#anti identitarianism

[is-this-really--life]

[yasminmeadowflower]

[pawberri]

Its very annoying to see western leftists go "of course other countries don't want to have [insert human right] that's a western/capitalist value Forced on them" like omg you're doing free labor for the right wing identitarians of the world. Being anti-western isn't an inherently leftist view it's like one of the biggest and most useful dog whistles across the world. Because Western imperialism is so evil that most populations, regardless of politics, don't support it. They experienced it. It's like assuming that "preserving Japanese national identity" must be leftist because Japanese Americans have to fight for recognition against the state. But gay rights and women's rights and etc etc aren't actually "western values". (Notably western powers fought tooth and nail to deny these rights and still do) and to the extent that western words are imported by the local oppressed population, it isn't equivalent to imperialism... and people most contexts people will run into Local Oppressed People advocating for their rights before they see what's going on in a pride parade across the world. If they purport to be against their neighbors' rights because they saw what's happening in the west, I'd ask their neighbor for their opinion before going wowww makes u think....... Why choose to have solidarity with a right-wing nationalist majority over your fellow minorities fighting for their rights.

[dizzymoods]

Since we're bashing afropessimists we should remember that they love citing Fanon and DuBois. You know, Black communists. But we must ask ourselves, why do they ignore their contributions to communism? Bc Fanon & DuBois understand that

The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

They locate identity within a class analysis. Engels says the first class struggle was against patriarchy — meaning class goes beyond the stereotypical factory worker radical liberal/anarchistic identitarians like to use against communists. DuBois famously said that the slaves should be understood as proletarian because their labor was the dialectical negation of slavery.

Gabriel Rockhill & Domenico Losourdo (rip) have been doing work showing how Critical Theory (which AP is), French Philosophy, and Frankfurt School were funded by the Rockefeller, Ford Foundation, with support from the CIA post WWII as part of anticommunist movement. One way these theories restate imperialist ideology is to move from class consciousness and dialectical materialism to discursive bullshit about culture & identity devoid of class analysis. By de-emphasizing Fanon's marxism & overemphasizing his psychoanalysis, AP claims that everybody, everywhere, all the time is antiBlack. You can never beat a feeling like you can beat a capitalist or colonizer.

But this is stupid bc feelings are not borne out of thin air. The APs cite the arab slave trade as the origins of antiBlackness. And there you have it. the material reality comes first. And Fanon answers this question about the relationship between dehumanization and colonial exploitation in Concerning Violence. If antiBlackness is a thing, then you have to defeat the incentive for antiBlackness. All societies inherent the contradictions of their previous formations. slavery to capitalism. And when we get to socialism antiBlackness will still exist but! there is no incentive for it. As socialism eases the burden of scarcity the need for the Black as villain decreases.

Wilderson says capitalism wasn't a historical inevitability implying that communism is somehow irrelevant. But you'll notice he doesn't ever breach the possibility that the arab slave trade wasn't inevitable either! Very telling!

Lastly, there's a reason why all anti-imperial movements have had the participation of (some spearheaded by!) communists and why all communists movements are anti-imperialist. You cannot understand communism without understanding imperialism. You cannot defeat capitalism without defeating imperialism.

So African communists like Patrice Lumumba, Kwame Nkrumah, Aimé Césaire, Claudia Jones (Carribean!), Thomas Sankara are necessary to learn from. imperialism rots the core of the empire so Jon Watson, Ben Davis, Huey Newton, Assata Shakur, and Paul Robeson are important too.

As we move together globally against capitalism, as we learn about each others' struggles and cultures, the artificial barriers the captialists construct to keep us afraid of each other crumble. Only then can antiBlackness can be defeated.

[mariacallous]

Last weekend, former President Donald Trump posted another anti-immigrant screed to Truth Social. It would have been unremarkable ― at least, graded on the Trumpian curve of extreme xenophobia ― except for one word.

“[We will] return Kamala’s illegal migrants to their home countries (also known as remigration),” he wrote. “I will save our cities and towns in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and all across America.”

Many people might have glossed over his use of “remigration.” White nationalists did not.

“#Remigration has had a massive conceptual career,” Martin Sellner — leader of the Austrian chapter of Generation Identity, a pan-European white supremacist network — tweeted in his native German. “Born in France, popularized in German-speaking countries and now the term of the hour from Sweden to the USA!”

It was a succinct and accurate history from Sellner, a 35-year-old who typically trafficks in vicious lies and conspiracy theories, particularly about Black and brown people. He has been at the vanguard of pushing “remigration” — a euphemism for ethnically cleansing non-white people from Western countries — into the popular political lexicon in Europe.

Now Sellner was seeing his favorite little word all grown up, moving overseas in service of the 45th president of the United States, who has promised to implement the largest mass deportation of immigrants in U.S. history if elected back to the White House in six weeks’ time.

Trump’s use of “remigration” is the latest instance of the GOP’s intensifying anti-immigrant rhetoric in the run-up to November’s election, underscoring the degree to which one of America’s two major political parties is sourcing many of its talking points and policy ideas directly from neo-fascists.

