There is an old saying: scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.

I have reached my final form of gay trans atheist commie.

One of us. One of us.

Easy, there's no advertising money incentives on peertube. People who put in the most effort aim for sponsorships, and sponsors aren't looking at peertube.

To succeed, peertube would need to leverage leftist mutual aid networks to get community funded videos and livestreams.

I hope for my ashes to be mixed with the soil of the land my ancestors were stolen to build.

I would hope that socialists would at least be aware enough of the culture to be open to reparations.

John Brown catgirl revolution

An interesting take I've seen from some marxists is the idea that "race is class". It more or less functions as its own class system. Gender is also a kind of class. It gets close to the idea of intersectionality but hasn't been co-opted to be toothless yet.

I think maybe you should chill and consider why you've made me into a caricature in your head. You're punching at shadows.

This is the oldest existing photo of Marx, when he was 43. Much dad energy, and well-earned.

Marx at 18 on the other hand...

https://www.royalroad.com/fiction/57505/his-soul-is-marching-on-to-another-world-or-the

Lol, why is this getting downvoted? This comment basically said what mine said.

An axiom, sometimes called postulate, is a mathematical statement that is regarded as “self-evident” and accepted without proof. It should be so simple that it is obviously and unquestionably true. Axioms form the foundation of mathematics and can be used to prove other, more complex results.

https://philosophy-question.com/library/lecture/read/301487-what-are-the-axioms-in-geometry

What's funny is that the full quote actually negates the screenshot by stating that 'self-evident' common knowledge, institutionalized old theories, or theological dogma about human behavior should be challenged by science and scientific socialism. Queer theory technically falls under a socialist science umbrella, challeging conservative intuition.

There is a well-known saying that if geometrical axioms affected human interests attempts would certainly be made to refute them. Theories of natural history which conflicted with the old prejudices of theology provoked, and still provoke, the most rabid opposition. No wonder, therefore, that the Marxian doctrine, which directly serves to enlighten and organise the advanced class in modern society, indicates the tasks facing this class and demonstrates the inevitable replacement (by virtue of economic development) of the present system by a new order—no wonder that this doctrine has had to fight for every step forward in the course of its life.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1908/apr/03.htm

@[email protected]

Just finished this. I'm a bit biased (I've heard a lot of the points she's made already), but I do agree that keeping the definition of "woman" nebulous takes away its usage as a medium of power projection. It's pretty telling that most terfs are white and at least financially comfortable wheras most unprivileged people with gendernormative views trend toward the reactionary aspect rather than preservation of an institution.

I've seen a some nonbinary people try to redefine gender in terms of fuzzy blobs of tendencies so this would lend some credence to the idea that more people can have degrees of nonbinariness rather than having some arbitrary dividing lines that make enbies feel like a third gender.

Maupin and Haz are American and everything about them reeks of American exceptionalism. Why would you even be into that? America is a garbage country.

The problem with Haz and Maupin is that they let their love of Great Men™ eschew internationalist, pro-indigenous, racial, and lower-class solidarity. It's really obvious they have an ideological preference for the middle class, which gives them money-backed visibility but very little real proletarian power. All AES states leveraged serfs/lumpenproles as the bulk of their war economies and soldiers. It doesn't matter how good the appeals to authority are if you fundamentally cannot grasp the social and numerical importance of people living on the boundary between base and superstructure.

Also Haz is an insecure little incel.

Sup, nerd?

Bigots are occasionally good at multitasking.

Wasn't he rumored to be softening to legalization during his campaign? Funny how that turned out.

Tbh, the problem is just that white people are little kids who can't handle criticism. Sakai ends his book by saying:

The thesis we have advanced about the settleristic and non-proletarian nature of the U.S. oppressor nation is a historic truth, and thereby a key to leading the concrete struggles of today. Self-reliance and building mass institutions and movements of a specific national character, under the leadership of a communist party, are absolute necessities for the oppressed. Without these there can be no national liberation. This thesis is not “anti-white” or “racialist” or “narrow nationalism.” Rather, it is the advocates of oppressor nation hegemony over all struggles of the masses that are promoting the narrowest of nationalisms — that of the U.S. settler nation. When we say that the principal characteristic of imperialism is parasitism, we are also saying that the principal characteristic of settler trade unionism is parasitism, and that the principal characteristic of settler radicalism is parasitism.

Every nation and people has its own contribution to make to the world revolution. This is true for all of us, and obviously for Euro-Amerikans as well. But this is another discussion, one that can only really take place in the context of breaking up the U.S. Empire and ending the U.S. oppressor nation.

He EXPLICITLY states that his goal is using historical materialism to understand the failure of American communism, but readers don't like what history says about them and close their ears. This is why I personally don't have faith in them. But Sakai's thesis is not mine. He wants people to break the colonial state, and to do that you're going to need white people to become disillusioned and see it for what it is.

If you think that that disillusionment is anti-white, then you're basically admitting that white people and imperialism cannot be separated, and that you have to advocate keeping colonialism alive to avoid hurting their feelings.

Liberalism