteristic in law by virtue of our membership, but we’re (loosely) a gang. Sorry to jump on you felix but this is a great point. I was born in London and lived there until 7 then moved to Sussex. My world of being one of four white kids in my class went to one of being only white kids in my class. I kept asking where everyone else was! So then growing up and all of my adulthood living in predominantly white areas I am surrounded (not by choice) with white people. Being on fab is the first community I’ve found as an adult where literally every type of person is here. And it’s great. There are so many people here that I wouldn’t come across in my daily life and I love being able to have that interaction. Even wi th the trolls and idiots I'm going to hop on this too, as personally I was surprised to find there was a tendency towards the exact opposite around these parts - I too expected a strongly tolerant, possibly left-leaning overall environment, but hanging around forums I've encountered an alarming amount of intolerance and outright hatred. It's why I don't actually participate very often, I always end up disagreeing with someone strongly enough to earn a forum ban
I've also had my eyes opened to how many intersectional factors can change a person's experience or perception just in the mini-community of Fab itself. From the often discussed differences between a single males experience Vs a single woman, to the fetishization of race/ethnicity. These are issues and experiences that would never have occurred to me from a position of relative privilege."Indeed! (Acknowledging Fluffy, too). It occurred to me that, provided we are open minded enough to allow ourselves the opportunity to view topics through an alternative lens, we may experience things differently. Unless I’m taking the term intersectionality too literally. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe I’m being naive but if capitalism is just the privatisation of trade and business, I’d hope someone could point out how that’s inherently racist itself without needing a book Nothing within capitalism says anyone of any race or gender can’t own their business. It’s the people within it that make it racist That’s like saying football is racist because once upon a time we didn’t let black people play. The rules of football don’t have racism within them “ Capitalism as an economic system is not inherently racist, but its historical implementations and structures have sometimes led to disparities and systemic issues that disproportionately affect certain racial groups. It's essential to address and mitigate these issues to promote a more equitable society within a capitalist framework.” It’s not *inherently* racist, but racism is used as a tool by capitalists to increase their own capital. Slav3ry in the US was done for economic reasons (free labour) not racist ones - racism was simply used to justify it by convincing people that black people were lesser beings which made it ok. Shadows of that still exist today in the US - the drug war was deliberately targeted at black and hippy communities to break up progressive movements, allowing right wing (pro inequality) policies to advance to where they are now. Black people are disproportionately imprisoned in the US and private prisons profit from their forced labour (slav3ry is technically still legal for prisoners over there). " That’s fair enough, it just doesn’t make sense to me to be anti capitalist for the sake of being against racism when the issue isn’t capitalism but how it’s implemented by racist people and ideas I think it’s really important to make sure we are putting our limited energy into the right thing and I don’t see capitalism as that. Capitalism, especially unregulated late stage capitalism, comes with its own host of problems. But those are solved by tackling corruption, proper regulations and including socialist ideas and schemes into a capitalist framework | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe I’m being naive but if capitalism is just the privatisation of trade and business, I’d hope someone could point out how that’s inherently racist itself without needing a book Nothing within capitalism says anyone of any race or gender can’t own their business. It’s the people within it that make it racist That’s like saying football is racist because once upon a time we didn’t let black people play. The rules of football don’t have racism within them “ Capitalism as an economic system is not inherently racist, but its historical implementations and structures have sometimes led to disparities and systemic issues that disproportionately affect certain racial groups. It's essential to address and mitigate these issues to promote a more equitable society within a capitalist framework.” It’s not *inherently* racist, but racism is used as a tool by capitalists to increase their own capital. Slav3ry in the US was done for economic reasons (free labour) not racist ones - racism was simply used to justify it by convincing people that black people were lesser beings which made it ok. Shadows of that still exist today in the US - the drug war was deliberately targeted at black and hippy communities to break up progressive movements, allowing right wing (pro inequality) policies to advance to where they are now. Black people are disproportionately imprisoned in the US and private prisons profit from their forced labour (slav3ry is technically still legal for prisoners over there). That’s fair enough, it just doesn’t make sense to me to be anti capitalist for the sake of being against racism when the issue isn’t capitalism but how it’s implemented by racist people and ideas I think it’s really important to make sure we are putting our limited energy into the right thing and I don’t see capitalism as that. Capitalism, especially unregulated late stage capitalism, comes with its own host of problems. But those are solved by tackling corruption, proper regulations and including socialist ideas and schemes into a capitalist framework " Capitalism will always work by exploiting a poorer lower class. There will be have to be some factor, intrinisic or acquired, which separates those at the top of the hierarchy from those at the bottom. The owners VS the workers. So even if you remove race or gender as one of those factors, Capitalism will always rely on Exploitation of those with less Power | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe I’m being naive but if capitalism is just the privatisation of trade and