COINTELBRO posted:

The only way out of this endless cycle of dispersal is to build communist science again, somehow, but how without at least one communist superpower in place like the USSR?

It took the crazy destabilizing inter-imperialist conflict of WW1 for the USSR to form and I'm thinking that this centuries Glorious New Socialism will maybe center around resource wars from climate change? So, an ocean of blood?

c_man posted:

COINTELBRO posted:

which is why you will often find shrill denunciations of actual leftism

couldn't let it go without some classic misogyny i see. are they hysterical as well?

yeah cause white first world bourgeois feminism is something we should defend

babyhueypnewton posted:

c_man posted:

COINTELBRO posted:

which is why you will often find shrill denunciations of actual leftism

couldn't let it go without some classic misogyny i see. are they hysterical as well?

yeah cause white first world bourgeois feminism is something we should defend

you're a sex tourist

getfiscal posted:

'achieving' things shouldn't be the only measure of short-term success. i mean all the maoists in india have done is shit in holes and cover it with leaves for a decade in a bunch of forests and i think we shouldn't write them off.

Actually the urban strategy of the CPI (Maoist) has been successful over the last few years, which you can read about on http://www.bannedthought.net/India/CPI-Maoist-Docs/

Lal salaam!

Chears.

le_nelson_mandela_face posted:

i got beat up for being a queer in high school

we can tell

COINTELBRO posted:

It was developed in "critical legal theory" along with standpoint theory to raise the profile of American black women in academia, and it specifically eschews the primacy of class or radical re-thinking of class relations and frames itself entirely in an immutable liberal paradigm, which is why you will often find shrill denunciations of actual leftism in its journals, such as this one: http://criticallegalthinking.com/2013/10/18/rebels/

Che Guevara was a dick. I know this because I have the Bolivian Diary in my toilet and every time I pick it up I have the urge to use it when I’m done. He was emotionally as well as actually committed to authoritarianism—and of a particular patriarchal stripe that didn’t shrink from programs of executions for the greater good. His death was no great loss, except perhaps to his family. If the CIA had any sense they would have let him live in order to discredit him. As for the Cuban revolution, it was mostly driven by Cuba’s own social movements and for all we know it would have turned out better without Che and his pal Castro.

Of course, its current internet bastardization is merely an extension of these principles, except the people peddling "intersectional feminism" are far less educated than the actual academics who originally developed it, and are trapped in a world of surfaces in which they can only hysterically shout "be more intersectional!" without being able to elaborate what that actually means. Occasionally they will namedrop Kimberlé Crenshaw, Audre Lorde or the Combahee River Collective as a response, without noting that these people never achieved anything. These internet soft-leftist feminists (and us) live in a reality in which actual leftist notions have been stripped away by the establishment and replaced entirely with relativistic identity positions, and the most radical tools they can muster up in this climate are white guilt, gender criticism and perhaps ecology. The only way out of this endless cycle of dispersal is to build communist science again, somehow, but how without at least one communist superpower in place like the USSR?

So in that sense, at least the original bourgeois academic theorists of standpoint theory were more reliable in that they were aware that their "intersectionality" belonged entirely to their ambitions and aims of raising their profiles and financial stability in that very specific sphere of American academia.

Cheers.

COINTELBRO posted:

It was developed in "critical legal theory" along with standpoint theory to raise the profile of American black women in academia, and it specifically eschews the primacy of class or radical re-thinking of class relations and frames itself entirely in an immutable liberal paradigm, which is why you will often find shrill denunciations of actual leftism in its journals, such as this one: http://criticallegalthinking.com/2013/10/18/rebels/

Che Guevara was a dick. I know this because I have the Bolivian Diary in my toilet and every time I pick it up I have the urge to use it when I’m done. He was emotionally as well as actually committed to authoritarianism—and of a particular patriarchal stripe that didn’t shrink from programs of executions for the greater good. His death was no great loss, except perhaps to his family. If the CIA had any sense they would have let him live in order to discredit him. As for the Cuban revolution, it was mostly driven by Cuba’s own social movements and for all we know it would have turned out better without Che and his pal Castro.

Of course, its current internet bastardization is merely an extension of these principles, except the people peddling "intersectional feminism" are far less educated than the actual academics who originally developed it, and are trapped in a world of surfaces in which they can only hysterically shout "be more intersectional!" without being able to elaborate what that actually means. Occasionally they will namedrop Kimberlé Crenshaw, Audre Lorde or the Combahee River Collective as a response, without noting that these people never achieved anything. These internet soft-leftist feminists (and us) live in a reality in which actual leftist notions have been stripped away by the establishment and replaced entirely with relativistic identity positions, and the most radical tools they can muster up in this climate are white guilt, gender criticism and perhaps ecology. The only way out of this endless cycle of dispersal is to build communist science again, somehow, but how without at least one communist superpower in place like the USSR?

So in that sense, at least the original bourgeois academic theorists of standpoint theory were more reliable in that they were aware that their "intersectionality" belonged entirely to their ambitions and aims of raising their profiles and financial stability in that very specific sphere of American academia.

Cheers.

no