#161
Not Your S.H.I.E.L.D.
Post rating: ~

cleanhands posted:



http://www.joystiq.com/2012/01/28/minecraft-language-update-inadvertently-contained-racial-slur-b/

#162
Post rating: ~
As Minecraft Forums user EgXPlayer commented, "Thats racist."
#163
Not Your S.H.I.E.L.D.
Post rating: ~

cleanhands posted:
theres probably men who have learned from feminism that drunk consent isnt ok, and so on



yeah but thats pretty much just mainstream thought now. Not that drunkfucking isnt still rampant, but a lot of modern feminist thought has left that so far behind in the dust, and has moved on to much more progressive ideas such as internet anti-masturbation pacts and birthrape

#164
Not Your S.H.I.E.L.D.
Post rating: ~
apparently, "intentionally inserted by a volunteer translator" translates to "inadvertently" in Joystiqaans
#165
Post rating: ~

cleanhands posted:


This is fake. http://www.reddit.com/r/Minecraft/comments/ew6u7/what_the_fuck_notch/

#166
Post rating: ~

babyhueypnewton posted:
Are women, blacks, gays, etc so weak that they have to rely on their oppressors for support rather than seeing the enemy...

...either the movement is not radical enough to threaten the actual foundations of systematic privilege or those men are too weak to benefit from their own privilege.



right, so the N. American civil rights and S. African apartheid struggles, those were just 100% POC. no white, Jewish, or Afrikaaner allies necessary. no need for those with privilege to defect? also LGBT fights in N. America, they haven't benefited from the queering of women's issues at all in order to increase their political base with upper middle class straight white women? on one hand, you're acknowledging that minorities are oppressed groups and at the same time saying "oohh dumb babies too weak to fight on their own" ?

#167
Post rating: ~

Ironicwarcriminal posted:

AmericanNazbro posted:

i have no idea what this video is about but here is something white people did in the 21st, post racial, century

i heard about this and was trying to formulate a defence but after watching the video i can't, i just can't. wow.



"the food was delicious"

#168
Post rating: +
privilege seems like the safe liberalized version of a very important question though. how can those who benefit from oppression participate in a revolution to overthrow oppression. this seems like an important question on a personal level as well as a national level. like, hey. i'm a male and thinking about+fixing my oppressive behaviors has been key in being able to build strong relationships with women, especially women who are strong organizers.

i guess i broadly reject the article in the OP because it builds a strange image of Privilege Theory that cites nobody and doesn't even show any real-world examples, and it also doesn't seem to be based in any real-world organizing experience other than getting frustrated that Occupy GAs are dumb.

also i just want to call out the blinkandwheeze and aerdil fight as totally dumb and stupid for very obvious reasons, and also because ive never seen anyone who wasnt stuck up their academic butt care about any of those things in the slightest
#169
Post rating: +
ive only been organizing for half a year or so and already in my time ive met a dude who couldnt organize with terrifyingly strong females because he couldnt stop sexualizing her, a lot of people who try to organize blue collar workers but fundamentally think of themselves as better than blue collar ("i'm not just a waiter/hostess/etc, i'm a REVOLUTIONARY AGENT"), organizations that could only recruit mid-20s post-college privileged kids because they cant figure out how to work with the wild and difficult life schedules of middle-aged black women, so on and so forth, the list goes on.

maybe its wrong to put this all under the heading of 'privilege' but these are the problems caused by growing up in a terrible society, a society full of poison that creeps into you regardless of what you do
#170
Post rating: ~

rakauq posted:
also i just want to call out the blinkandwheeze and aerdil fight as totally dumb and stupid for very obvious reasons, and also because ive never seen anyone who wasnt stuck up their academic butt care about any of those things in the slightest


like, it very much felt like a fight over the hypothetical problems found through the reading of books and not at all a fight over problems found through practice

#171
[account deactivated]
#172
Post rating: ~
im on pretty blind ground here but my two reactions are

1. why can't nearly everyone on earth benefit from self-criticism

or

2. something something, the principle contradiction currently being struggled against, compared to a lesser contradiction which still causes problems but isn't in primary focus
#173
Post rating: ~
also im probably really dumb and not understanding the concepts fully but i wonder how does privilege theory deal with the concept of materialism, like doesn't materialism say that your material circumstances are like this and so you will behave in a particular way, and privilege theory specifically tries to correct the behavior of those in a particular material circumstance?

