COINTELBRO posted:littlegreenpills posted:
sexbuying shd be criminalized but leaving it up to the fucking cops where, when and on whom to enforce that law is fugging stupid
Hating the police is infantile ultraleft posturing that is being coopted by capital. The current cop-bashing media narrative is just a Soros conspiracy to justify destroying their unions and fully replace their public service with "private security", much like private prisons appropriate the rhetoric of prison activism. The media decided to seize upon police racism during this moment for a very intentional reason, and it's not "justice". Create and manage another pointless Occupy-esque "horizontalist" movement full of politically illiterate young leftists (Black Lives Matter) and you're set.
uh, no
2. cops are already "private security"
3. activists forced the media to pay attention to police racism through direct action
4. BLM isn't occupy
Edited by le_nelson_mandela_face ()
chickeon posted:I think we're more or less in agreement on the subject, not that I thought we had any sort of substantial disagreement before
thanks, posting on the z o n E is such a fraught experience as soon as you try and say anything serious
tears posted:but instead its like being accused of something I didn't do and i'm all like wut. All your points are a great reffutal of something I didn't say, ugh, lol. So obvs i'll accept some responsibility for not making things clear enough tho.
i appreciate the further substantiation of your points but i'm still pretty unclear on the points you expressed that led me to draw the impression i, and apparently several other people, did. i'll quote your previous post to that effect
tears posted:there is this heavily pushed lie that the reason people working in prostitution in the uk are “all” eastern european (actually a whole range of non uk countries) is because they were all trafficked across here rather than the obvious which is generally foreign immigrants are poorer and more oppressed so are obviously more likely to have to turn to prostitution to live
this still seems to be fairly unambiguously stating that 1. understanding trafficking as a primary vehicle behind migrant sex work is fallacious to the point of being considered a lie, while 2. economic and social oppression of migrant labourers is instead a more valid explanation but also one that is contrary to the first
so my confusion remains, as you didn't seem to elaborate this particular point any further in your broader argument. again, i'm not sure at all how these explanations are exclusive, or how the latter necessarily undermines the former
it's possible that here you're actually forwarding two distinct conceptions of human trafficking - one that is lurid and sensational, and one that is more concrete - and you are only taking issue with explanatory value of the former. if that's the case, then i agree with you and your argument was just somewhat unclear
however you did previously cite a report diminishing the significance of human trafficking in a real sense as a substantial factor in migrant sex work, conjuring up a figure of "less than 6%" (a claim based entirely on the subjective self-reporting of only 100 participants, including both women and men, in "all of the main jobs available within the sex industry"). you may have been quoting that just to the extent that it also indicated police abuses in the execution of anti-trafficking measures, but this was pretty ambiguous
tbh ive made a few posts recently that on re-reading dont actually say what I want them to, of which this is the most egregious. good reminder to re-read things, not to rush and remeber the potential imprecision of meaning while writing
tears posted:I feel really irritated that this has happened, not because I've been called out on something, which I would be really happy to reply to, re-analyse things and perhaps change my stance, but because your post entirely misses the point of what I was trying to say, like almost 100%
welcome to here, tHE r H i z z o n e
cars posted:on the front page all the discussion included beneath this story is about how no one wants to discuss it, what's the work to bash in a couple more pages from this thread
it's built into the template so it would mean changing that so that each story can have its own "number of comments to include underneath" setting which is a database change. not hard but maybe a lot of unnecessary overhead.
what we could change is the default number of comments included underneath all stories, but i don't think we should do it just because this one story doesn't have the best first page comments. if it becomes a trend, sure.
drwhat posted:what we could change is the default number of comments included underneath all stories, but i don't think we should do it just because this one story doesn't have the best first page comments. if it becomes a trend, sure.
i wonder how hard it would be to include a default number of comments above a certain threshold of upvotes. sure this would catch a bunch of joke replies but overall it could improve quality of the sample discussion which i see mostly as a lure for people to join or at least lurk the forums
Petrol posted:drwhat posted:what we could change is the default number of comments included underneath all stories, but i don't think we should do it just because this one story doesn't have the best first page comments. if it becomes a trend, sure.
i wonder how hard it would be to include a default number of comments above a certain threshold of upvotes. sure this would catch a bunch of joke replies but overall it could improve quality of the sample discussion which i see mostly as a lure for people to join or at least lurk the forums
i like this idea
Petrol posted:i wonder how hard it would be to include a default number of comments above a certain threshold of upvotes. sure this would catch a bunch of joke replies but overall it could improve quality of the sample discussion which i see mostly as a lure for people to join or at least lurk the forums
that's a good idea, ok
xipe posted:I dunno I think the phrase human rights has been totally colonised by liberal imperialist governments and NGOs si when we use it we are injecting anti communism and pro war tropes undermining whatever we are trying to say.
xipe can you extrapolate this for me? like, specifically, the technicalities of a phrase being colonised (what is the quanta of a colony in such use?) and the injection of tropes (into what realm are they injected?). I am intrigued.
