Of course, I'm happy that someone finally allowed themselves to learn the truth - but that's just it - the only thing that prevents anyone from learning that the Dalai Lama is a fucking theocratic slaveowner is themselves. Acting like we're the ones not doing a good job spreading the message is to ignore the fact that we are doing what we can, it's just that others have to accept it, we can't learn it for them
I don't particularly feel like coddling your ignorance, given that it's almost a guarantee that I or someone like me has told you that the Dalai Lama is a fucking slaveowner and should not be given any attention or power, only to be met with a "fuck off, CPC shill" or something similar
And true, perhaps I've been slacking off on screaming about the Dalai Lama over here on Chapo. But don't pretend that Chapo is the only place where discussions can be held
I'm this hostile because of your implication that I or others like me aren't doing what they can to educate others on Tibet (and China, and non-western countries as a whole) because we absolutely are. The problem is that when we bring up the Tibetan slaves (or anything else, for that matter), people just say "that's not true!" or some variation.
It's not that people aren't teaching, it's that people refuse to learn
i literally advocated for more of this kinda content and showed you that there hasn't been any of it for months. i learned something new today, which is great. on sites like reddit there definitely are assholes who do nothing but shit on communism, but we all left reddit for that very reason.
in this instance you got it wrong, which is fine, everyone gets it wrong sometimes.
just saying, not everyone is unreachable, some people are just un-informed, and by being an ass you don't do anything for your cause.
Every time I bring up the Dalai Lama's slaves I get like 50 replies about how they weren't actually slaves, how it's CPC propaganda, how slaves under the Dalai Lama lived a better life than the average citizen in China, how they didn't have slaves, etc.
It's not that there's a lot of propaganda (which, granted, there is). It's that people cling to their propaganda and nothing we do will loosen that grip. That change has gotta come from within
Well then maybe the problem isn't that tankies aren't shitting on the Dalai Lama enough, it's that the western left lends credence to this propaganda and should fight it instead
People question stuff that doesn't fit with mainstream historical narratives. If they do some cursory digging and find out you're right -- as they will if you point out Tibet had slaves before communists freed them -- they'll trust you a bit more and be a bit more skeptical of sources that say otherwise/gloss over it. But if that cursory digging turns up something like "Cuba abolished slavery in 1886," they'll think you don't know what you're talking about, and they'll discount whatever else you're saying or write you off entirely.
I've tried it both ways, both in person and online. I've tried radical language and contestable claims like "shitty wage labor is wage slavery," and I've tried describing awful exploitation in terms that can't really be argued. The latter works far better, because someone who's still a little skeptical can't pick apart one of your points and derail the whole conversation. And you get that even from people who you can move left on other issues.
See assuming that anyone other than actual capitalists or mobilized reactionaries is "probably not a lefty in waiting" is pretty problematic for actually building a mass movement. There are plenty of people who would balk at being presented with what seems to be (and in some sense genuinely is) factually incorrect information who are absolutely reachable. As for the bit about cultural hegemony, there's a big difference between backing down from being thoroughly descriptive or fully radical in our claims, and avoiding counterproductive rhetorical flourishes. One costs us substantive and important parts of our program, the other costs us nothing but a few incendiary words
Even if you can't convince the person you're talking to, it's better to put forward a more coherent message for the people watching. It's always better to have fewer flaws in what you're saying, as it makes it more difficult for people to dismiss you out of hand (even if they're trying to!). There are people out there who value coherency, and a lot more people who'd at least like to tell themselves they do. Having a more factually sound case absolutely does help reach them, and on the internet at least you can never assume none of them are watching. Nothing is lost by not using imprecise and indefensible language, you can still make the actual atrocities involved very clear, and at least some small amount is gained. Given this, I fail to see any reason to engage in those sorts of rhetorical practices
wait the dalai lama had slaves?
Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth
deleted by creator
avengers assemble
i feel like i should have known this. if i didn't know this, i feel like a lot of other people probably don't. we need more content like this.
