No you took the most bad faith reading of my comment and are actually going to argue that I'm wrong because "there have been movements other than workers movements!!!"
Yeah no shit, that isn't what I was saying. Everyone else seemed to get that other than you. To even acknowledge intersectionality kinda inherently means acknowledging movements other than class movements.
Yeah, very good faith arguing going on by you (in this and the other comments). You seem to think that your point is truth, but it isn't. How you defend it instead of broadening your thought (to understand how there can be a synthesis of movements and how these might actually be stronger than a semi-class reductionist workers movement) is nothing you do.
Were one is oppressed all are oppressed is a guiding slogan, that means you ought to look at more than just the direct class position and exploitation. If you don't you are less scientific than Marx or Engels or Bernstein.
Give me a list of real existing events ("name of event","timeframe","location") which underlie your point, that class is the thing to focus on and to trick people into accepting their role as workers. I tell you you can't.
to understand how there can be a synthesis of movements and how these might actually be stronger than a semi-class reductionist workers movement
That is what I said in my first comment. That intersectionality is important, but realizing that despite all of the different identities that are out there relating to each other as a worker ALONGSIDE our personal identities will most likely bring about real systemic change.
Give me a list of real existing events (“name of event”,“timeframe”,“location”) which underlie your point, that class is the thing to focus on
I'm not gonna do that because that's not what I said.
trick people into accepting their role as workers.
I think you're too focused on the word trick, so let me tell you now just as a precaution that I will not be waving my hands in front of people and speaking incantations to them so that they forget their identities and only view themselves as workers. I don't think that would work and I think it would be pretty alienating.
No you took the most bad faith reading of my comment and are actually going to argue that I'm wrong because "there have been movements other than workers movements!!!"
Yeah no shit, that isn't what I was saying. Everyone else seemed to get that other than you. To even acknowledge intersectionality kinda inherently means acknowledging movements other than class movements.
Yeah, very good faith arguing going on by you (in this and the other comments). You seem to think that your point is truth, but it isn't. How you defend it instead of broadening your thought (to understand how there can be a synthesis of movements and how these might actually be stronger than a semi-class reductionist workers movement) is nothing you do.
Were one is oppressed all are oppressed is a guiding slogan, that means you ought to look at more than just the direct class position and exploitation. If you don't you are less scientific than Marx or Engels or Bernstein.
Give me a list of real existing events ("name of event","timeframe","location") which underlie your point, that class is the thing to focus on and to trick people into accepting their role as workers. I tell you you can't.
That is what I said in my first comment. That intersectionality is important, but realizing that despite all of the different identities that are out there relating to each other as a worker ALONGSIDE our personal identities will most likely bring about real systemic change.
I'm not gonna do that because that's not what I said.
I think you're too focused on the word trick, so let me tell you now just as a precaution that I will not be waving my hands in front of people and speaking incantations to them so that they forget their identities and only view themselves as workers. I don't think that would work and I think it would be pretty alienating.