5 ms·

I liken far left extremism to descending from obsessive generalization, and far right extremism descending from obsessive categorization - from the latter of wh

I liken far left extremism to descending from obsessive generalization, and far right extremism descending from obsessive categorization - from the latter of which emerges hierarchies, divisions based on things like race or genetics, and pissing contests based on labels.

donatj 5y ago
> pissing contests based on labels I'm getting a lot of that from both sides.
- michannne 5y ago
  Intersectionality paradoxically requires obsessive categorization while being promoted by those who are obsessive generalists
  - beaconstudios 5y ago
    I don't think you have a strong grasp on what leftists believe.
    - michannne 5y ago
      Rather than leaving it up to mystic interpretation, can you point out what is wrong with the sentiment "Intersectionality requires obsessive categorization"? I assume this is what you're talking about given the parent comment is strictly about far left extremism
      - beaconstudios 5y ago
        Intersectionality is just about how people can be oppressed along different lines simultaneously, and how rather than having separate feminist, black rights, trans rights movements they should be working together across those lines. Intersectionality or leftists or whatever didn't invent the categories, it's about identifying the way society mistreats people based on categories. I'm also not sure what you mean about leftism being defined by "obsessive generalising". Being somewhat familiar with left wing theory (Marxism, anarchism and postmodernism) I just don't see it - left theories have nothing to do with generalising people and everything to do with understanding socioeconomic systems. Edit: also intersectional theory is about how different social categories play off each other, ie how being black and trans is different from being white and trans.
        michannne 5y ago
        On intersectionality: I'm not insinuating that intersectionalists are creating the categories, only that they need, and heavily leverage those categories in order to achieve the goals of intersectionality. I don't think you're disagreeing with me on this. On obsessive generalization: You are approaching it from a purely economic perspective. I think it's disingenous to ignore the social goals of leftist theory, which are firmly rooted in removing the class concept entirely - obsessive generalization.
        beaconstudios 5y ago
        The goals of intersectionality, as well as all leftism, is to reduce oppression. In the case of intersectionality, the ideal case would be that people are no longer oppressed due to being in these categories. That's not leveraging categories to achieve a goal, it's describing how society keeps people down for often fairly arbitrary reasons. How is the idea of getting rid of class distinction "obsessive generalisation"? Also, the idea of getting rid of class is an explicitly economic issue.
        Fellshard 5y ago
        I believe this is a very rose-tinted slant on what the intent is, especially that worldview has shown itself quite willing and ready to generate oppression along some categories in order to purportedly alleviate oppression along other categories, so long as the tables are being turned.
        beaconstudios 5y ago
        Do you mean the USSR and China? Because yeah, many leftists opposed those revolutions, including at the time (anarchists opposed the bolsheviks and were murdered, support for Mao fell off after the West learned about the Cultural Revolution). The mainstream form of the left nowadays is either reformist (social democrats like Bernie or AOC) or libertarian socialists/anarchists opposed to the state (David Graeber (RIP), Noam Chomsky).
        5y ago
  - donatj 5y ago
    I'd be curious to understand what you mean by that. From what I've seen/understood the far left is very intent on categorizing, separating, and forcing "equality" upon.
    - michannne 5y ago
      I mean, you just answered your own question. The far left, and I don't mean just the "American-brand" of it, is very much focused on removing the categorization of individual identity - dismantling the concepts of race, sex, background, belief, nationality, etc. By removing those categories, the aim is to resolve the discrimination inherent in systems that inevitably have some bias towards individuals based on those characteristics, and ultimately make it infeasible to establish a hierarchy of any kind. Paradoxically, in order to do so, the far left must lean heavily into categorization to "remedy" the remnants of injustice that have been levied on groups of people and level the playing field.
      - saila 5y ago
        There's nothing paradoxical going on here. When people are oppressed via categorization, it's only natural to embrace that categorization to reduce the stigma and turn it into a source of social and/or political power. It seems to me that the left, idealistically speaking, is intent on removing forced categorization by others. You would be hard pressed find anyone who is trying to remove all individual distinctions, and if you did, that person would be an outlier. On the contrary, the left, again idealistically, seems to embrace differences, just not those that are imposed and used as a rationale for discrimination. In my experience, those who go on about "freedom" are usually the most intolerant of individual differences. How about that for irony?
  - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
    That's not a paradox. Thats like saying fire departments are obsessed with categorizing houses into 'burning vs not burning' because fire departments require burning houses. I thought they were against fires? Why are they always asking me if my house is on fire or contains flammable material? If they just stopped bringing it up then the fires would put themselves out.

