A few thoughts on the latest round of White Guilt discussions

[Juana]

You're fine, Ippy.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

There's no point being an activist for any cause, because:

1.  Activism now requires an infinitely regressive set of purity tests.  You wear the entire uniform or GTFO.
2.  If you are found wanting in the above tests, then you are worse than an active opponent.
3.  Nothing you do is good enough to qualify you as an "ally", which is apparently itself now a bad word.
4.  Some activists are inherently less equal than others.
5.  Slurs are made by Bad People.  "Jokes" are made by the Good People.  They may appear to be slurs, but that's just your privilege talking.

There are a few benefits gained by avoiding activism:

1.  You don't get a pat on the head and a condescending sneer from college students (I don't hate college students and in fact admire education, but I can see where the hate comes from), because your life experiences since the Johnson Administration are obviously useless in the face of a few humanities classes.
2.  You don't have to change your entire language every 6 months to conform to the latest version of Correctness™.
3.  You don't have to tolerate the very same slurs you'd never dish out.
4.  You are actually allowed to smile and be happy occasionally.
5.  No culture guardians rapping you on the forehead.

Now, none of this is to say you shouldn't CARE about things and maybe try to make things BETTER or IMPROVE the world around you.  If you don't do these things, then you're basically wasting space.  But to become an activist is to surrender your identity and your will to someone else's standard of what's right and what's not.  And all you get out of it is a stupid Greenpeace tee shirt maybe, and the snickering and sneers of the people you foolishly "allied" with.

Fix shit.  But do it on a personal level.

1. Bullshit.
2. Bullshit.
3. I said I don't like the word. That has nothing to do with anyone else.
4. Bullshit.
5. What the fuck does that even mean?

1. Y'know, I'm in a shitty mood and should probably get off PD for the day before this turns into an argument, but I'd appreciate it if you'd stop taking passive aggressive swipes at me. If you're mad at me, please, talk to me directly.
2. See three above. I don't especially like the word, even though I'm fully aware that LIKE-ing the word is the source of the problem and can be transferred to any other replacement.
3. Oh my god. Insulting individual behavior is not the same as slurring an entire group. Christ.
4.
5.

Would you like your goat back? 

[Juana]

Asshole.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

i don't happen to agree with Garbo on the trigger topic at hand, but this now seems to be overstating things a good deal, and has gotten a bit caustic, imo.
Roger, no skin off my back and i'm not harping here.
Garbo, i'd just like to distance myself from any animosity since i posted here, but don't intend any offense.

BREAKING NEWS:  ROGER IS CAUSTIC.   

Good God A'mighty, if someone here means to imply that I can't be a sarcastic prick now and again, I suggest you take your complaints to ECH, who is known far and wide as a font of sympathy, understanding, and a mighty fighter against the power.

Also, I'd like to issue a standing invitation for everyone - in this thread, this board, the internet, and in fact the entire world - to kiss my abrasive and scabby, diseased ass.

Thank you for your attention in this matter.

TGRR,
The Source of All Your Troubles.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Asshole.

GUILTY AS CHARGED.





Comments later.  Something is on fire in the lab, probably ought to go look.

[Elder Iptuous]

 
like i said, Roger, i wasn't harping.
i know what you are.
and i know why we have to keep you around.

hm... gives me an idea for a thread.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

You will call me a pedant and worse again, but, while I agree with the general gist of everything here, I think there is a misuse of the words "activism" and "activist" here.  I am sensitive to this sort of issue because I grew up in a country where I had the opportunity to go to school with very large pictures of Marx (and his buddies, or fellow-triumvirates, as we thought of them in those days, Lenin and Engels), and where the society we lived in was routinely called "socialism" - when in fact it was nothing but. It was a sort of deeply corrupt, pervasively feudal planned-economy capitalism.

So I think what you are describing is why not to join the things that usually get called "activist organisations",  but which are in fact mutual appreciation societies often with fairly rough initiation rites. These things are always like pyramid-schemes: they butress the egos (and often also the bank accounts) of the people forming the core at emotional (and often also financial) cost to the periphery.

But activism, I think, is an apt word to descibe something else. I think activism is first and foremost the name of a personal philosophy that is opposed to apathy and navel-gazing. Its core notion is that what you do, your activity, matters. I think sabotage, ridicule, memetic warefare, the sort of thing that quite a lot of PD seems to be about, spannering the works - that is what I think of when I think 'activism'.

I've gotta agree with the polar bear, here.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

You will call me a pedant and worse again, but, while I agree with the general gist of everything here, I think there is a misuse of the words "activism" and "activist" here.  I am sensitive to this sort of issue because I grew up in a country where I had the opportunity to go to school with very large pictures of Marx (and his buddies, or fellow-triumvirates, as we thought of them in those days, Lenin and Engels), and where the society we lived in was routinely called "socialism" - when in fact it was nothing but. It was a sort of deeply corrupt, pervasively feudal planned-economy capitalism.

