Let's have a real discussion on this subject. (Note: I'm speaking as someone whose family migrated from the Third World to the first, so my way of thinking is a bit different.)
What I don't like about many on the Western left is how mystified and idealized their understanding of power relations are. It's not just an anarchist thing either since a lot of ☭TANKIE☭s do it too. By that I mean, they hold everyone to a standard that can never be realized, and if something doesn't fit their standard they immediately dismiss it as immoral or disgusting.
For example, take the classic idpol examples: idpolers expect middle-class white cishet secular males to be concerned with marginalized peoples *all the time* in order to shave off their white male guilt and de facto change the existing power/priv-ilege relation. Or, more recently, the examples dealing with international politics: "How can Muslims go on hajj when KSA is committing genocide in Yemen?" "How can Jews celebrate Passover when Israel is committing genocide in Palestine?" "How can Hindus celebrate their festivals when Modi is a fucking fascist?" "How can you eat quinoa when Peruvian peasants are starving?" The problem here is that people don't just give up aspects of their lives because others have guilt-tripped them into doing so. They give shit up and dedicate themselves to causes only after they feel a sense of solidarity with the peoples whom are suffering, which isn't something you can force on someone. You can make the argument that people not caring does reinforce the status quo, but speaking from a purely pragmatic perspective, guilt-tripping is based on a faulty understanding of how power relations change.
In my culture we don't see power relations as something inherently evil. We put much more emphasis on virtue and honor rather than ideas of power corrupting. So for instance your teachers rule over you because your teachers have knowledge and virtue that you don't, your government officials rule over you because they're the most virtuous people out there, etc. And if the people in power are corrupt and the power relation isn't working, it's changed but gradually. It's worked through rather than immediately dismissed.
In other words, I think leftists today have a priori understandings of power, whereas people like me have a more fluid/inductive notion of power.
Nathan Robinson
I mean, socialists aren't against organically occurring hierarchies like those that occur from skill or knowledge or those that arise in communities by election or choice. Socialists are and should be against only economic hierarchies and the structures which result from capitalism. Your example has more to do with liberal self-loathing or virtue signaling then anything, which is always more of a "feel good" measure that's done so people don't have to actually confront the actual system or commit to meaningful action because they can just show how "guilty" they are or how guilty you should be and move on. It actually reinforces the status quo rather then change it. To feel guilty over something you have no control over is pure lifestylism.
You come from a third world shithole Yet you think that power is not corrupting What place do you come from user
Anthony Wilson
Well, it's like this: I'm an ex-Muslim. I've been frequently put down by *actual Marxists* (MLs, Maoists, etc.) for discussing all the shit I went through during my childhood and why I was so relieved to finally leave Islam and the tyranny of my parents' house. I've been told that my apostasy is de facto playing into the hands of western hegemony, that being a Muslim and a hijabi serves as a mental shield against imperialist ideology, etc. What those comrades who criticized me don't understand is that I was at the bottom of the hierarchy in my community being a young Muslim female. Modesty standards (not just covering the body but also plenty of other little things) were like a prison to me. But they dismissed that on the basis that capitalism is also bad, so I should take the lesser evil and shut up about it.
Joseph Rivera
I was born in the U.S. but my parents are from Pakistan.
Hunter Gutierrez
projecting descriptions of 'power relations' that might actually be accurate when talking about large groups onto individuals is also stupid, if we're here to air more greivances about liberals. like the idea that, because 'white people' overall direct the course of society and culture more, because of racial inequality, all individual white people have, as individuals, power over black people. which begs the 'repent for your white privilege' approach to racial inequality instead of actually addressing the real nature of the inequality.
Austin Myers
Well the way I understand it is, there is such a thing as collective responsibility. For example, take Left Twitter's response to the recent massacre of Gaza protesters. "How can Jews celebrate their holidays and not concern themselves with genocide?" Which, as you've pointed out, merely assumes that individual Jews or Jewish families have any power over the situation beyond being "aware" and self-flagellating. Or, shitting on Muslims for going on hajj this year and spending thousands of dollars in a country that's also committing genocide, are these Muslims actually responsible for Saudi's massacres in Yemen? What can they do beyond being angry?
