4 ms·

If you are part of the identity group, and if you question what they say, they'll call you a traitor. It's thinly veiled fascism to say the least.

caconym_ 7y ago
I don't really think calling it "fascism" is especially accurate or productive. It stinks of "the other side" which is, frankly, much scarier, whether you think I'm referring to the far-right fringe or the propaganda operations that are working to deepen these divisions. See also e.g. the widely documented fake BLM pages on Facebook. It's just a meme that spreads through its appeal to a certain type of person.
- smudgymcscmudge 7y ago
  The other side in this case isn’t the far right. The other side are just ordinary people who don’t want to be called names for forgetting to use the right pronoun or even not using a pronoun at all.
  - caconym_ 7y ago
    Yeah, those aren't the people labeling it "fascism" as far as I can tell. GP of this comment was specifically responding to GGP.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
Yes, and that's why this and other people (like the way Codes of Conduct were pushed in the first place) always smelled to me similar to a fascist coup. You suddenly find yourself you've become a part of the identity group, you're judged a traitor, and you're out. (I know "fascism" is the wrong word here, but what's the correct word for "fascism-like, but with $random-issue instead of nationality, and without the far-right"? We need that word.)
- olalonde 7y ago
  > (I know "fascism" is the wrong word here, but what's the correct word for "fascism-like, but with $random-issue instead of nationality, and without the far-right"? We need that word.) I think Social Justice Warriors is the proper term.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    That's with $random-issue = something from the bag of things related to gender identity and minorities. I wonder if there's a more general term, partly because I have the feeling that the very use of "SJW" is now perceived by many as association with far-right.
- Udo 7y ago
  > I know "fascism" is the wrong word here I think the proper word is "authoritarian", which is a classification they would likely agree with. As an aside, I think traditionally political labels like "the Left" are becoming very problematic and are part of the problem. It's generally no longer enough to ask someone whether they're left or right and then correctly assume their stance on things. Instead - and I argue that we should have started doing that before this current upheaval - instead, you have to query a person specifically about their positions on specific things. For example, that way some confusion about the so-called Social Justice Warriors could have been avoided on all sides. They are a heterogenous group, but do tend to represent leftist values (inclusiveness, equality, a belief that society should take care of disadvantaged individuals disproportionately), at the same time they are not liberals in most regards. They tend to believe in progress through force, and they do generally favor strict rules and harsh/permanent punishment. They're authoritarians. One might argue that the SJW movement has more in common with conservatives and reactionaries than traditional leftist liberals, if you disregard their disparate political goals for a moment. Leftist liberals and SJWs often cannot successfully communicate and as a result are often in conflict, despite overlapping goals. This may also be the reason why, as the article describes in one instance, an openly anti-trans moderator was mostly seen as A-OK, whereas the leftist liberal author was fired.
  - 7y ago

caconym_ 7y ago

I don't really think calling it "fascism" is especially accurate or productive. It stinks of "the other side" which is, frankly, much scarier, whether you think I'm referring to the far-right fringe or the propaganda operations that are working to deepen these divisions. See also e.g. the widely documented fake BLM pages on Facebook. It's just a meme that spreads through its appeal to a certain type of person.

smudgymcscmudge 7y ago
The other side in this case isn’t the far right. The other side are just ordinary people who don’t want to be called names for forgetting to use the right pronoun or even not using a pronoun at all.
- caconym_ 7y ago
  Yeah, those aren't the people labeling it "fascism" as far as I can tell. GP of this comment was specifically responding to GGP.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

Yes, and that's why this and other people (like the way Codes of Conduct were pushed in the first place) always smelled to me similar to a fascist coup. You suddenly find yourself you've become a part of the identity group, you're judged a traitor, and you're out. (I know "fascism" is the wrong word here, but what's the correct word for "fascism-like, but with $random-issue instead of nationality, and without the far-right"? We need that word.)

olalonde 7y ago
> (I know "fascism" is the wrong word here, but what's the correct word for "fascism-like, but with $random-issue instead of nationality, and without the far-right"? We need that word.) I think Social Justice Warriors is the proper term.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  That's with $random-issue = something from the bag of things related to gender identity and minorities. I wonder if there's a more general term, partly because I have the feeling that the very use of "SJW" is now perceived by many as association with far-right.
Udo 7y ago
> I know "fascism" is the wrong word here I think the proper word is "authoritarian", which is a classification they would likely agree with. As an aside, I think traditionally political labels like "the Left" are becoming very problematic and are part of the problem. It's generally no longer enough to ask someone whether they're left or right and then correctly assume their stance on things. Instead - and I argue that we should have started doing that before this current upheaval - instead, you have to query a person specifically about their positions on specific things. For example, that way some confusion about the so-called Social Justice Warriors could have been avoided on all sides. They are a heterogenous group, but do tend to represent leftist values (inclusiveness, equality, a belief that society should take care of disadvantaged individuals disproportionately), at the same time they are not liberals in most regards. They tend to believe in progress through force, and they do generally favor strict rules and harsh/permanent punishment. They're authoritarians. One might argue that the SJW movement has more in common with conservatives and reactionaries than traditional leftist liberals, if you disregard their disparate political goals for a moment. Leftist liberals and SJWs often cannot successfully communicate and as a result are often in conflict, despite overlapping goals. This may also be the reason why, as the article describes in one instance, an openly anti-trans moderator was mostly seen as A-OK, whereas the leftist liberal author was fired.
- 7y ago