i'm dumb about everything please enlighten me. thanks
#174
Post rating: +
i know privilege people get really mad when you mention materialism
#175
Post rating: +

rakauq posted:
also im probably really dumb and not understanding the concepts fully but i wonder how does privilege theory deal with the concept of materialism, like doesn't materialism say that your material circumstances are like this and so you will behave in a particular way, and privilege theory specifically tries to correct the behavior of those in a particular material circumstance?

i'm dumb about everything please enlighten me. thanks


in my experience they tell you materialism is just another ideology and you need to check your privilege

#176
Post rating: ~
in my experience they're all liberals
#177
Post rating: ~
so is there a better approach than ~privilege theory, or no?

ill keep using it as default settings till then, warts n all
#178
Post rating: ~

rakauq posted:
also im probably really dumb and not understanding the concepts fully but i wonder how does privilege theory deal with the concept of materialism, like doesn't materialism say that your material circumstances are like this and so you will behave in a particular way, and privilege theory specifically tries to correct the behavior of those in a particular material circumstance?

i'm dumb about everything please enlighten me. thanks



it's a little bit more subtle than that, it says that as a class people are driven by their material circumstances. that's not to say certain individuals can't change, but that expecting an entire class of people to correct their behaviour because it's "right" is ridiculous.

#179
Post rating: +

xipe posted:
so is there a better approach than ~privilege theory, or no?

ill keep using it as default settings till then, warts n all

uhh marxism

#180
Post rating: +
hmm seems i need to explore my new identity as an oppressed minority (white muslim) and get the Real Scoop
#181
drivel of drunken hags
Post rating: +

Impper posted:

xipe posted:
so is there a better approach than ~privilege theory, or no?

ill keep using it as default settings till then, warts n all

uhh marxism



privilege theory is what happens when marxism festers in the halls of academia for decades & is adopted by liberals in search of their own parsimonious ideology

#182
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: ~

elemennop posted:
expecting an entire class of people to correct their behaviour because it's "right" is ridiculous.

almost as foolish as expecting a simple correspondence between a single dimension of structural class position and some "correct" subjectivity, as was believed by marxists. fortunately almost the whole world abandoned marxism.

#183
Post rating: ~

getfiscal posted:

elemennop posted:
expecting an entire class of people to correct their behaviour because it's "right" is ridiculous.

almost as foolish as expecting a simple correspondence between a single dimension of structural class position and some "correct" subjectivity, as was believed by marxists. fortunately almost the whole world abandoned marxism.



agreed, i support communism for purely aesthetic reasons

#184
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: ~

elemennop posted:
agreed, i support communism for purely aesthetic reasons

#185
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: +
#186
Post rating: +

elemennop posted:

getfiscal posted:

elemennop posted:
expecting an entire class of people to correct their behaviour because it's "right" is ridiculous.

almost as foolish as expecting a simple correspondence between a single dimension of structural class position and some "correct" subjectivity, as was believed by marxists. fortunately almost the whole world abandoned marxism.

agreed, i support communism for purely aesthetic reasons



#187
Post rating: ~

getfiscal posted:

elemennop posted:
expecting an entire class of people to correct their behaviour because it's "right" is ridiculous.

almost as foolish as expecting a simple correspondence between a single dimension of structural class position and some "correct" subjectivity, as was believed by marxists. fortunately almost the whole world abandoned marxism.


that's not even a fundamental tenet of historical materialism, let alone marxism

#188
Post rating: ~
like, lenin's position was the working class would never progress beyond trade union reformism based on their class position alone, and that it would take an intellectual vanguard to produce a revolutionary subjectivity. and he's one of the more "vulgar" "reductionist" "Engels-revisionist" types rather than any of that fruity frankfart school shite where you can drone on about false consciousness all day long. your trolls are weak dude, i can't imagine your heart's really in is
#189
Kurdt
Post rating: +

Lessons posted:
that's not even a fundamental tenet of historical materialism, let alone marxism


nice catchphrase lady

#190
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: ~

Lessons posted:
like, lenin's position was the working class would never progress beyond trade union reformism based on their class position alone, and that it would take an intellectual vanguard to produce a revolutionary subjectivity. and he's one of the more "vulgar" "reductionist" "Engels-revisionist" types rather than any of that fruity frankfart school shite where you can drone on about false consciousness all day long. your trolls are weak dude, i can't imagine your heart's really in is

if you admit that the political has autonomy from the material then you can't get back to saying that the material (in terms of class struggle) is determining except in the althusserian sense of some "last instance", but althusser himself admitted this formulation is obviously wrong and therefore marxism is in crisis.

