I think there was some miscommunication in the convo that led to it spiraling, but I was referring to calling them a “rabid radlib”. The strange thing is that I agree with you both on many points raised, and I think you agree with each other more than the conversation lends itself to showing.
The economic factor behind fascistic terrorism is obviously paramount. The perpetrators of these types of attacks are more often than not isolated, alienated white guys who feel completely abandoned by society and indulge in misanthropic violence to cope and escape. They see their financially secure futures dwindling. If they’re the recipients of scraps from their imperial benefactors, as settlers are, they can likely see the writing on the wall with further neoliberal privatization of plundered resources occurring - the profit extracted from the third world is not being distributed as it once was amongst the settler class and is funneling into fewer and fewer hands. They want those spoils back.
Tucker Carlson and other right-wing culture-war ideologues know this and capitalize on it, pushing more and more of them to violence. I think it’s one thing to understand the economic component leading to a rise in fascistic violence, but a mistake to abstract the culture-war into a violenceless nothing-burger meant to distract us from its economic foundations. We should be calling attention to the primary contradictions of capitalism rather than allowing fascist demagogues to bring us down to their level of focusing on non-issues like the sexy M&M or whatever, but we shouldn’t be forgoing the promotion of revolutionary self-defense amongst the groups they’re targeting either, just to stand atop our ivory towers telling the oppressed “we told you so!” We are the masses and the masses are us, after all.
I don’t mean to imply that you don’t know this. I don’t mean to imply that I’m not regurgitating points already made. I think that we all agree on many of these points, though, and probably should offer each other interaction in good faith rather than dismissing concerns as childish radlibbery. I know comrade DoubleK is very passionate about this in part because many of their loved ones are being targeted by these fucks, as are mine. I do not mean to speak for them but I respect their passion for wanting to defend those targeted and don’t think that they mean ill intent towards others who have, in the end, the same goals they do.
Hmm…I seem to be not getting my point across, I’ll have to study that conversation. What I meant isn’t to ignore the violence, I did say it needed to be responded to. What I meant is look past the wall of flames to see the arsonist on the other side of them. The flames are still a problem. I just don’t want us to see fascists as the sexy M&Ms where all we do is talk about them and nothing more. With the rampant fear mongery from the democratic party this too is becoming a trend on the left…that means their nonsense is working to some degree, which is troubling.
I have sympathies for the most oppressed and most effected, and I don’t mean to diminish any of what they know or are going through. I would have made a more respectful approach however from my perspective I was misunderstood greatly from my actual point from the beginning. Not only this, their response was akin to a radical liberal to such a degree it ‘checked all boxes’ for me if you will and I was confident they were indeed a radical liberal and so I treated them as such in these times. They also seemed to ignore my logical counterpoints which were amongst my sarcasm as we continued and instead focused on the sarcasm and responded with the same so that didn’t help. If logic was stuck to we could have arrived here sooner, but I agree I believe I had a large hand in forfeiting that by being a tactless and blunt dick. I think next time I’ll check out their post history before deciding how to respond. This was yet another reminder I shouldn’t be so caviler, I suppose I did because I am new to Lemmy and wanted to feel out the waters. I was very pleased when they responded answering my questions competently though. I don’t want to sugar coat my analysis this so that we can all improve - I feel that if I hadn’t been as observation and patient this would have spiraled further, and if I had to guess why this is the case I would guess that DoubleK is deep in conflict and is new to this level of conflict or rather new to it’s process, which is why they lead with emotion and why said emotion was so strong. I say this because as someone who is familiar with the process myself one learns the hard way that emotions are to guide not to lead. I also think that the exact context of what I said as I said it disrespectfully ticked all of their boxes too, which happens as there are so many things hitting the fan right now, and is also part of why I apologized. Regardless of their impression of me I do hope they too learned and can improve from our interaction. I already have and I’m sure I will further.
Example?
I think there was some miscommunication in the convo that led to it spiraling, but I was referring to calling them a “rabid radlib”. The strange thing is that I agree with you both on many points raised, and I think you agree with each other more than the conversation lends itself to showing.
The economic factor behind fascistic terrorism is obviously paramount. The perpetrators of these types of attacks are more often than not isolated, alienated white guys who feel completely abandoned by society and indulge in misanthropic violence to cope and escape. They see their financially secure futures dwindling. If they’re the recipients of scraps from their imperial benefactors, as settlers are, they can likely see the writing on the wall with further neoliberal privatization of plundered resources occurring - the profit extracted from the third world is not being distributed as it once was amongst the settler class and is funneling into fewer and fewer hands. They want those spoils back.
Tucker Carlson and other right-wing culture-war ideologues know this and capitalize on it, pushing more and more of them to violence. I think it’s one thing to understand the economic component leading to a rise in fascistic violence, but a mistake to abstract the culture-war into a violenceless nothing-burger meant to distract us from its economic foundations. We should be calling attention to the primary contradictions of capitalism rather than allowing fascist demagogues to bring us down to their level of focusing on non-issues like the sexy M&M or whatever, but we shouldn’t be forgoing the promotion of revolutionary self-defense amongst the groups they’re targeting either, just to stand atop our ivory towers telling the oppressed “we told you so!” We are the masses and the masses are us, after all.
I don’t mean to imply that you don’t know this. I don’t mean to imply that I’m not regurgitating points already made. I think that we all agree on many of these points, though, and probably should offer each other interaction in good faith rather than dismissing concerns as childish radlibbery. I know comrade DoubleK is very passionate about this in part because many of their loved ones are being targeted by these fucks, as are mine. I do not mean to speak for them but I respect their passion for wanting to defend those targeted and don’t think that they mean ill intent towards others who have, in the end, the same goals they do.
Hmm…I seem to be not getting my point across, I’ll have to study that conversation. What I meant isn’t to ignore the violence, I did say it needed to be responded to. What I meant is look past the wall of flames to see the arsonist on the other side of them. The flames are still a problem. I just don’t want us to see fascists as the sexy M&Ms where all we do is talk about them and nothing more. With the rampant fear mongery from the democratic party this too is becoming a trend on the left…that means their nonsense is working to some degree, which is troubling.
I have sympathies for the most oppressed and most effected, and I don’t mean to diminish any of what they know or are going through. I would have made a more respectful approach however from my perspective I was misunderstood greatly from my actual point from the beginning. Not only this, their response was akin to a radical liberal to such a degree it ‘checked all boxes’ for me if you will and I was confident they were indeed a radical liberal and so I treated them as such in these times. They also seemed to ignore my logical counterpoints which were amongst my sarcasm as we continued and instead focused on the sarcasm and responded with the same so that didn’t help. If logic was stuck to we could have arrived here sooner, but I agree I believe I had a large hand in forfeiting that by being a tactless and blunt dick. I think next time I’ll check out their post history before deciding how to respond. This was yet another reminder I shouldn’t be so caviler, I suppose I did because I am new to Lemmy and wanted to feel out the waters. I was very pleased when they responded answering my questions competently though. I don’t want to sugar coat my analysis this so that we can all improve - I feel that if I hadn’t been as observation and patient this would have spiraled further, and if I had to guess why this is the case I would guess that DoubleK is deep in conflict and is new to this level of conflict or rather new to it’s process, which is why they lead with emotion and why said emotion was so strong. I say this because as someone who is familiar with the process myself one learns the hard way that emotions are to guide not to lead. I also think that the exact context of what I said as I said it disrespectfully ticked all of their boxes too, which happens as there are so many things hitting the fan right now, and is also part of why I apologized. Regardless of their impression of me I do hope they too learned and can improve from our interaction. I already have and I’m sure I will further.