COINTELBRO posted:Hating the police is infantile ultraleft posturing that is being coopted by capital. The current cop-bashing media narrative is just a Soros conspiracy to justify destroying their unions and fully replace their public service with "private security", much like private prisons appropriate the rhetoric of prison activism. The media decided to seize upon police racism during this moment for a very intentional reason, and it's not "justice". Create and manage another pointless Occupy-esque "horizontalist" movement full of politically illiterate young leftists (Black Lives Matter) and you're set.
Like where you are going here... I'm not sure that under a Marxist criticism the police can be regarded as part of a proletariat (considering calling it a police union at all). It seems they function in a capitalist state system as a domestic display of state power reinforcing its flows.
tears I think its always important to take the time to look at the ways information is being used to create and uphold narratives outside of the control of those emotionally invested in them. nice work.
COINTELBRO posted:littlegreenpills posted:
sexbuying shd be criminalized but leaving it up to the fucking cops where, when and on whom to enforce that law is fugging stupid
Hating the police is infantile ultraleft posturing that is being coopted by capital. The current cop-bashing media narrative is just a Soros conspiracy to justify destroying their unions and fully replace their public service with "private security", much like private prisons appropriate the rhetoric of prison activism. The media decided to seize upon police racism during this moment for a very intentional reason, and it's not "justice". Create and manage another pointless Occupy-esque "horizontalist" movement full of politically illiterate young leftists (Black Lives Matter) and you're set.
why not both?
levoydpage posted:xipe posted:I dunno I think the phrase human rights has been totally colonised by liberal imperialist governments and NGOs si when we use it we are injecting anti communism and pro war tropes undermining whatever we are trying to say.
xipe can you extrapolate this for me? like, specifically, the technicalities of a phrase being colonised (what is the quanta of a colony in such use?) and the injection of tropes (into what realm are they injected?). I am intrigued.
thread necromancy spectrum disorder. clearly the point is that the discourse of 'human rights' is tainted with imperialist politics to the point that it is probably best to avoid using the concept in our discussions. it is, after all, a very general and lazy concept. better to make more specific and well-supported arguments than to use neoliberal catchphrases, which is what 'human rights' has sadly turned out to be.
Edited by tears ()
tears posted:under no circumstances will i re read this thread
i just did, well i reread the OP and skimmed the rest, and this actually strikes me as a great thread to revisit, but not to discuss rotherham (there has never been a more appropriate handle on this forum than cointelbro tbh)
some thoughts i had while rereading:
- its been a while now since the whole #metoo thing started and even if we are generous and accept that it's mostly been confined to the entertainment industry, the fact that it has not brought a reexamination of allegations against men in porn goes to show that it is a firmly liberal 'movement'
- i am dismayed to think that we have had some turnover in membership here and a recent influx of new posters but possibly less women than ever
- i wonder whether anyone's opinions on what to do about sex work have changed following recent discussions around sakai's book on lumpen
Anyone who thinks they own their body is an idiot. You didn't create it, you don't maintain it and for the majority of people with life threatening medical conditions you would be dead without society. Actually the same is true for even the ostensibly healthy since modern medicine keeps the odds you won't get a random bacterial infection and die above 50-50.
Religion is smart to say that god owns and maintains you, they should just replace god with society.
Try to claim bodily autonomy when the draft hits. It's a stupid liberal lie only erected to obscure the necessary converse statement, just as you belong to society society belongs to you and it owes it to you to meet your needs. A dangerous idea if it ever finds itself in the minds of the proletariat.
bumpthread posted:Just want to comment that you don't own your body.
Anyone who thinks they own their body is an idiot. You didn't create it, you don't maintain it and for the majority of people with life threatening medical conditions you would be dead without society. Actually the same is true for even the ostensibly healthy since modern medicine keeps the odds you won't get a random bacterial infection and die above 50-50.
Religion is smart to say that god owns and maintains you, they should just replace god with society.
Try to claim bodily autonomy when the draft hits. It's a stupid liberal lie only erected to obscure the necessary converse statement, just as you belong to society society belongs to you and it owes it to you to meet your needs. A dangerous idea if it ever finds itself in the minds of the proletariat.
i feel like there might be something worthwhile in this thought that would be better expressed in a less provocative fashion and maybe ina diffrent context
This is literally impossible to refute. Whatever you think this implies is up to you.