“Trump’s rhetoric about ‘remigration’ has its origins in the international far-right,” Jakob Guhl, a senior manager of policy and research at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, explained to HuffPost in an email. “The term remigration was popularized by groups adhering to Identitarianism, a pan-European ethno-nationalist movement, as their policy to reverse the so-called ‘great replacement.’”

“The great replacement theory is a conspiracy theory which claims that ‘native’ Europeans are being deliberately replaced through non-European migration while suppressing European birth-rates,” he continued. “This theory has inspired numerous terrorist attacks, including the Christchurch massacre, where 51 people were killed, as well as attacks in Poway, El Paso, Halle, Buffalo, and Bratislava.”

Pat Buchanan, the onetime presidential hopeful and former aide to President Richard Nixon, used the term “remigration” to whitewash his own call for ethnic cleansing as early as 2006, in his racist tract “State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America.” But the term’s journey into the Trump campaign’s vernacular more likely got its start in November 2014, when 500 far-right activists gathered in Paris.

The inaugural Assises de la Remigration, or Annual Meeting on Remigration, was organized by Generation Identity. Its featured speaker was Renaud Camus, the travel writer-turned-philosopher who coined the term “great replacement” in his 2012 book by the same name. Camus’ book built off the work of another French author, Jean Raspail, who wrote “The Camp of the Saints,” an extraordinarily racist French novel that depicts a flotilla of feces-eating brown people invading Europe.

“The Great Replacement is the most serious crisis that France has witnessed in 15 centuries,” Camus told the crowd, eliding many bloody episodes in the country’s history, including a pair of world wars that killed nearly 2 million French people. For Camus, “remigration” was the best solution to the imagined crisis of the “great replacement,” the two terms essentially joined at the hip.

Camus and his fellow subscribers to identitarianism “have always been quite clear that the objective of ‘remigration’ is to create greater ‘ethnocultural’ homogeneity,” Ruhl told HuffPost. “For them, culture and ethnicity are inseparable, and they view (white) European identity as being fundamentally threatened by the presence of migrants ― necessitating drastic, far-reaching responses.”

According to a study by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, the term “remigration” was “used over 540,000 times between April 2012 and April 2019” on Twitter, particularly from accounts in France and Germany. Usage of the term skyrocketed after the Annual Meeting on Remigration in Paris. Camus himself was one of the main promoters of the word online.

As “remigration” became an increasingly discussed term, militant far-right groups adapted it as their own. In 2017, police in France arrested 10 far-right activists over a suspected plot to kill politicians and migrants and to attack mosques. Officers found a shotgun and two revolvers in the home of the group’s ringleader, who’d sought to create a militia, according to a post on Facebook, to kill “arabs, blacks dealers, migrants, [and] jihadist scum.” Per French investigators, the group, known as OAS, was formed to “spark remigration.”

The term made an appearance in Canada, too, where a far-right fight club called Falange — named for the fascist group that served under the Spanish general Francisco Franco during the Spanish Civil War — put signs with the word “Remigration” across Quebec City.

And that same year in the U.S., the group Identity Evropa — modeled after Generation Identity in Europe — burst into the public consciousness for its participation in the deadly white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. Identity Evropa’s proposed policies included “remigration,” and when its members marched in Charlottesville, they invoked the “great replacement” concept, chanting “You will not replace us.”

Back in Europe, in March 2019, Sellner started a channel on the chat app Telegram called the “European Compact for Remigration,” the beginning of a campaign, he announced, to influence far-right parties across Europe to support “de-Islamisation” and “remigration.”

That same month, a white supremacist in Christchurch, New Zealand, livestreamed himself walking into two mosques and opening fire, killing 51 Muslim worshipers. He’d posted a genocidal screed online before the shooting. Its title was “The Great Replacement.” Nevertheless, one week after the shooting, Sellner’s Generation Identity group in Austria staged a protest against the “great replacement,” again calling for “de-Islamisation” and “remigration.”

A couple of months later, it emerged that the shooter in New Zealand had communicated with Sellner only a year prior, donating over $2,300 to Sellner’s white supremacist group. “Thank you that really gives me energy and motivation,” Sellner wrote to the shooter in an email.

“If you ever come to Vienna,” Sellner added, “we need to go for a café or a beer.”

Despite these revelations, Sellner’s efforts to get far-right political parties to support remigration started to see results in the following years. In 2019, Alternative for Deutschland — which recently became the first far-right party since the Nazis to win a state election in Germany — inserted “remigration” into its list of official policy proposals.

Four years later, an investigation from Correctiv found that AfD members held a secret meeting with neo-Nazis and wealthy businesspeople to discuss the “remigration” of asylum seekers, immigrants with legal status, and “unassimilated citizens” to a “model state” in North Africa. The plan — which bore an unnerving resemblance to the Nazis’ initial idea to mass-deport Jews to Madagascar, before they settled on a wholesale extermination campaign — was Sellner’s brainchild.

