More like it implores people to find every point of difference they can and quibble over every person's exact position in the oppression hierarchy. That's considered a necessary condition for an "inclusive" or whatever organization, which means nothing can ever get done because litigating every sort of oppression will literally take forever because you can always chop people up into finer categories and find more minute ways people are mean to each other. Cutting the Gordian Knot is taking this mentality to its logical conclusion and just treating each person as an individual with their own unique situation. As the one decent quote from Ayn Rand goes: "The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." Just, you know, do an oppositional reading so it's not about bourgeois property rights. I've got another bone to pick with this specific bit though. The most "common struggles" are those of the proletariat, which absolutely do not require people to be recognized as every identity they comprise. It only requires the recognition of someone being in the economic role of a worker.
Being considerate isn't what makes a revolution. If your organization is nothing more than a hug box it's not going to accomplish anything politically. Support groups are fine but people shouldn't pretend they're a form of radicalism.
"The Working Class" is not a coalition, but a coherent group unto itself. The only reason you'd need to build "broad coalitions" is if you can only conceive of your fellow workers as somehow essentially different from you, not having "common struggles" that can unite you for a political purpose. In this regard, intersectionality is precisely and exactly backward from what we should be pursuing and these tweets are an object lesson in how red liberals fundamentally don't understand class struggle. Notice how nowhere here does he provide justification for why this ideological framework would be useful, although he does repeatedly insist it is so.
I am glad to hear, that there are ancoms like you.
But this intersectional cancer is not only problem of ancoms, but ALL of the leftist groups. Even the "tankies".
Matthew Lewis
this is what i used to believe as well, but after having spoken to a couple extremely radical idpols they seemingly are aware of precisely this as the cause of their issues. at least they explained to me, that because of their position of experienced oppression that exceeds that of your average white (in my case) middle european man, they have chosen this as their field of fight on their way to end capitalism, as their perceived oppressors live off the exploitation of their special group (gender, race, gay etc.) i might not agree with many idpols, as their INTERSECTIONALITY ABOVE ALL must inevitably lead to what happened to antideutsche going full neo liberal and/or right wing, i do however think, that their ideas tend to be cogwheels in a bigger gear mechanism of shit that we call society
Dylan Clark
Dude make the Rosa-killing SPD look like the IWW with his hunger for power and treatment of the local Left. If anything the latest presidency was shit on by all races despite 100% idpol driven.
Although to be fair Singapore is probably the most egalitarian country in SEA.
t.singaporean
Austin Watson
Class isnot one of the intersections its THE intersection.
In practice idpolers just use intersectionality as a way to coddle their own little pet oppressions that only apply to vanishingly small segments of the working class. It's less coalition-building than pathological atomisation
Camden Adams
Oh, I agree, I'm not one of those lolbertarian autists that think he was the greatest statesman ever, just that he made an extremely salient point. AOC is a good example of this, shifting constantly between arguing for economic reform and complaining about lack of POC representation in the institutions of power.
Evan Ward
He doesn't precisely coz a huge chunk of Singapore's history proves otherwise. He is just fulfilling his own prophecy.
