• 10 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 24th, 2022

help-circle


  • I’ve noticed that, too. I think it’s thanks to the mods and us having an actual line, like a direction that is consistent, coherent and adjusts itself as events unfold. Because we’re not dogmatic. What is that line? What Comrade, darkcalling mentioned down here, the unity of Marxists. We’re clear on what we think, and new people either come in already clearheaded or they slowly see what we’re like, and join in. We have good people, and I mean that. I come here to learn and laugh everyday. I guess we’re just that cool, that we don’t start beefs with each other or with our Hexbear friends.






  • One of my favorite brands of silliness.

    ‘‘Free thinkers’’ love to think of themselves as ‘‘enlightened’’, as brilliant individuals whom have ‘‘cracked the code’’, broke the binary, went beyond the pale of ‘‘good and evil’’, rose above the filth of material reality, of left and right in political terms.

    There are none more sheepishly led by the nose than those that think they’re free, paraphrasing from Goethe, and deliberately utilizing the word ‘‘sheep’’ in there. Because these are the clowns that always call people ‘‘sheep’’ while, as comrades have pointed out, bleating state department talking points. They think they’re freed from material reality, ‘‘free spirits’’ roaming aimlessly, ‘‘sovereign citizens’’ in defiance of state decrees. The amount of irony in their existence is what I find most entertaining, and why I love seeing their ass takes on YT comment sections.










  • I spent the holidays last year going to a neighbor’s house, and hanging out in the balcony, with fireworks popping off from the ‘‘cerro’’ behind my home, with beers and loud music, while his boys who’re off in Chicago, were videocalling us from their car, in a parking lot, drinking with us and some Mexican friends of theirs, while looking out for cops. The contrast was just sad.



  • This is just to add a strategy that helps me out.

    The reason I caught on to this ‘‘nuance fetishism’’ some time ago was by looking at function. What is the function of nuance? What does it do, and whom does it benefit? What is the function of ‘‘leftists’’ who parrot their western media and repeat the same shit the right says, for example? They may claim to be nominally leftwing, but functionally they’re rightwing. Names don’t matter shit, what matters is what names do. What good am I doing by pissing into the sea? If everyone is criticizing say, China right now, on every news show and YT channel, what is the point, if I wish to counteract their bullshit, of me repeating the same crap those channels are saying? Or lending a shred of credence to their factually incorrect takes? If I want to convince you about my point, will adding critiques function as strengths or weaknesses to my point? In my opinion, they weaken my point, because we cannot give an iota to reaction. This brings me to a related point to nuance which is ‘‘balance’’. Balance, Bothsiding and Nuance, are the trifecta of liberalism, and function as the same thing: justifying the status quo. What are they functionally doing? What is the function of bothsiding? When you equivocate, speak from both sides of your mouth, are you to be taken seriously? In words, you’re not taking a position, but functionally, you’ve taken the position of the status quo. What is the function of saying, for example, with regards to Palestine, that ‘‘it’s complicated’’? To not do shit about it, and condemn those that do, like Ansar Allah and Hamas. This also adds the trick of ‘‘muddying the waters’’, of ‘‘equalizing’’ opposing forces as both bad. Let’s not forget the all time Christmas classic, ‘‘harm reduction’’, or more colloquially known as ‘‘voting for the lesser evil’’, which are related to ‘‘all governments are bad’’, and function as means of quelling change or believing in an alternative.