We fucking shout that every time the Dalai Lama is brought up, not our fault you don't listen the first, second, third, tenth, fiftieth time we do
deleted by creator
Of course, I'm happy that someone finally allowed themselves to learn the truth - but that's just it - the only thing that prevents anyone from learning that the Dalai Lama is a fucking theocratic slaveowner is themselves. Acting like we're the ones not doing a good job spreading the message is to ignore the fact that we are doing what we can, it's just that others have to accept it, we can't learn it for them
you kinda come off as an ass here. the last time the dalai lama was brought up was months ago in random replies to threads, there's no other posts about the fucking dalai lama anywhere on this site.
I don't particularly feel like coddling your ignorance, given that it's almost a guarantee that I or someone like me has told you that the Dalai Lama is a fucking slaveowner and should not be given any attention or power, only to be met with a "fuck off, CPC shill" or something similar
And true, perhaps I've been slacking off on screaming about the Dalai Lama over here on Chapo. But don't pretend that Chapo is the only place where discussions can be held
This will bring the revolution any day now, I can feel it
Talking shit about China definitely will though
deleted by creator
Oh I'm sure you weren't, you just scream free tibet at me to own the libs is all
deleted by creator
Hey once you western leftists start pushing back against imperial propaganda I'll stop
deleted by creator
I'm this hostile because of your implication that I or others like me aren't doing what they can to educate others on Tibet (and China, and non-western countries as a whole) because we absolutely are. The problem is that when we bring up the Tibetan slaves (or anything else, for that matter), people just say "that's not true!" or some variation.
It's not that people aren't teaching, it's that people refuse to learn
i literally advocated for more of this kinda content and showed you that there hasn't been any of it for months. i learned something new today, which is great. on sites like reddit there definitely are assholes who do nothing but shit on communism, but we all left reddit for that very reason. in this instance you got it wrong, which is fine, everyone gets it wrong sometimes.
just saying, not everyone is unreachable, some people are just un-informed, and by being an ass you don't do anything for your cause.
deleted by creator
Every time I bring up the Dalai Lama's slaves I get like 50 replies about how they weren't actually slaves, how it's CPC propaganda, how slaves under the Dalai Lama lived a better life than the average citizen in China, how they didn't have slaves, etc.
It's not that there's a lot of propaganda (which, granted, there is). It's that people cling to their propaganda and nothing we do will loosen that grip. That change has gotta come from within
deleted by creator
Well then maybe the problem isn't that tankies aren't shitting on the Dalai Lama enough, it's that the western left lends credence to this propaganda and should fight it instead
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
This question is why we need to retire the "Castro freed slaves" meme.
People question stuff that doesn't fit with mainstream historical narratives. If they do some cursory digging and find out you're right -- as they will if you point out Tibet had slaves before communists freed them -- they'll trust you a bit more and be a bit more skeptical of sources that say otherwise/gloss over it. But if that cursory digging turns up something like "Cuba abolished slavery in 1886," they'll think you don't know what you're talking about, and they'll discount whatever else you're saying or write you off entirely.
deleted by creator
I've tried it both ways, both in person and online. I've tried radical language and contestable claims like "shitty wage labor is wage slavery," and I've tried describing awful exploitation in terms that can't really be argued. The latter works far better, because someone who's still a little skeptical can't pick apart one of your points and derail the whole conversation. And you get that even from people who you can move left on other issues.
deleted by creator
See assuming that anyone other than actual capitalists or mobilized reactionaries is "probably not a lefty in waiting" is pretty problematic for actually building a mass movement. There are plenty of people who would balk at being presented with what seems to be (and in some sense genuinely is) factually incorrect information who are absolutely reachable. As for the bit about cultural hegemony, there's a big difference between backing down from being thoroughly descriptive or fully radical in our claims, and avoiding counterproductive rhetorical flourishes. One costs us substantive and important parts of our program, the other costs us nothing but a few incendiary words
deleted by creator
Even if you can't convince the person you're talking to, it's better to put forward a more coherent message for the people watching. It's always better to have fewer flaws in what you're saying, as it makes it more difficult for people to dismiss you out of hand (even if they're trying to!). There are people out there who value coherency, and a lot more people who'd at least like to tell themselves they do. Having a more factually sound case absolutely does help reach them, and on the internet at least you can never assume none of them are watching. Nothing is lost by not using imprecise and indefensible language, you can still make the actual atrocities involved very clear, and at least some small amount is gained. Given this, I fail to see any reason to engage in those sorts of rhetorical practices
deleted by creator