business, I’d hope someone could point out how that’s inherently racist itself without needing a book Nothing within capitalism says anyone of any race or gender can’t own their business. It’s the people within it that make it racist That’s like saying football is racist because once upon a time we didn’t let black people play. The rules of football don’t have racism within them “ Capitalism as an economic system is not inherently racist, but its historical and structures have sometimes led to disparities and systemic issues that disproportionately affect certain racial groups. It's essential to address and mitigate these issues to promote a more equitable society within a capitalist framework.” It’s more that capitalism relies upon the exploitation of others and that means that in western societies built on racism, that built their wealth on racism, they’re invariably linked. Also there’s the fact of racial inequality in labour markets for example. If you’re paid less, in a society like ours that increases your risk of health and social inequalities. That’s racism and that’s capitalism. Capitalism breeds competition. It thrives on it. That’s how you see the things that underpin the theory of how the Irish became white in America. By collectively organising to work for less to prevent black people getting jobs and to monopolise your place in the labour market. Also then threatening action when faced with the prospect of working with Black people. People want cheapest labour in search of profit. There’s also the links to the transatlantic trade. I went to a talk that explored it in more detail and obviously gave a proper deeper look
I mean inherent as in, it relies on it. Racism is central to how it was made in the modern world. The birth of modern capitalism is impossible to separate from racism. "Capitalism isn’t getting paid less due to racial inequality That’s just racism. In capitalism your paid what your worth based on the market. Without racism that means you’d be valued on your work, not your race. I think there’s a lot of confusion around the links between the 2 and I think that comes in part from your last point. It’s never existed without racism baked into the system But I think it’s important to realise that’s not capitalism. Nothing within capitalism mentions race or gender or sex or religion. It’s just a free market with private ownership of the means of production | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It’s not *inherently* racist, but racism is used as a tool by capitalists to increase their own capital. Slav3ry in the US was done for economic reasons (free labour) not racist ones - racism was simply used to justify it by convincing people that black people were lesser beings which made it ok. Shadows of that still exist today in the US - the drug war was deliberately targeted at black and hippy communities to break up progressive movements, allowing right wing (pro inequality) policies to advance to where they are now. Black people are disproportionately imprisoned in the US and private prisons profit from their forced labour (slav3ry is technically still legal for prisoners over there). " The above is actually untrue. Sl4v3ry WAS done for racist reasons. Black people were categorised as non-human animals. That’s a fact. It wasn’t “free labour” either, because these people were regularly bought and sold. If it was all about free labour then you’d see equal amounts of European people being ensl4ved. Instead you just see 99% black and then a few Irish and Chinese being made sl4v3s as punishment. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That’s fair enough, it just doesn’t make sense to me to be anti capitalist for the sake of being against racism when the issue isn’t capitalism but how it’s implemented by racist people and ideas I think it’s really important to make sure we are putting our limited energy into the right thing and I don’t see capitalism as that. Capitalism, especially unregulated late stage capitalism, comes with its own host of problems. But those are solved by tackling corruption, proper regulations and including socialist ideas and schemes into a capitalist framework " I guess it’s the difference between the textbook definitions of capitalism and racism having little to do with each other, versus the reality on the ground where they have been thoroughly woven into each other over hundreds of years. Trying to address one without the other would be limiting your effectiveness even if you really did only care about one of them (which in my opinion you shouldn’t!) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe I’m being naive but if capitalism is just the privatisation of trade and business, I’d hope someone could point out how that’s inherently racist itself without needing a book Nothing within capitalism says anyone of any race or gender can’t own their business. It’s the people within it that make it racist That’s like saying football is racist because once upon a time we didn’t let black people play. The rules of football don’t have racism within them “ Capitalism as an economic system is not inherently racist, but its historical and structures have sometimes led to disparities and systemic issues that disproportionately affect certain racial groups. It's essential to address and mitigate these issues to promote a more equitable society within a capitalist framework.” It’s more that capitalism relies upon the exploitation of others and that means that in western societies built on racism, that built their wealth on racism, they’re invariably linked. Also there’s the fact of racial inequality in labour markets for example. If you’re paid less, in a society like ours that increases your risk of health and social inequalities. That’s racism and that’s capitalism. Capitalism breeds competition. It thrives on it. That’s how you see the things that underpin the theory of how the Irish became white in America. By collectively organising to work for less to prevent black people getting jobs and to monopolise your place in the labour market. Also then threatening action when faced with the prospect of working with Black people. People want cheapest labour in search of profit. There’s also the links to the transatlantic trade. I went to a talk that explored it in more detail and obviously gave a proper deeper look
I mean inherent as in, it relies on it. Racism is central to how it was made in the modern world. The birth of modern capitalism is impossible to separate from racism.
