Permanently Deleted
I'm sorry but he's not wrong. most people who identify as left are democratic party supporting libs who clutch their pearls when they hear the internationale because communism killed 10 bajillion people.
He’s right in the sense that performative wokeness is not a threat to power and that power is very successfully coopting and weaponizing idpol to inoculate itself against criticism, but he’s concluding that intersectionality itself is useless or even damaging. which is, in a word, bullshit
first, before I say anything, I have a conspiracy theory. glenn is straight up saying stupid/controversial/provocative shit because he's scared for his life in brazil. the ruling class in brazil has the means of assassinating journalists and not being held accountable. he's been associated with a couple of local journalists who've been assasinated. I straight up think the guy is drawing this attention to himself because he knows the more relevant you are in America the less likely you are to be murdered.
second, I'm not seeing him conclude in the way you think he is. In a recent interview of his, he sounded extremely cynical about american politics (which is the only correct view) but also proclaimed his support for the lgbt and blm struggle.
Greenwald is a lib, but he's also a journalist with integrity and has a far more internationalist view than you're average Bernie supporter. those latter two things should matter more to us than his opinions because 99% of americans have opinions way more trash than his.
I straight up think the guy is drawing this attention to himself because he knows the more relevant you are in America the less likely you are to be murdered.
This is exceedingly unlikely.
Its' a common strategy for the wealthy to increase their public profile to make themselves less assassinateable. Like buying a football team or a newspaper or something. It's quite logical for Greewald to be possibly doing something similar imo.
-
He said things like that before Brazil, just not as much
-
There is a million other ways to do that which would probably be more effective too.
Yeah, well aware of the history. Doesn't change the fact that he's much safer with a large international profile than without and that it's a common strategy. What other ways would be more effective, genuinely?
I mean there are other ways to be intentionally controversial and talked about... Ones that won't alienate a big part of your audience...
hmm Greenwald has been less worried than his peers about alienating whatever could be defined as his audience imo
-
i think a problem here might be disagreement about what "intersectionality itself" refers to. if it's just the barest bones of standpoint epistemology holding up a long list of polite manners, as many people across the political spectrum seem to think it is, then Glenner's analysis is pretty reasonable.
Not just to inoculate against criticism, but as an offensive tool in atrocity propaganda.
He isn’t concluding intersectionality itself is useless. There are debates to be had over the value of intersectionality in a pre revolutionary environment
Would love to ask Glenn what he feels is more pernicious: the CIA coopting woke language in bad faith in a recruitment video that, as of right now, only has 100k views on YouTube or Tucker Carlson coopting the language of class in bad faith on his show that is watched nightly by several million impressionable dipshits.
It's all just language policing. Coming from some dipshit terminally online pundit, it amounts to nothing.
The CIA's ad was cringe. Tucker's rhetoric is absolutely poisonous. They both serve the same class interests. Bemoaning the malicious use of rhetoric is glorified navel gazing.
But if we're going to play the game, I'll argue that Glenn going on Tucker to criticize the CIA is good, aktuly.
Whether or not fascists coopt leftist language or IDpol or whatever has zero fuck all to with the actual merits of those ideals and concepts.
The joke went way over Glenn’s head lmao. The point of the joke was “do the opposite of whatever the CIA does” because the CIA is evil.
Yeah Glenn’s response is way out of proportion and out of sync with matt’s tweet. matt’s is a good take that I would think GG would agree with. It’s like GG was just looking for any tweet to make his point off of.
I thought it was a parody the concept of doing the opposite of whatever the CIA does?
Glenn Greenwald can eat shit for coming after my local Ozarks leftists at the Hoot 'n' Holler
Honestly tired of this shit Glenn. Anti/racism and anti-bigotry are the left, as well as socialism. If you can’t reconcile the two you aren’t a leftist.
So weird to see a gay man with a Hispanic husband really want to strip the left down to just class politics.
I thought Glenn would be moral than a buttigieg I guess. Used to really respect the man until he started going pseudo-chud.
It's clear the actual problem was the left backed off from having any actual plan, didn't form a voting block, and still falls heavily into the trend of launching low effort projects that are immediately abandoned to follow whatever the trendiest thing in the news is. Like the problem with woke activism isn't where if they just used the right language the CIA would cry, it's that a lot of it is beholden to special interest groups and never develops any concrete goals beyond creating a market of what are basically secular mission trips for college students.
I'd probably be more sympathetic to the anti woke people if so many didn't do the too cool for school thing, but they help a lot of this happen. Using the "I'm a real deal class guy" to sell substack subscriptions, books, podcast, vlogs or whatever. To be fair to Glenn he was one of the people who did try to help last time to turn the left into something more practical, he was just one of the only ones from that side of the divide.
because he's always been the bad kind of libertarian even when people on the left try to present him as some lefty