donatj 5y ago

> pissing contests based on labels I'm getting a lot of that from both sides.

michannne 5y ago
Intersectionality paradoxically requires obsessive categorization while being promoted by those who are obsessive generalists
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  I don't think you have a strong grasp on what leftists believe.
  - michannne 5y ago
    Rather than leaving it up to mystic interpretation, can you point out what is wrong with the sentiment "Intersectionality requires obsessive categorization"? I assume this is what you're talking about given the parent comment is strictly about far left extremism
    - beaconstudios 5y ago
      Intersectionality is just about how people can be oppressed along different lines simultaneously, and how rather than having separate feminist, black rights, trans rights movements they should be working together across those lines. Intersectionality or leftists or whatever didn't invent the categories, it's about identifying the way society mistreats people based on categories. I'm also not sure what you mean about leftism being defined by "obsessive generalising". Being somewhat familiar with left wing theory (Marxism, anarchism and postmodernism) I just don't see it - left theories have nothing to do with generalising people and everything to do with understanding socioeconomic systems. Edit: also intersectional theory is about how different social categories play off each other, ie how being black and trans is different from being white and trans.
      - michannne 5y ago
        On intersectionality: I'm not insinuating that intersectionalists are creating the categories, only that they need, and heavily leverage those categories in order to achieve the goals of intersectionality. I don't think you're disagreeing with me on this. On obsessive generalization: You are approaching it from a purely economic perspective. I think it's disingenous to ignore the social goals of leftist theory, which are firmly rooted in removing the class concept entirely - obsessive generalization.
        beaconstudios 5y ago
        The goals of intersectionality, as well as all leftism, is to reduce oppression. In the case of intersectionality, the ideal case would be that people are no longer oppressed due to being in these categories. That's not leveraging categories to achieve a goal, it's describing how society keeps people down for often fairly arbitrary reasons. How is the idea of getting rid of class distinction "obsessive generalisation"? Also, the idea of getting rid of class is an explicitly economic issue.
        Fellshard 5y ago
        I believe this is a very rose-tinted slant on what the intent is, especially that worldview has shown itself quite willing and ready to generate oppression along some categories in order to purportedly alleviate oppression along other categories, so long as the tables are being turned.
        beaconstudios 5y ago
        Do you mean the USSR and China? Because yeah, many leftists opposed those revolutions, including at the time (anarchists opposed the bolsheviks and were murdered, support for Mao fell off after the West learned about the Cultural Revolution). The mainstream form of the left nowadays is either reformist (social democrats like Bernie or AOC) or libertarian socialists/anarchists opposed to the state (David Graeber (RIP), Noam Chomsky).
        5y ago
- donatj 5y ago
  I'd be curious to understand what you mean by that. From what I've seen/understood the far left is very intent on categorizing, separating, and forcing "equality" upon.
  - michannne 5y ago
    I mean, you just answered your own question. The far left, and I don't mean just the "American-brand" of it, is very much focused on removing the categorization of individual identity - dismantling the concepts of race, sex, background, belief, nationality, etc. By removing those categories, the aim is to resolve the discrimination inherent in systems that inevitably have some bias towards individuals based on those characteristics, and ultimately make it infeasible to establish a hierarchy of any kind. Paradoxically, in order to do so, the far left must lean heavily into categorization to "remedy" the remnants of injustice that have been levied on groups of people and level the playing field.
    - saila 5y ago
      There's nothing paradoxical going on here. When people are oppressed via categorization, it's only natural to embrace that categorization to reduce the stigma and turn it into a source of social and/or political power. It seems to me that the left, idealistically speaking, is intent on removing forced categorization by others. You would be hard pressed find anyone who is trying to remove all individual distinctions, and if you did, that person would be an outlier. On the contrary, the left, again idealistically, seems to embrace differences, just not those that are imposed and used as a rationale for discrimination. In my experience, those who go on about "freedom" are usually the most intolerant of individual differences. How about that for irony?
- ZeroGravitas 5y ago
  That's not a paradox. Thats like saying fire departments are obsessed with categorizing houses into 'burning vs not burning' because fire departments require burning houses. I thought they were against fires? Why are they always asking me if my house is on fire or contains flammable material? If they just stopped bringing it up then the fires would put themselves out.