So I think what you are describing is why not to join the things that usually get called "activist organisations",  but which are in fact mutual appreciation societies often with fairly rough initiation rites. These things are always like pyramid-schemes: they butress the egos (and often also the bank accounts) of the people forming the core at emotional (and often also financial) cost to the periphery.

But activism, I think, is an apt word to descibe something else. I think activism is first and foremost the name of a personal philosophy that is opposed to apathy and navel-gazing. Its core notion is that what you do, your activity, matters. I think sabotage, ridicule, memetic warefare, the sort of thing that quite a lot of PD seems to be about, spannering the works - that is what I think of when I think 'activism'.

I've gotta agree with the polar bear, here.

He's been like that all day.  I think he's on drugs. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

You will call me a pedant and worse again, but, while I agree with the general gist of everything here, I think there is a misuse of the words "activism" and "activist" here.  I am sensitive to this sort of issue because I grew up in a country where I had the opportunity to go to school with very large pictures of Marx (and his buddies, or fellow-triumvirates, as we thought of them in those days, Lenin and Engels), and where the society we lived in was routinely called "socialism" - when in fact it was nothing but. It was a sort of deeply corrupt, pervasively feudal planned-economy capitalism.

So I think what you are describing is why not to join the things that usually get called "activist organisations",  but which are in fact mutual appreciation societies often with fairly rough initiation rites. These things are always like pyramid-schemes: they butress the egos (and often also the bank accounts) of the people forming the core at emotional (and often also financial) cost to the periphery.

But activism, I think, is an apt word to descibe something else. I think activism is first and foremost the name of a personal philosophy that is opposed to apathy and navel-gazing. Its core notion is that what you do, your activity, matters. I think sabotage, ridicule, memetic warefare, the sort of thing that quite a lot of PD seems to be about, spannering the works - that is what I think of when I think 'activism'.

I've gotta agree with the polar bear, here.

He's been like that all day.  I think he's on drugs.

Something ain't right. I think someone replaced his CPU.

[East Coast Hustle]

He's been right twice today.

Either he's not a total lost cause, or he's a human stopped clock.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

He's been right twice today.

Either he's not a total lost cause, or he's a human stopped clock.

Goddammit, I might have to reset my reality tunnel.

FUCK.

[Dildo Argentino]

He's been right twice today.

Either he's not a total lost cause, or he's a human stopped clock.

Goddammit, I might have to reset my reality tunnel.

FUCK.

No shit.
On the other hand, it's a good idea every now and again, anyway. 

(I'm always on drugs. Start with caffeine in the morning, and then take it from there.)

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

You will call me a pedant and worse again, but, while I agree with the general gist of everything here, I think there is a misuse of the words "activism" and "activist" here.  I am sensitive to this sort of issue because I grew up in a country where I had the opportunity to go to school with very large pictures of Marx (and his buddies, or fellow-triumvirates, as we thought of them in those days, Lenin and Engels), and where the society we lived in was routinely called "socialism" - when in fact it was nothing but. It was a sort of deeply corrupt, pervasively feudal planned-economy capitalism.

So I think what you are describing is why not to join the things that usually get called "activist organisations",  but which are in fact mutual appreciation societies often with fairly rough initiation rites. These things are always like pyramid-schemes: they butress the egos (and often also the bank accounts) of the people forming the core at emotional (and often also financial) cost to the periphery.

But activism, I think, is an apt word to descibe something else. I think activism is first and foremost the name of a personal philosophy that is opposed to apathy and navel-gazing. Its core notion is that what you do, your activity, matters. I think sabotage, ridicule, memetic warefare, the sort of thing that quite a lot of PD seems to be about, spannering the works - that is what I think of when I think 'activism'.

An excellent point! I would go as far as to say activism requires active thinking... not buying into some pre-built interpretation of Right and Wrong.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

He's been right twice today.

Either he's not a total lost cause, or he's a human stopped clock.

Goddammit, I might have to reset my reality tunnel.

FUCK.

No shit.
On the other hand, it's a good idea every now and again, anyway. 

(I'm always on drugs. Start with caffeine in the morning, and then take it from there.)

Maybe you can also reset yours and stop responding to everything I say as if I'm saying it in an angry, accusatory, or mocking tone.

[Juana]

I'm also gonna add that I think the rejection of activism is dumb. No activism = no change in society. Yes, there's a problem with assholes and snooty bastards in the activist community, but it serves an important purpose.

I mean, unless you want to tell me that MLK, Stephen Douglas, Susan B. Anthony and Estelle Griswold, Lucy and Albert Parsons, Harvey Milk and others should have shut the fuck and only tried to change things on a local level. Changing things on the local level is important and the only way to make lasting change, but no activism = no change in law, in larger society, no attention on issues that need to be touched (which makes it harder for individuals to be aware of the issues they need to tackle in themselves). Individual change and activism have to come together because they re-enforce each other.