So this site has been keeping it's anarchist and ML(M) elements together cause of the sectarianism ban, right? What if we extended that ban to other things we are currently fighting about? Seriously this is out of fucking hand
(not trying to ban discussion of veganism as a whole, obviously, but im real tired of people getting worked up over food on the internet)
It's also about the exploitation undocumented workers face in slaughterhouses and dairy farms. :vegan-liberation-rad:
Freedom from exploitation for man and nature alike.
If we can call people reactionary for their diets, opinions on site policies, etc why can't we do the same for more serious political differences?
lol they're not the ones being reactionary. "can we just ban all the people who don't have the same opinion as me (hint: it's the vegans)" is pretty fucking reactionary bro.
I think the current interpretation of sectarianism privlages debates about dumb shit over debates over theory and actual politics. Anything significant enough to define a tendency receives extreme protection (except Trotskyism, which remains a punching bag), but you can be as divisive as you like over petty bullshit.
The sectarianism rule was supposed to promote unity, but it just redirects the division, failing to achievt its goal while restricting users and preventing what could be productive discussion.
I think that sectarianism should not apply in c/strugglesession
We can call people reactionary for their stance in defending their right to animal cruelty AND for requesting that all posts challenging that notion be memory-holed as to not face cognitive dissonance.
I'd like to point out that to vegans veganism isn't about "getting worked up over food" and they (I guess we) would consider that characterization a little bit trivializing. But I agree a lot of what has gotten up hasn't been a serious discussion of veganism, moreso just trolling. Although to be fair initially it was mostly memes related to the Reddit drama regarding a few ironic subreddits getting banned.
🔽 needlessly extending a situation that's almost over, they've already created a community specifically for hard discussions
you're right, that expression was pretty problematic, fixd
edit: oh shit it's ____ _ _____ i hadn't even noticed. whats good
Wait, am I at the point where people on this site recognize my username? Fuck yeah.
I think emphatic and open debate between different wings is valuable for the left. The problem is the hostility and name calling, which generally mods do their best to mop up.
Anyone that actually thinks that THIS is a fight leftism can afford to have right now is so stupid they are not even worth talking with.
Also thinking that staking the party line on a lifestyle only successfully upheld by 1-5% of the Left and suicidaly taking a rhetorical stance designed to piss off even your nearest ideological allies - on a settled issue no less; factory farms must be shut down and any means are valid - is ultra-leftcom wrecker shit and has no place in either a serious movement or a liberal forum.
Neoliberals (Impossible Foods, et al) are closer to ending factory farming than we are. 14,000 libs cohesively and successfully boycotting and abstaining from animal products leaves us no closer to seizing Kraft Foods and its suppliers by the throat. Nobody cares about what we do or how we feel. Especially at this scale and especially on an individualist level. Boycotts aren't worth shit, you all know where power comes from.
easy solution: ban vegans and also ban meaters. no more vegan struggle sessions
The virgin vegan fan vs the virgin dead animal fan vs the chad honey enjoyer
You mean we should consider the vegan/meat struggle a form of sectarianism and just deal with it the same way?
Sounds good to me, idfk tho
Veganism and carnism are ultimately ideologies like anarchism and communism, but also communism and capitalism. It depends what we deem acceptable sectarianism to declare truces on.
