Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   AnarchoNinaWrites (anarchoninawrites@oliphant.social)'s status on Saturday, 26-Aug-2023 00:16:00 JST AnarchoNinaWrites

   No, you know, fine, fuck it:

   https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/sever-horrible-creatures

   This is the shit essay. Read it twice. Because at first, the author is so vague about who he's complaining about, you're going to map whoever you like least onto what he's saying. Personally? That doesn't strike me as an accident; nor does the decision to use "Horrible Creatures" and still never ACTUALLY admit who he's talking about. It's only after he compares being called out on your shit/kicked out of scenes to Hiroshima (no, really) that you're going to understand this is Vampire Castle but more emo, and then when you go back and read it a second time, you'll see that shit is crypto-coded into the entire essay.

   This is literally a skred against cancel culture and intersectionality, employing projection ("they cover up rapes" - oh yeah? Cause last I heard it was the anti-cancel culture guys out West running cover for sexual abusers, but I digress), and low key-racist shit, to push some incel/unity crap that's only "unified" by pushing anyone demanding you be better human beings, out.

   This is, to put it fucking politely; reactionary, incel, fucking nonsense. This is not anarchism, or any anarchism I want to be part of at least. It's garbage. And the fact that a prominent anarchist author just shared it saying "we need this now more than ever" is fucking EMBARASSING.

   • novatorine 🏴🏳️‍⚧️ repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     AnarchoNinaWrites (anarchoninawrites@oliphant.social)'s status on Saturday, 26-Aug-2023 00:41:52 JST AnarchoNinaWrites

     in reply to

     • Jacob

     @SnoozyRests Well, I suspect that's because they knew if they ADMITTED directly who they were talking about, there would be hell to pay.

     This bit speaks volumes tho:

     "Horrible Creatures are those who have a list, who know who is good and who is evil. Horrible Creatures are those who swell and elate when destroying their competitors. Horrible Creatures are those who have no patience for mistakes, who make no allowance for the time it takes people to grow and learn and improve because they themselves, already perfect, have never had much consideration for such processes. Horrible Creatures give more importance to definitions and categories than to feelings and conditions; they are more attuned to status than to reciprocal relations."

   • Embed this notice
     Jacob (snoozyrests@kolektiva.social)'s status on Saturday, 26-Aug-2023 00:41:53 JST Jacob

     in reply to

     @AnarchoNinaWrites How the hell can someone write an essay about a group they dislike for their hard dichotomies and cruel distinctions while the whole time referring to them as 'horrible creatures'???

   • Embed this notice
     AnarchoNinaWrites (anarchoninawrites@oliphant.social)'s status on Saturday, 26-Aug-2023 01:24:35 JST AnarchoNinaWrites

     in reply to

     • CynAq 🤘

     @CynAq I can think of no reason to disagree with this analysis; I also don't remember hearing that phrase used in good, or meaningful ways. In fact, I think I've used it, and still agree that this' dogshit, ambiguous, and very easy for the fash to repurpose. I suspect you are simply right.

   • Embed this notice
     CynAq 🤘 (cynaq@evil.social)'s status on Saturday, 26-Aug-2023 01:24:36 JST CynAq 🤘

     in reply to

     @AnarchoNinaWrites@oliphant.social I learned to be weary of the phrase "anything they don't like." Very rarely, if ever, have I seen it used in a way that's beneficial to the idea presented, and almost without exception, it's there to provide a quick but crude generalization, or muddy the waters about exactly how bad the stance of a group is concerning a certain subject.
     
     As an example, whenever an "independent leftist political commentator" says "the right labels as socialist, anyone they don't like", what they actually should have said is "fascists label as socialists, anyone they want to genocide."
     
     So, is this a gross, but unintentional over-simplification, or is it a not-so-unintentional obscuring of the extent of vileness? I don't know in every case, but I have suspicions.

   • Embed this notice
     Azuaron (azuaron@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 29-Aug-2023 20:27:24 JST Azuaron

     in reply to

     @AnarchoNinaWrites Totally confused, logically inconsistent teenager philosophy. This is in a single sentence:

     "the antifascists who tolerate misogyny... harm reduction activists who ghost friends who said something uncomfortable"

     Which is it? Do I stop tolerating misogyny, or do I stand by misogynists who say "uncomfortable" things?

   • Embed this notice
     ro (romnx@todon.eu)'s status on Tuesday, 29-Aug-2023 20:27:51 JST ro

     in reply to

     @AnarchoNinaWrites what really bothers me too is that Peter basically went straight to "everyone who disagrees is trolling or arguing in bad faith". Like that little poorly written snarky shit text was some sort of great work that no one can honestly disagree with.