Capitalism isn’t getting paid less due to racial inequality
That’s just racism. In capitalism your paid what your worth based on the market. Without racism that means you’d be valued on your work, not your race.
I think there’s a lot of confusion around the links between the 2 and I think that comes in part from your last point. It’s never existed without racism baked into the system
But I think it’s important to realise that’s not capitalism. Nothing within capitalism mentions race or gender or sex or religion. It’s just a free market with private ownership of the means of production"Outside of a capital Capitalist system, those employers would have never sided with their majority White workforce over stopping black workers having jobs. The employers themselves would feel less pressure to relent to ideology they maybe disagree with in order to keep their business flourishing. That part of the reason sl@very continued in/by britain long after social attitudes condemned it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It’s not *inherently* racist, but racism is used as a tool by capitalists to increase their own capital. Slav3ry in the US was done for economic reasons (free labour) not racist ones - racism was simply used to justify it by convincing people that black people were lesser beings which made it ok. Shadows of that still exist today in the US - the drug war was deliberately targeted at black and hippy communities to break up progressive movements, allowing right wing (pro inequality) policies to advance to where they are now. Black people are disproportionately imprisoned in the US and private prisons profit from their forced labour (slav3ry is technically still legal for prisoners over there). The above is actually untrue. Sl4v3ry WAS done for racist reasons. Black people were categorised as non-human animals. That’s a fact. It wasn’t “free labour” either, because these people were regularly bought and sold. If it was all about free labour then you’d see equal amounts of European people being ensl4ved. Instead you just see 99% black and then a few Irish and Chinese being made sl4v3s as punishment." They weren't sl@ves they were Indentured servants | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The above is actually untrue. Sl4v3ry WAS done for racist reasons. Black people were categorised as non-human animals. That’s a fact. It wasn’t “free labour” either, because these people were regularly bought and sold. If it was all about free labour then you’d see equal amounts of European people being ensl4ved. Instead you just see 99% black and then a few Irish and Chinese being made sl4v3s as punishment." People of all ethnicities used to be enslav3d if you go back far enough, fundamentally because it allowed their masters to maximise the amount of work they could benefit from at the lowest cost (by free I meant as close to free as you could get, obviously people still bought, sold and fed them) - it’s an economic issue at its core. The concept of only enslaving certain groups of people is a more recent thing as the world slowly became more progressive, and society started to develop more empathy for their fellow man, but that was limited initially to people who looked like them, and those dehumanising arguments were created to justify enslaving people from other cultures, until eventually society (thankfully) decided that wasn’t ok either. As has been said throughout this thread, a lot of society’s issues stem from material conditions (greed and unequal allocation of resources) at the end of the day. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The above is actually untrue. Sl4v3ry WAS done for racist reasons. Black people were categorised as non-human animals. That’s a fact. It wasn’t “free labour” either, because these people were regularly bought and sold. If it was all about free labour then you’d see equal amounts of European people being ensl4ved. Instead you just see 99% black and then a few Irish and Chinese being made sl4v3s as punishment. People of all ethnicities used to be enslav3d if you go back far enough, fundamentally because it allowed their masters to maximise the amount of work they could benefit from at the lowest cost (by free I meant as close to free as you could get, obviously people still bought, sold and fed them) - it’s an economic issue at its core. The concept of only enslaving certain groups of people is a more recent thing as the world slowly became more progressive, and society started to develop more empathy for their fellow man, but that was limited initially to people who looked like them, and those dehumanising arguments were created to justify enslaving people from other cultures, until eventually society (thankfully) decided that wasn’t ok either. As has been said throughout this thread, a lot of society’s issues stem from material conditions (greed and unequal allocation of resources) at the end of the day." We aren’t talking about going back far enough though are we. The subject was talking about recently in America and the Caribbean. