Anti-colonial Marxism is as good as a country breakfast.

  • 8 Posts
  • 83 Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 23rd, 2022

help-circle
  • No. Killing and hurting animals is not bad for humans. Rather, killing and hurting animals with improper methods and ethics will invariably encourage harmful outcomes. These outcomes will not manifest with even distribution across humanity, other animals, and other life forms. It’s sad you are so disconnected from reality that you are so confident making infantile statements that are easily dismissed. You may as well start a religion that condemns the climate itself instead of addressing the causes and dangers of climate change.

    And while I’m here I’ll just add … stop separating humanity from the rest of the biosphere so casually. Are you so arrogant to believe other life forms are blameless or even without ethics? Vegans treat “animals” the same way Mormons treat Indigenous Peoples as “Lamanites” that are simultaneously purer than but still lessor than and in need of “salvation.” You use other life forms as tokens just as all colonial religions do.






  • Doom is certainly not our inevitable future but it is where we are going given our direction. Perpetual deterioration is its own doom. Drowning in discourse is its own doom.

    I don’t believe people actually think we are fucked. I don’t think they believe we are doomed. No one even knows what that means. I think denial is far more palpable than any other sentiment. And I would say helplessness is more potent than doom as well. People that understand the problem are drowned out by denial, not doom. Far too many still hold faith in traditional avenues for me to believe doomerism is anything but disingenuous.

    My issue with the fantasy (civil war/ww3) is that it can not mean anything positive. These are ungrounded fantastic scenarios where we can’t hope to take a meaningful victory. We can only hope to continue our cause and protect our communities to the degree we can prepare and organize ourselves.











  • Honestly I’m fine with it. I need people to tell the truth about who they are. Most of the time this is done with sanctimonious grandstanding on one caliber or another. Yesteryear it was crocodile tears for children they never cared about. Now it’s pearl clutching about nationalism for their beloved empire, or at least their understanding of it.

    At least I can rest assured that I’m not just paranoid about what is happening in the world. That is an invaluable gift.


  • Deeply unserious people are dangerous to me and I’m not going to allow that. I’m not going to disrespect myself by silencing my gut. I’ve been trained my entire life to sense ableism because it is the only way to ever be safe. Make yourself clear and known. If you are going to use autism in that way, what choice do I have than to see you as an unserious agitator? No games. I don’t care what you think is “autistic” only that you know autistic people aren’t going to tolerate being in danger. Either admit you don’t have any respect for autistic people or their experiences so we can all draw lines and hash out what happens next. Or, move and speak with serious intentions and make known that eugenicists and ableists are your sworn enemies and that the cause of destroying ableism is a cause you are deeply enfranchised in.






  • I agree. I never want to hear it and more than anything I definitely don’t want to hear it as a joke. There is no safety with someone whose ontology can hold the meaning of that word.

    But likewise I resent those who would refrain from saying the r-word but would express and enforce ableism regardless. If I ever use that word it would be in private to make their ableism more clear and ironically shock such people out of their ableist stupor. But even this is just a discursive risk that I would never advocate for such a tactic in good conscience.