I think this site is very much elitist in terms of political and cultural views. There's a large push here to try to make DemSocs and AnComs feel welcome, but anyone that doesn't directly conform to ML stuff gets shit on, which is much different than the sub. Lib = anything I don't like essentially. Like I get it was started as a joke, but it's starting to get a bit sincere and offputting.
Music taste and political views are not really equivalent I would say. I don't think the lib thing was a joke really, at least not completely, it is meant to spur self-reflection and self-criticism which, whether you are ML or not, is a good trait to have.
I wouldn't say that I'm equating those entirely, although many of the aspects are the same. /Mu/ used to (I haven't used it in years) demand conformity and diversity in music taste. Certain things in certain genres were deemed better than others for various reasons while leaving room in a lot of ways to diversity in many genres. Classical, blues, country, etc. were largely left open to interpretation. Chapo has a ton of cultural views shaped by politics or otherwise that act in a similar manner. The dynamic is similar in a lot of ways.
I think lib has become a catchall for "the thing I don't like". I've been called a lib for the dumbest shit on here before. Do I need to expand on either of these points?
I simply don't agree, I think politics should be materially and historically informed and people get upset when you point out that what they believe doesn't really meet that standard. It's not the same as bullying people for not having that same "conformity and diversity" of taste (which I think is a really good description of /mu/ culture btw) because theory and history isn't just some literary culture, it should be the basis of political thought and it should be approached critically because not all ideas are equally up to the task of bringing about communism.
MLs literally scream about Anarchists being children online. I agree that that should be how it's approached, but it's simply not the reality in most online left spaces, especially here.
Tbh, I don't see this stuff very often and never really have despite how much people bring up MLs and how viscous they are on this site. Maybe I don't go on the threads where it happens or something, but I would say those people are just taking the piss out of anarchists and maybe it's a bit rude and not useful to the anarchist being made fun of and should be avoided, but it isn't a "cultural elitism" but a real substantive political difference.
MLs can get toxic (as can Anarchists occasionally). When that political difference becomes the norm, one group tends to dominate the other. IDK if I can provide you with any concrete examples on here since I didn't star any of my or other peoples' discussions. I'm going to try to go to bed now though. Have a nice night.
![[Discussion thread] How do you feel about /mu/'s essentials list?](https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/4chanmusic/images/7/76/Mucore.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20160725185538){kind=link}
I think this site is very much elitist in terms of political and cultural views. There's a large push here to try to make DemSocs and AnComs feel welcome, but anyone that doesn't directly conform to ML stuff gets shit on, which is much different than the sub. Lib = anything I don't like essentially. Like I get it was started as a joke, but it's starting to get a bit sincere and offputting.
Music taste and political views are not really equivalent I would say. I don't think the lib thing was a joke really, at least not completely, it is meant to spur self-reflection and self-criticism which, whether you are ML or not, is a good trait to have.
I wouldn't say that I'm equating those entirely, although many of the aspects are the same. /Mu/ used to (I haven't used it in years) demand conformity and diversity in music taste. Certain things in certain genres were deemed better than others for various reasons while leaving room in a lot of ways to diversity in many genres. Classical, blues, country, etc. were largely left open to interpretation. Chapo has a ton of cultural views shaped by politics or otherwise that act in a similar manner. The dynamic is similar in a lot of ways.
I think lib has become a catchall for "the thing I don't like". I've been called a lib for the dumbest shit on here before. Do I need to expand on either of these points?
I simply don't agree, I think politics should be materially and historically informed and people get upset when you point out that what they believe doesn't really meet that standard. It's not the same as bullying people for not having that same "conformity and diversity" of taste (which I think is a really good description of /mu/ culture btw) because theory and history isn't just some literary culture, it should be the basis of political thought and it should be approached critically because not all ideas are equally up to the task of bringing about communism.
MLs literally scream about Anarchists being children online. I agree that that should be how it's approached, but it's simply not the reality in most online left spaces, especially here.
Tbh, I don't see this stuff very often and never really have despite how much people bring up MLs and how viscous they are on this site. Maybe I don't go on the threads where it happens or something, but I would say those people are just taking the piss out of anarchists and maybe it's a bit rude and not useful to the anarchist being made fun of and should be avoided, but it isn't a "cultural elitism" but a real substantive political difference.
MLs can get toxic (as can Anarchists occasionally). When that political difference becomes the norm, one group tends to dominate the other. IDK if I can provide you with any concrete examples on here since I didn't star any of my or other peoples' discussions. I'm going to try to go to bed now though. Have a nice night.