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It’s not *inherently* racist, but racism is used as a tool by capitalists to increase their own capital. Slav3ry in the US was done for economic reasons (free labour) not racist ones - racism was simply used to justify it by convincing people that black people were lesser beings which made it ok. Shadows of that still exist today in the US - the drug war was deliberately targeted at black and hippy communities to break up progressive movements, allowing right wing (pro inequality) policies to advance to where they are now. Black people are disproportionately imprisoned in the US and private prisons profit from their forced labour (slav3ry is technically still legal for prisoners over there). The above is actually untrue. Sl4v3ry WAS done for racist reasons. Black people were categorised as non-human animals. That’s a fact. It wasn’t “free labour” either, because these people were regularly bought and sold. If it was all about free labour then you’d see equal amounts of European people being ensl4ved. Instead you just see 99% black and then a few Irish and Chinese being made sl4v3s as punishment. They weren't sl@ves they were Indentured servants" What? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We aren’t talking about going back far enough though are we. The subject was talking about recently in America and the Caribbean." It’s all relevant though in context - we live in a racist society not because white people have always seen brown and black people as subhuman, but because racism was deliberately pushed to the masses by the wealthy to (these days) divide the working class and (further back) make people think that enslaving africans is justifiable. If everyone thought another group of people half a world away were subhuman, but there was no benefit to be gained by exploiting them, wouldn’t they just leave them alone? The exploitation was the point, the racism was the excuse - yes many people now are dyed in the wool racists, but that just shows how successful the propaganda was. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We aren’t talking about going back far enough though are we. The subject was talking about recently in America and the Caribbean. It’s all relevant though in context - we live in a racist society not because white people have always seen brown and black people as subhuman, but because racism was deliberately pushed to the masses by the wealthy to (these days) divide the working class and (further back) make people think that enslaving africans is justifiable. If everyone thought another group of people half a world away were subhuman, but there was no benefit to be gained by exploiting them, wouldn’t they just leave them alone? The exploitation was the point, the racism was the excuse - yes many people now are dyed in the wool racists, but that just shows how successful the propaganda was." I think - as someone vaguely qualified on the less recent stuff - comparing the Atlantic trade with older stuff is like comparing apples and automobiles. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think - as someone vaguely qualified on the less recent stuff - comparing the Atlantic trade with older stuff is like comparing apples and automobiles." Aye the fine details may vary a lot but the core point in all these things are the material conditions, people exploiting others and the means used to justify it - that’s my point. The slav3rs didn’t do what they did out of hate, they did it out of selfishness - and promoted hatred in others to cover their backs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think - as someone vaguely qualified on the less recent stuff - comparing the Atlantic trade with older stuff is like comparing apples and automobiles. Aye the fine details may vary a lot but the core point in all these things are the material conditions, people exploiting others and the means used to justify it - that’s my point. The slav3rs didn’t do what they did out of hate, they did it out of selfishness - and promoted hatred in others to cover their backs." I'm going to strongly disagree. Before that trade, the commodity was much higher value and needed to be cared for, like you'd look after your car more than you'd care for some shit you picked up from Poundland. There were also greater similarities between ethnic groups because the world was smaller. Our discussion of this subject is very heavily skewed towards more recent history - which makes a fuckton of sense and from a social justice perspective I'm all for it. However, it means that people end up talking a lot of horse shit about history and assuming that "African Americans" is a good representative of all owned people ever. Profoundly untrue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It’s not *inherently* racist, but racism is used as a tool by capitalists to increase their own capital. Slav3ry in the US was done for economic reasons (free labour) not racist ones - racism was simply used to justify it by convincing people that black people were lesser beings which made it ok. Shadows of that still exist today in the US - the drug war was deliberately targeted at black and hippy communities to break up progressive movements, allowing right wing (pro inequality) policies to advance to where they are now. Black people are disproportionately imprisoned in the US and private prisons profit from their forced labour (slav3ry is technically still legal for prisoners over there). The above is actually untrue. Sl4v3ry WAS done for racist reasons. Black people were categorised as non-human animals. That’s a fact. It wasn’t “free labour” either, because these people were regularly bought and sold. If it was all about free labour then you’d see equal amounts of European people being ensl4ved. Instead you just see 99% black and then a few Irish and Chinese being made