Jace Hall
Yeah, no, this is just another form of identity politics and is revisionism of the highest kind. The idea that the hijab is "a mental shield against imperialist ideology" is ridiculous and has absolutely no basis in Marxist thought. Trying to connect anti-capitalism with being for things which are in no way by themselves anti-capitalist is opportunism and should be treated as such. To quote an article related to this kind of thought: adidasmarxism.wordpress.com/2017/08/25/american-thought-from-theoretical-barbarism-to-intellectual-decadence/
Ryan Long
The idea is, hijabis are stigmatized because they (allegedly) stand out and are open about their religious devotion, which irks the reproduction of capitalism.
Nathan Anderson
Hey that's pretty brave. Here's one commie who backs your choice of leaving islam for what it's worth.
Henry Russell
Fuck boons! We don't want boons! All boons may eek and ook in the zoos! Bye bye!
Ethan Ross
Yeah I'm pretty thankful to be away from my fucking tyrant of a father.
Gavin Richardson
They don't sound like particularly good Marxists then.
I'll come straight out and admit it: leftism has a noble savage problem. Especially the less rigorous, left liberal types. The marginalized group du jour is indeed mystified, put up on a pedestal, and imbued with magical revolutionary essence that the comfortable first world leftist feel he or she is lacking. I think it has more to do with self-loathing about the inability to arouse class consciousness in western proles than anything else; you end up looking elsewhere for the elusive revolutionary subject.
as for power- the association between power and virtue has, for a long, long, long time, in many different cultures, how those with authority justified it regardless of whether or not it was the case. im deeply suspicious of the idea that anyone has special honor or virtue inside them that entitles them to high status for that reason. european aristocrats, at least in england, there was an idea that high-borns had an internal store of 'honor' peasants did not, and that was why they were nobles who had power and freedom while the peasants had to submit to their lord. with this came the idea that they had a responsibility for those lower than them, too. an idea of 'stewardship'- they had power, because they were honourable, and so they had a responsibility to use it honourably. we know thats often not how it worked, but even in the cases where it was, does that justify it? if they didnt have that special status, noone would depend upon them to be honourable and exercise it well. You can extend this idea to the wealth of the modern bourgeoisie, and how a lot of rich people donate to charity and talk about social responsibility. Why should we have to depend on them to be charitable and responsible? Why do they control that power in the first place? another case of 'honor and virtue' being used as the elites argument for their rule over everyone else is the ancient world- the idea that the most virtuous and wise should rule was the elites usual argument against democracy, for oligarchy. I can understand the mindset, the picture of the world that idea of power creates, but I dont trust it.
Elijah Sullivan
Because you can’t have capitalism and Islam together, right? The Saudis aren’t Uber capitalists participating in the same global economic system as everyone else? Do people actually take that idea seriously outside of internet sjw circles?
Ian Johnson
To be fair, most Muslims don't view the Saudis or the leaders of any Arab nation for that matter as "real Muslims." I was told my whole life "real Islam" doesn't exist anywhere in the world today because we lack an authentic Islamic state (Khilafah) that can ensure Islam is accurately interpreted and practiced. All Muslims today are just LARPers without the Khilafah.
Aiden Hughes
I dont think anyone takes it as seriously as internet sjws, but that the idea permeates far outside them. Not everyone might be willing to argue for the stupidest shit they do, but it sets the tone and the ideas trickle out to people who'll regurgitate softer or shorter versions of them uncritically because they look and sound like they're 'on my side'. I think its like this with most any example of the most extreme, stupid people in an ideology. they're a poison that leaks out into the rest of the stream and makes it that much worse.
James Cooper
*by saying 'extreme' im not appealing to the 'DA TROOF IS IN DUH CENDUR :DDDD' meme, I more just mean idiots who are very very energetic and dedicated but dont know what they're talking about
Most Muslims aren't even all that anti-capitalist to begin with. They're highly critical of the superstructure (which they see as something foreign and dominating) but not of the base itself. They're happy to become extraordinarily wealthy so as long as they spend most of their money on their families and give at least 2.5% of it to charity.