#191
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: +

rakauq posted:



Allah's Apostle (SAW) said, "Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one. People asked, "O Allah's Apostle (SAW)! It is all right to help him if he is oppressed, but how should we help him if he is an oppressor?" The Prophet (SAW) said, "By preventing him from oppressing others."

#192
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: +

getfiscal posted:

Lessons posted:
like, lenin's position was the working class would never progress beyond trade union reformism based on their class position alone, and that it would take an intellectual vanguard to produce a revolutionary subjectivity. and he's one of the more "vulgar" "reductionist" "Engels-revisionist" types rather than any of that fruity frankfart school shite where you can drone on about false consciousness all day long. your trolls are weak dude, i can't imagine your heart's really in is

if you admit that the political has autonomy from the material then you can't get back to saying that the material (in terms of class struggle) is determining except in the althusserian sense of some "last instance", but althusser himself admitted this formulation is obviously wrong and therefore marxism is in crisis.



don't althussplain me bro

#193
Post rating: ~

getfiscal posted:
if you admit that the political has autonomy from the material then you can't get back to saying that the material (in terms of class struggle) is determining except in the althusserian sense of some "last instance", but althusser himself admitted this formulation is obviously wrong and therefore marxism is in crisis.



it's a crisis for a particular sort of marxism, and it's not one that's compatible with the beliefs of a man who would write statements like, "The materialist doctrine that men are products of circumstances and upbringing, and that, therefore, changed men are products of changed circumstances and changed upbringing, forgets that it is men who change circumstances and that the educator must himself be educated." so yes, the claim that politics are outside of and suborned to material circumstances is clearly incorrect, but that's not the clear position of either the founders or most successful proponents of marxism, so it's very hard to take these criticisms to suggest a crisis in marxism.

by the way, have you read this? he does a brilliant job highlighting these same contradictions but hasn't discarded materialism at all.

http://media.pfeiffer.edu/lridener/dss/Marx/2marxtoc.htm

#194
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
that link looks cool
#195
Post rating: ~

babyfinland posted:
Allah's Apostle (SAW) said, "Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one. People asked, "O Allah's Apostle (SAW)! It is all right to help him if he is oppressed, but how should we help him if he is an oppressor?" The Prophet (SAW) said, "By preventing him from oppressing others."



The big Other's vessel (JACKHAMMER) said, "Fear your neighbor, whether zir is a paranoiac or a neurotic." People asked, "O big Other's vessel (JACKHAMMER)! It is all right to help zir if zhe is a paranoiac merely attempting to fill the hole in their symbolic universe by the lack of a primordial signifier, but how should we help zir if zhe is a neurotic?" The Zizek (JACKHAMMER) said, "By preventing zir from avoiding zir own desire."

#196
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
is there any reason that marxists value lacan other than the fact that zizek does so

note that this is a seperate question from the actual value of lacan per se, it's about the marxist who would dismiss so much other theory on certain grounds but accepts lacan because The Fat Slovene
#197
Post rating: ~
marxists & other leftists have valued lacan long before zizek, two examples being barthes and deleuze...

unless u mean something else far more dogmatic by "value"
#198
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: ~

Lessons posted:
so yes, the claim that politics are outside of and suborned to material circumstances is clearly incorrect, but that's not the clear position of either the founders or most successful proponents of marxism

well i'll try to clarify. lenin, trotsky, stalin and luxemberg all thought that marxists shouldn't wait for a majority in society, shouldn't depend on parliamentary institutions, and should take measures to ensure the dictatorship of the proletariat even in the absence of, say, sustained majority support among the broader population. this was because the proletariat had a special mission connected to their material position in society. this is what makes marxism revolutionary. but if you deny that there is an objectively "correct" subject-position for the working class then you remove the certainty that all revolutionary marxists have held to be fundamental. more importantly, you can define people in more complex ways, which implies letting people decide what's important about their own lives. that is, no dictatorship of the proletariat, but rather a pluralist democracy that allows women, different races and nationalities, different religions, etc., to represent themselves how they feel best.

#199
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: ~
if you mean that there's a watered down "marxism" that is basically just reformism then yes, of course.
#200
Post rating: ~

babyfinland posted:
is there any reason that marxists value lacan other than the fact that zizek does so

note that this is a seperate question from the actual value of lacan per se, it's about the marxist who would dismiss so much other theory on certain grounds but accepts lacan because The Fat Slovene


lacan was bros with althusser and sartre, althusser in particular owed a lot to lacan's theories and his conception of marxism is pretty fundamental to this particular school of balibar/badiou/zizek etc.

iirc jacques-alain miller is also very sympathetic to this particular 'post-maoist' tendency too