sl4v3s as punishment. They weren't sl@ves they were Indentured servants What? " https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/04/19/how-myth-irish-sl@ves-became-favorite-meme-racists-online Correct the Url | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe I’m being naive but if capitalism is just the privatisation of trade and business, I’d hope someone could point out how that’s inherently racist itself without needing a book Nothing within capitalism says anyone of any race or gender can’t own their business. It’s the people within it that make it racist That’s like saying football is racist because once upon a time we didn’t let black people play. The rules of football don’t have racism within them “ Capitalism as an economic system is not inherently racist, but its historical and structures have sometimes led to disparities and systemic issues that disproportionately affect certain racial groups. It's essential to address and mitigate these issues to promote a more equitable society within a capitalist framework.” It’s more that capitalism relies upon the exploitation of others and that means that in western societies built on racism, that built their wealth on racism, they’re invariably linked. Also there’s the fact of racial inequality in labour markets for example. If you’re paid less, in a society like ours that increases your risk of health and social inequalities. That’s racism and that’s capitalism. Capitalism breeds competition. It thrives on it. That’s how you see the things that underpin the theory of how the Irish became white in America. By collectively organising to work for less to prevent black people getting jobs and to monopolise your place in the labour market. Also then threatening action when faced with the prospect of working with Black people. People want cheapest labour in search of profit. There’s also the links to the transatlantic trade. I went to a talk that explored it in more detail and obviously gave a proper deeper look
I mean inherent as in, it relies on it. Racism is central to how it was made in the modern world. The birth of modern capitalism is impossible to separate from racism.
Capitalism isn’t getting paid less due to racial inequality
That’s just racism. In capitalism your paid what your worth based on the market. Without racism that means you’d be valued on your work, not your race.
I think there’s a lot of confusion around the links between the 2 and I think that comes in part from your last point. It’s never existed without racism baked into the system
But I think it’s important to realise that’s not capitalism. Nothing within capitalism mentions race or gender or sex or religion. It’s just a free market with private ownership of the means of production"No it is capitalism. Capitalism as we know it. Which is what we are dismantling. We’re not dismantling a theory we’re dismantling something real. That is seeped in and thrives on racism and other inequalities. Also my point about racial pay gaps was not to say that’s capitalism but again to say that’s an example of racism in our capitalist system. Might not have explained that clearly but was rush typing | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" But I think it’s important to realise that’s not capitalism. Nothing within capitalism mentions race or gender or sex or religion. It’s just a free market with private ownership of the means of production No it is capitalism. Capitalism as we know it. Which is what we are dismantling. We’re not dismantling a theory we’re dismantling something real. That is seeped in and thrives on racism and other inequalities. Also my point about racial pay gaps was not to say that’s capitalism but again to say that’s an example of racism in our capitalist system. Might not have explained that clearly but was rush typing" And same with gender. Capitalism in practice, which is what we must be talking about here, is reliant on gendered inequalities. In so many ways. Our approach to dismantling it and replacing it HAS to dismantle those inequalities otherwise it’s futile. Who are we really saving? Who actually benefits? Who actually lives without inequality in that world? Only a very obvious few that still benefit from their dominant positions in a social hierarchy | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It’s not *inherently* racist, but racism is used as a tool by capitalists to increase their own capital. Slav3ry in the US was done for economic reasons (free labour) not racist ones - racism was simply used to justify it by convincing people that black people were lesser beings which made it ok. Shadows of that still exist today in the US - the drug war was deliberately targeted at black and hippy communities to break up progressive movements, allowing right wing (pro inequality) policies to advance to where they are now. Black people are disproportionately imprisoned in the US and private prisons profit from their forced labour (slav3ry is technically still legal for prisoners over there). The above is actually untrue. Sl4v3ry WAS done for racist reasons. Black people were categorised as non-human animals. That’s a fact. It wasn’t “free labour” either, because these people were regularly bought and sold. If it was all about free labour then you’d see equal amounts of European people being ensl4ved. Instead you just see 99% black and then a few Irish and Chinese being made sl4v3s as punishment. They weren't sl@ves they were Indentured servants What? " They were indentured. And it was very different, entirely different to slxvery. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe I’m being naive but if capitalism is just the privatisation of trade and business, I’d hope someone could point out how that’s inherently racist itself without needing a book Nothing within capitalism says anyone of any race or gender can’t own their business. It’s the people within it that make it racist That’s like saying football is racist because once upon a time we didn’t let black people play. The rules of football don’t have racism within them “ Capitalism as an economic system is not inherently racist, but its historical and structures have sometimes led to disparities and systemic issues that disproportionately affect certain racial groups. It's essential to address and mitigate these issues to promote a more equitable society within a capitalist framework.” It’s more that capitalism relies upon the exploitation of others and that means that in western societies built on racism, that built their wealth on racism, they’re invariably linked. Also there’s the fact of racial inequality in labour markets for example. If you’re paid less, in a society like ours that increases your risk of health and social inequalities. That’s racism and that’s capitalism. Capitalism breeds competition. It thrives on it. That’s how you see the things that underpin the theory of how the Irish became white in America. By collectively organising to work for less to prevent black people getting jobs and to monopolise your place in the labour market. Also then threatening action when faced with the prospect of working with Black people. People want cheapest labour in search of profit. There’s also the links to the transatlantic trade. I went to a talk that explored it in more detail and obviously gave a proper deeper look
I mean inherent as in, it relies on it. Racism is central to how it was made in the modern world. The birth of modern capitalism is impossible to separate from racism.
Capitalism isn’t getting paid less due to racial inequality
That’s just racism. In capitalism your paid what your worth based on the market. Without racism that means you’d be valued on your work, not your race.
I think there’s a lot of confusion around the links between the 2 and I think that comes in part from your last point. It’s never existed without racism baked into the system
But I think it’s important to realise that’s not capitalism. Nothing within capitalism mentions race or gender or sex or religion. It’s just a free market with private ownership of the means of production
No it is capitalism. Capitalism as we know it. Which is what we are dismantling. We’re not dismantling a theory we’re dismantling something real. That is seeped in and thrives on racism and other inequalities.
Also my point about racial pay gaps was not to say that’s capitalism but again to say that’s an example of racism in our capitalist system. Might not have explained that clearly but was rush typing"Fair enough. We can agree to disagree. Nothing in capitalism’s framework mentions race or gender. That’s something someone else decided to factor into it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm going to strongly disagree. Before that trade, the commodity was much higher value and needed to be cared for, like you'd look after your car more than you'd care for some shit you picked up from Poundland. There were also greater similarities between ethnic groups because the world was smaller. Our discussion of this subject is very heavily skewed towards more recent history - which makes a fuckton of sense and from a social justice perspective I'm all for it. However, it means that people end up talking a lot of horse shit about history and assuming that "African Americans" is a good representative of all owned people ever. Profoundly untrue." What you said doesn’t disagree with my point? Yes some slav3s in more ancient times were treated better, because the societies they lived in had different values regarding their treatment. It’s harder to make dehumanising arguments about slav3s when they basically look the same as the free citizens. The fundamentals of slav3ry are unchanged though - exploitation. The degrees at which it was done obviously differ based on the degree that it could be justified by the owners - when the opportunity was presented to dehumanise a group of people to an extreme degree, some people took it and exploited them that much worse. I’m not equating anything, just talking about how the core principles are the same, applied to differing degrees. It’s all bad, but definitely more bad for the people who got it worse! Not sure what’s so contentious about what I said - we only got onto the subject by talking about how racism and capitalism have been entwined with each other for hundreds of years. Definitionally they are separate things but in our world today they are very heavily linked and should be addressed together where possible, in my opinion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wonder - and yeah I'm being shallow etc - if capitalism upholding isms isn't so much about "capitalism must uphold racism as it currently stands" but more "capitalism upholds power structures". So if for some reason we thought that people with blue eyes were demi-gods, capitalism would be about the suppression of people with other eye colours in however that perpetuated itself over centuries. (yes