6 ms·

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).
      - Karrot_Kream 5y ago
        Are you familiar with non-leftist thought? I've found when interacting with a lot of leftists that they became leftists first through their/others observations/feelings and then began to read leftist thought afterword, but aren't aware of how leftist thoughts fit into the general framework of political ideas. It makes it tough to discuss political thought with a lot of leftists because their only exposure to political critiques is through Marxist lenses, even though Marx himself was very well read in both philosophy and history. Leftism and intersectionality is all about labelling folks into groups. Each person falls into an intersection of multiple groups (e.g. "African-American" and "presents female") and we can use this to have an understanding of their experience and the oppression that they face. Taken to absurdity, this reduces a person into a bundle of specific labels and doesn't make any distinction between the individual and their labels: well I'm a person of X race assigned Y gender born at Z time with immigrant parents who experienced A, B, and C event and therefore I feel Aleph oppression. The original critique was that, the "obsessive generalization" necessary to equalize the experiences of humanity paradoxically requires an obsessive amount of categorization. > How is the idea of getting rid of class distinction "obsessive generalisation"? There are many political philosophies that believe that some amount of class distinction is inherent to humanity. One can create a reductive 1D projection of political preferences by placing "classless, fully equal" society on the left as many leftist theories do and "hierarchical, predetermined classes for each individual" on the right as many fascist theories do. If you think that a "classless, fully equal" society is not extreme at all, then you're probably the one on the very left end of the spectrum.

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).
    - Karrot_Kream 5y ago
      Are you familiar with non-leftist thought? I've found when interacting with a lot of leftists that they became leftists first through their/others observations/feelings and then began to read leftist thought afterword, but aren't aware of how leftist thoughts fit into the general framework of political ideas. It makes it tough to discuss political thought with a lot of leftists because their only exposure to political critiques is through Marxist lenses, even though Marx himself was very well read in both philosophy and history. Leftism and intersectionality is all about labelling folks into groups. Each person falls into an intersection of multiple groups (e.g. "African-American" and "presents female") and we can use this to have an understanding of their experience and the oppression that they face. Taken to absurdity, this reduces a person into a bundle of specific labels and doesn't make any distinction between the individual and their labels: well I'm a person of X race assigned Y gender born at Z time with immigrant parents who experienced A, B, and C event and therefore I feel Aleph oppression. The original critique was that, the "obsessive generalization" necessary to equalize the experiences of humanity paradoxically requires an obsessive amount of categorization. > How is the idea of getting rid of class distinction "obsessive generalisation"? There are many political philosophies that believe that some amount of class distinction is inherent to humanity. One can create a reductive 1D projection of political preferences by placing "classless, fully equal" society on the left as many leftist theories do and "hierarchical, predetermined classes for each individual" on the right as many fascist theories do. If you think that a "classless, fully equal" society is not extreme at all, then you're probably the one on the very left end of the spectrum.