Show any Muslim a picture of Dubai, then show them a picture of Havana and ask where they would rather live. 99% of the time they'll say Dubai, and it's not just because Dubai is rich either, it's because Muslims see their successes as a huge source of pride and honor, like they were able to beat the West at its own game.
Thomas Anderson
Baboons are fucking scary, man. they're like horrible half-man half-dog carnivorous goblins.
Pretty much. Muslim people (and boy how stupid is it to even talk about all these different cultures in one breath) are about as bad as any other kind of people. There is no inherent anti capitalism or anti colonialism in any of them. That a group is or was the victim of oppression is not a guarantee that they will become revolutionary, as the example of Israel should clearly show by now. That's the true tragedy; all of the injustice does not lead to redemption. Likely it's just a set up to more injustice.
Unrelated question, do you follow the political developments in Pakistan?
Bentley Perry
We haven't had a genuine Ummah since the death of Ali. Muslims are forever fractured until they get their Khilafah.
Not to mention there is a huge problem with what I call "Sunniocons": Sunni Muslims (mostly ones living in the West) who now hold that Russia, China, and India are the real big enemies. The US and EU are now the "lesser evils" because they're helping the so-called rebels get rid of Assad the Butcher. As soon as someone starts believing the crimes of the East are worse than the crimes of the West (as far as existing imperialism goes) you can tell they're headed down the NeoCon road. Not saying the East is totally innocent, but still.
Not as much as I follow American politics.
Tyler Nelson
Aha, so it's not just Zizek who has picked up on this. Damn. I really could use a primer on what the deal is with the MQM-L, MQM-P, and the PSP. It's all so maddeningly opaque from the outside.
He commented a few times on the new axis between the US, Israel, and the Gulf states. What you said sounded similar.
Liam Miller
I'm not even talking about that, I'm talking about the fact that many regular Sunni Muslims (some of whom are VERY critical of the Saudis even) are coming out in support of American imperialism in the Middle East just because "Assad is worse" or "Shia militias are just as bad as ISIS".
Keep in mind that these same Sunnis who oppose Assad and the Y-P-G are also strongly anti-Zionist and critical of the West, they only see the West as favorable to Russia, China, and India.
Sebastian Hernandez
In the Islamic world this is how leaders were primarily decided. The Caliph has to be extreme virtuous; his rulership itself is never seen as illegitimate though.
Luke Gonzalez
I don't doubt it, the thought of it however sickens me.
Jaxson Smith
That's kind of maddening. Bad as Russia can be, it's not them who ran a drone program in Pakistan, for example. Talk about short memories.
Adrian Rivera
Well what do you think of the fact that Russia, China, and India have been shielding UN resolutions concerning the Rohingya crisis? Yes, the US and Israel sell Myanmar weapons, but Russia, China, and India sell them even *more* weapons plus give the Myanmarese military government all sorts of political support. The whole conflict in the Rakhine state began with a Chinese oil pipeline, for instance.
Or, the fact that Uyghurs in China often complain about the Chinese government enforcing anti-Islam laws (I agree this is strongly overblown though) does anger the ummah.
Aiden Walker
Forgot to mention, the DPRK is still very friendly with Myanmar.
Jesus Christmas you are a spooked fag. Reading this made me sick. I mean me neither, I guess? Depends on what a power relationship is. This is gross. Just reading this I can tell you are spooked. Disgusting. Really? Government officials are the most virtuous people? Teachers are more virtuous and knowledgeable so they rule over students? I'll just skip ahead real quick Yeah, I have several. Firstly, virtue and honors are pieces of shit. Fuck them and the spooks they produce. I could imagine an honorable, virtuous man, but he can ultimately serve any cause. Virtue and honor are 90% of the time excuses for control over people, and when I say 90%, don't take that to mean your government is the 10%. I'm not surprised you see power relations like this; it's a popular and consoling take that most or even all of the control others have over us is good. Its easy to sleep at night knowing that your PM is a virtuous man elected through virtuous practices and thusly he does virtuous deeds. I then live the idea that any wrong doing is a result of "corruption". Personally, I'm more fond of attributing things to an evil spirit, or even a god, but corruption is cool too. Every time something goes wrong, a scapegoat can be found or even created. It isn't capitalism or any other real problem; it's a man or men. In more virtuous societies, some of the corrupt will be women! I enjoy the idea that you can measure people's honor and virtue. How convenient for society. Except you can't measure these things, it's just bulls hit the whole way down. You have ephemeral things that you can justify to ephemeral events for ephemeral reasons and somewhere down the line these justify real events. This thinking terrorizes me constantly and I'm starting to resent it. Ahhh, and now perhaps the greatest panacea. No matter how bad things get, if things get so bad we can't wait for any more virtue or honor, don't worry. We have the solution. We will simply fix the bad things by slowly, rationally changing things bit by bit. By slow and perilous magics of the virtuous we will expel the evil from our governments, which never, ever works because there are "bad" people constantly being reproduced often by the very circumstances that made the prior people.