I know I'm being very surface level pseudo Foucault. Also this is Fab, it's Friday, and I own that this is a hot take)" Yeah I was gonna say that’s cool an all but I think it does uphold. Like western capitalism as we know it has been *built* on specific isms. So they’re invariably linked. Not in theory but in practice. Ofc capitalism as an idea doesn’t depend on racism or sexism and in theory could depend on other eye colours being exploited but at the same time, what’s the point in imagining that when that’s not our reality, you know? Getting rid of capitalism can’t solve the isms because capitalism upholds it rather than creates them. If that makes sense | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe I’m being naive but if capitalism is just the privatisation of trade and business, I’d hope someone could point out how that’s inherently racist itself without needing a book Nothing within capitalism says anyone of any race or gender can’t own their business. It’s the people within it that make it racist That’s like saying football is racist because once upon a time we didn’t let black people play. The rules of football don’t have racism within them “ Capitalism as an economic system is not inherently racist, but its historical and structures have sometimes led to disparities and systemic issues that disproportionately affect certain racial groups. It's essential to address and mitigate these issues to promote a more equitable society within a capitalist framework.” It’s more that capitalism relies upon the exploitation of others and that means that in western societies built on racism, that built their wealth on racism, they’re invariably linked. Also there’s the fact of racial inequality in labour markets for example. If you’re paid less, in a society like ours that increases your risk of health and social inequalities. That’s racism and that’s capitalism. Capitalism breeds competition. It thrives on it. That’s how you see the things that underpin the theory of how the Irish became white in America. By collectively organising to work for less to prevent black people getting jobs and to monopolise your place in the labour market. Also then threatening action when faced with the prospect of working with Black people. People want cheapest labour in search of profit. There’s also the links to the transatlantic trade. I went to a talk that explored it in more detail and obviously gave a proper deeper look
I mean inherent as in, it relies on it. Racism is central to how it was made in the modern world. The birth of modern capitalism is impossible to separate from racism.
Capitalism isn’t getting paid less due to racial inequality
That’s just racism. In capitalism your paid what your worth based on the market. Without racism that means you’d be valued on your work, not your race.
I think there’s a lot of confusion around the links between the 2 and I think that comes in part from your last point. It’s never existed without racism baked into the system
But I think it’s important to realise that’s not capitalism. Nothing within capitalism mentions race or gender or sex or religion. It’s just a free market with private ownership of the means of production
No it is capitalism. Capitalism as we know it. Which is what we are dismantling. We’re not dismantling a theory we’re dismantling something real. That is seeped in and thrives on racism and other inequalities.
Also my point about racial pay gaps was not to say that’s capitalism but again to say that’s an example of racism in our capitalist system. Might not have explained that clearly but was rush typing
Fair enough. We can agree to disagree. Nothing in capitalism’s framework mentions race or gender. That’s something someone else decided to factor into it "Yeah you’re not as bad as I once thought. Maybe I was wrong about you. Fairs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" No it is capitalism. Capitalism as we know it. Which is what we are dismantling. We’re not dismantling a theory we’re dismantling something real. That is seeped in and thrives on racism and other inequalities. " this 
Textbook definitions vs what we face in practice are two different things! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wonder - and yeah I'm being shallow etc - if capitalism upholding isms isn't so much about "capitalism must uphold racism as it currently stands" but more "capitalism upholds power structures". So if for some reason we thought that people with blue eyes were demi-gods, capitalism would be about the suppression of people with other eye colours in however that perpetuated itself over centuries. (yes I know I'm being very surface level pseudo Foucault. Also this is Fab, it's Friday, and I own that this is a hot take) Yeah I was gonna say that’s cool an all but I think it does uphold. Like western capitalism as we know it has been *built* on specific isms. So they’re invariably linked. Not in theory but in practice. Ofc capitalism as an idea doesn’t depend on racism or sexism and in theory could depend on other eye colours being exploited but at the same time, what’s the point in imagining that when that’s not our reality, you know? Getting rid of capitalism can’t solve the isms because capitalism upholds it rather than creates them. If that makes sense" Oh yeah. The blue eyes thing is just me wanking intellectually in a way. But perhaps there's something to be said for pointing it out, because people find it difficult to disentangle that