I’ve seen enough from the chapos to make me think all of them aside from amber are not class reductionists (aside from the self hating weirdo shit amber says) and none of them are racists (especially Matt). Why do they want to be associated with assholes like Sean McCarthy? I’ve been a leftist and an anti fascist for like ten years now, the left is supposed to beat the shit out of these dorks, not quasi cater to them like this Sean dude and Others on that side of Twitter.
Sucks to see Will and the others associate with that piece of shit.
Just because they hate neoliberals doesn’t mean fascist neckbeards are our friends. They’d gladly me have my Jewish ass gassed in heart beat
Than don't say that class reductionists don't exist? There are a ton of "leftists" who call themselves class first and disregard race/sex/etc as boutique issues. Sean McCarthy is a particularly monstrous version of this, but Amber and the other Chapos do this kinda shit all the time. If you think it's a bad term because class is inherently racialized and you can't meaningfully separate them, than just say that.
Look I don't know who Sean McCarthy is, so I'm not defending him. The chapo's and many other public intellectuals being accused of class reductionism pretty much have the same view I just articulated. Yet, this intended smear of class reductionism is still used against them for prioritizing mass based politics and universal programs as a remedy for racial disparities etc.; and that's what I disagree with. It seems like an argument made in bad faith.
It's not a "smear" when they have on Matt Tiabbi to complain about PC culture not letting him talk about how violent BLM protesters are. Just because they'll claim they support an intersectional class analysis doesn't mean they consistently do, and just because libs will latch onto this criticism in bad faith doesn't mean it's not true.
Amber.
McCarthy and to a lesser extent Amber's class reductionism is largely a backlash to the weaponization of identity politics by liberals. Hillary said in 2016 that breaking up the big banks won't stop racism - that kind of cynicism creates a backlash. I find McCarthy's humor to be really off putting, I'm not a fan of him, but I understand the rationale behind his behavior.
The Adolph Reed/DSA controversy is a perfect example of the class reductionism charge used to prevent an actual conversation on class and intersectionality. I just don't know how anyone can look at the history of America and argue that only when racial wounds are healed will true class solidarity begin. The white backlash to any kind of progress for minorities is well documented. As leftists we should be using history to interpret the near future with the goal of achieving political power. The only way to achieve political power is via a broad and class based coalition. A high tide lifts all boats. Those who are struggling the most will be benefit the most from universal programs.
As much as I would love for true and life changing reparations to be a thing, it just won't happen with just a reactionary white working class. And some cynically use horrors perpetrated to minorities as justification to deny universal and redistributive programs to poor whites. Instead of a rising tide, they argue for a lower tide targeting poor whites. Punishing people isn't the goal here. Taking profit out of the equation is the goal.
So like I get the cynicism, but it's interpreted and projected in such a non-helpful way by Mccarthy.
I’m not saying universal policies are always bad, I’m simply saying things like Black Lives Matter and Antifascism are important parts of the left that should never be disregarded. The left he always stood up against any form of injustice and oppression , I do not think that should end so we can focus only on universal class policies. Different oppressed groups have different needs that need to be addressed and stood up for. To me, it seems easy to disregard that kind of stuff if you’re an upper middle class spoiled white kid, but it’s rather impossible when you belong to you one of these out groups to get behind ideas like allying with boogaloo boys because they are class conscious.
Kind of upset you literally laughed about my concerns towards rising fascism and how it would probably effect people like me, that was not cool.
Think I’m going to exit this conversation and pretend I blocked you somehow.
Edit: I also remember reading you post that you weren’t familiar with Sean really?
So you think universal policies are sometimes bad? I'm super confused as to what your ideology is. The entire leftist project is anti-capitalist in nature, capitalism requires misery at the bottom. The system is designed to immiserate minorities. No one is saying BLM is useless or unnecessary. The multi-racial makeup of BLM is one of the few things giving me hope for a better future.
I don't think any leftist disagrees with this, the only difference of opinion is tactical. Do we achieve this via means tested programs, or universal programs? Because means tested programs don't have a long shelf life. Look at the groups that benefit the most from universal programs - it is always poorest, which is usually always minority groups.
Overall I'm just confused as to your thinking.
Not really wanting to entertain this discussion anymore tbh. My thinking is that class is absolutely important and a pillar leftism, but so are things like anti-fascism and other forms of resistance against bigotry and hatred. The people who were in Portland and counter protesting in Charlottesville are as leftist as you can get IMO. Putting their bodies on the line against deranged genocidalc?maniacs to show resistance to mortifying and ugly ideas.
deleted by creator
Amber.
It doesn't matter if they are just reacting to liberal idpol or whatever, they are engaging in the exact same aestheticization of politics as the people they are supposedly failing against and are obfuscating class. This is how you get shit like Glenn Greenwald claiming that Donald Trump and Tucker Carlson are socialists.
Hard disagree, it does matter because, as I stated in my original comment, liberals are weaponizing identify to argue against redistributive policies.
Can you explain this thought a bit more? I don't quite understand the point, but I'd like to.
Glenn and Taibbi are two more who have replaced ideology with grievances. It's an inherently reactionary kind of thinking and bizarre. Best to ignore them.
This