You mean, Islamic cultures are spooked. This is generally how we see power as opposed to Westerners who think all forms of hierarchy are de facto bad.
Tell that to the ummah.
Levi Carter
That's true. I mean you believe in a God and the spooks just keep coming. It's like starting a Halloween party. Some people dress up as nurses, janitors, and other real things, but you inevitably gather a large amount of spooks. Yes you are generally spooked I am aware. So are the majority of westerners, look, we aren't all so different after all! Do you want to know how I know you are shilling? Or do you just want to let that nonsensical generalization speak for itself? Dear Ummah, I am not sure who you are, or if you will ever receive this letter, but I am writing to inform you that you are spooked and a faggot. Sincerely, user Now I was told we would have a discussion about you or your countries spooks.
Matthew Wright
itd be more accurate to say that westerners think hierarchy is ok if its "meritocratic". if you "earn" it within the existing framework of society, you deserve it. there is a pretty good amount of skepticism towards how much current society reflects that, but I dont think theres very much criticism of how the idea itself is used as a justification for hierarchy and of what 'earning it' means in the current society, outside of the far left. outside the far left its more common to think theres something that has to be done to fix capitalism(the hierarchy this justifies), like get rid of the jews, or put more women and minorities at the top, etc.
ITT: Honkies that purposely misunderstand what idpol is. White supremacy is the superstructure that was produced from Chattle slavery, a historical material legacy that manifests itself in soft apartheid into today. Many white people DO benefit from a prole sub caste, for one many of the even humble fortunes was built slave exploitation, the surplus labor produced those slaves was transferred into capital into various MoPs over hundreds of years so no you generally cannot prove a lineage, but I guess you think all that surplus value was just lost to the wind. Having a sub caste like black people keeps a ton of state suppression off of white people, look how many white people were incredulous of police brutality until the smart phone era, which was a fact of life for blacks for generations. Patriarchy IS different though, since it mostly comes from natural material conditions, particularly the fact that women died from child birth regularly until recently and that why they were denied property rights. Feminists love to forget that MEN had their own sufferage movement maybe a hundred years prior that pried voting rights from land owners. So really the patriarchy doesn’t exist as feminists say it does, but to be sure there are issues only women suffer from under capitalism. Sorry but idpol HAS material benefits, which is why it’s so fiercely defended by say white people. White supremacy is a soft union in many ways, and MANY PORKIES HAVE ALWAYS KNOWN THAT AND HATED IT. There’s memos from the 1950s of IBM execs complaining that there aren’t enough black people in their ranks. That IBM middle managers were only hiring white people and they knew why, it allowed white workers to demand higher salaries and that hurt their bottom line.
Brayden Myers
Anyone who believes women aren't oppressed as obviously never lived in a "traditional" family.
Connor Robinson
All baboons DIRECT to the zoos!
Wyatt Parker
There’s nothing wrong with power hierarchy as long as your subservients is to individuals acting as an instrument on behalf of the greater good of the people’s progress. This is the only thing that matters.
Joshua Howard
Protip: only liberals say this shit.
Michael Hill
In burger land there aren’t that many traditional families anymore. From what I understand divorce laws still favor women even in the third world so I’m not sure how oppressed a woman can be when they generally have the state on their side in these affairs.