capitalism is exploitative from (insert specific exploitation here). Ultimately it's just about power and exploitation. Or maybe I'm talking shit because I should be doing something more important on a fundamentally different topic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe I’m being naive but if capitalism is just the privatisation of trade and business, I’d hope someone could point out how that’s inherently racist itself without needing a book Nothing within capitalism says anyone of any race or gender can’t own their business. It’s the people within it that make it racist That’s like saying football is racist because once upon a time we didn’t let black people play. The rules of football don’t have racism within them “ Capitalism as an economic system is not inherently racist, but its historical and structures have sometimes led to disparities and systemic issues that disproportionately affect certain racial groups. It's essential to address and mitigate these issues to promote a more equitable society within a capitalist framework.” It’s more that capitalism relies upon the exploitation of others and that means that in western societies built on racism, that built their wealth on racism, they’re invariably linked. Also there’s the fact of racial inequality in labour markets for example. If you’re paid less, in a society like ours that increases your risk of health and social inequalities. That’s racism and that’s capitalism. Capitalism breeds competition. It thrives on it. That’s how you see the things that underpin the theory of how the Irish became white in America. By collectively organising to work for less to prevent black people getting jobs and to monopolise your place in the labour market. Also then threatening action when faced with the prospect of working with Black people. People want cheapest labour in search of profit. There’s also the links to the transatlantic trade. I went to a talk that explored it in more detail and obviously gave a proper deeper look
I mean inherent as in, it relies on it. Racism is central to how it was made in the modern world. The birth of modern capitalism is impossible to separate from racism.
Capitalism isn’t getting paid less due to racial inequality
That’s just racism. In capitalism your paid what your worth based on the market. Without racism that means you’d be valued on your work, not your race.
I think there’s a lot of confusion around the links between the 2 and I think that comes in part from your last point. It’s never existed without racism baked into the system
But I think it’s important to realise that’s not capitalism. Nothing within capitalism mentions race or gender or sex or religion. It’s just a free market with private ownership of the means of production
No it is capitalism. Capitalism as we know it. Which is what we are dismantling. We’re not dismantling a theory we’re dismantling something real. That is seeped in and thrives on racism and other inequalities.
Also my point about racial pay gaps was not to say that’s capitalism but again to say that’s an example of racism in our capitalist system. Might not have explained that clearly but was rush typing
Fair enough. We can agree to disagree. Nothing in capitalism’s framework mentions race or gender. That’s something someone else decided to factor into it
Yeah you’re not as bad as I once thought. Maybe I was wrong about you.
Fairs "Actually your reply above completely cleared it up for me Earlier you mentioned an anti capitalism revolution That’s thr issue I took, because I don’t think it’s capitalism that’s the issue, but the isms within But now I think I get you, you mean anti our current capitalist system, not capitalism as it is on paper In which case, yeah I agree. We’ve built a capitalist society on the foundation of racism and sexism, and we can’t fix that without stripping everything back and tackling those foundations. In an ideal world, capitalism wouldn’t have any racism, but this isn’t an ideal world and we need to take action that reflects that I think that’s where we agree anyways | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m not convinced the west have got this right. I think the intentions are good - to understand the complexity of oppression and marginalisation is a very personal thing , but the way it plays out is a lot of focus on the individual and them acknowledging, sometimes almost almost celebrating being a unique victim that everyone has to understand & accommodate. The problem is to a large degree poor funding and management of services creating scarcity and that leads marginalisation of groups Where I have seen huge progress on equality, racism and gender in diverse places such as Rwanda, New Zealand , autonomous Kurdistan and even UAE (now the most progressive & liberal Islamic country in the world) , they have not pursued this approach but instead used the legal and political systems to create equality with radical positive discrimination and a focus on high standards of health , education , transport and housing for everyone. When you solve things like unemployment, homelessness and doctors waiting lists for every citizen, oppression and marginalisation become less of a problem Whereas in Europe, things seem to be going the other way; standards are dropping for everyone and there is the rise of toxic masculinity and racism. " 100% - you can’t have social justice without economic justice. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