That same year, as noted recently by Mother Jones, a jury of linguists in Germany selected “remigration” as the “non-word” of the year. “The seemingly harmless term remigration is used by the ethnic nationalists of the AfD and the Identitarian Movement to conceal their true intentions: the deportation of all people with supposedly the wrong skin color or origin, even if they are German citizens,” one guest juror wrote.

Mother Jones also noted that earlier this year, “an AfD candidate in Stuttgart campaigned with the slogan ‘Rapid remigration creates living space,’ a nod to the concept of Lebensraum used by the Nazis to justify the genocidal expansion into Eastern Europe.”

And finally, this year in Austria, the far-right Freedom Party (FPOe), founded after World War II by former Nazis, and which recently enjoyed success in national elections, called for the creation of a “remigration commissioner” in the country.

Still, very few, if any, U.S. politicians have uttered the word “remigration” in recent years. Trump’s use of the term stateside has coincided with his renewed embrace of dehumanizing language when talking about immigrants.

The former president’s promotion of a false story about Haitian immigrants eating pets in Ohio was classic fascist fare, depicting an entire category of people as savages. And earlier this year, the GOP nominee said immigrants were “poisoning the blood” of the nation. Historians quickly noted that Trump’s language echoed the words of Adolf Hitler. “All great cultures of the past perished only because the originally creative race died out from blood poisoning,” Hitler wrote in “Mein Kampf.”

But who in Trump’s orbit might have introduced him to the term “remigration”? The Trump campaign didn’t immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment. One possible culprit, though, might be Stephen Miller, who served in the Trump White House as an adviser and speechwriter. Miller’s ties to white supremacists are legion, and while working as an editor at Breitbart in 2015, according to leaked emails obtained by the Southern Poverty Law Center, he suggested the website publish articles about “The Camp of the Saints,”the racist French novel that inspired Renaud Camus.

Miller, like Sellner, was thrilled with Trump’s use of “remigration” last weekend.

“THE TRUMP PLAN TO END THE INVASION OF SMALL TOWN AMERICA: REMIGRATION!” he tweeted.

[there-are-4-lights]

Very funny that you think feminists shouldn't ally with the far right (it's true they shouldn't and us real feminists never would so we don't need to have that debate) but you also don't recognize the inherently right wing bioessentialism in your own ideology. Stop excluding women from your movement based on them having a marginalized identity you don't have and maybe you won't have to encourage your movement not to ally themselves with nazis. It's pretty fucking easy

Feminists are given this false binary between "support left wing anti-woman politics" and "support right wing anti-woman politics" so when feminists go "no thanks we're going to do pro-woman politics actually" the misogynist left wing men use the misogynist right wing men as a stick to beat us with. Tale as old as time.

By framing all criticism as "far right" and then refusing to talk with feminist women, instead no-platforming them and calling them Nazis, the far right got a massive open goal and a path into mainstream society. Alas, some women fell for this.

In countries where the resistance to the current flavour of identitarian anti-woman politics was not primarily conservative and religious but built by secular women of the left, the broader left would have done well to listen to them about the massive open goal to the far right they were creating.

Because if you try and use a ton of authoritarianism to force people into saying humans aren't sexed, that gay people aren't same sex attracted, that gender identity should replace sex in all of law and public policy, and medicalise gender nonconforming children, is it surprising there's a backlash?

When politicians start seeing this (and they have), is it not important that the adults in the room are not the people who want to blame everything on the loony left and gay marriage?

[nando161mando]

🔴⚫️ MOBILISATION ANTIFA - SAMEDI 13 JANVIER - PARIS ⚫️🔴

🇨🇵 Face aux nationalismes et aux identitaires, construisons un large front antifasciste.

Samedi 13 Janvier, prenons la rue, ne les laissons pas exister.

➡️ Rendez-vous dès 14h place de la République au cortège antifasciste de la marche Palestinienne.

➡️ Puis partons ensemble pour le rassemblement antifasciste, 18h Place de La Sorbonne contre la manifestation Paris-Fierté.

🇬🇧 Facing nationalism and identitarianism, let's build a broad anti-fascist front.

Saturday January 13, let's take to the streets, let's not let them exist.

➡️ Meet at 2 p.m. on Place de la République for the anti-fascist procession inside the Palestinian march.

➡️ Then let's leave together for the anti-fascist rally, 6 p.m. Place de La Sorbonne against the Paris-Fierté demonstration.

Via AFA Paris-Banlieue

Paris, Paris, antifa ! 🏴‍☠️

t.me/primalinea161

@anarchistmemecollective @antifainternational @kropotkindersurprise @left-reminders @radicalgraff

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Christopher Mathias at HuffPost:

Last weekend, former President Donald Trump posted another anti-immigrant screed to Truth Social. It would have been unremarkable ― at least, graded on the Trumpian curve of extreme xenophobia ― except for one word. “[We will] return Kamala’s illegal migrants to their home countries (also known as remigration),” he wrote. “I will save our cities and towns in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and all across America.” Many people might have glossed over his use of “remigration.” White nationalists did not. “#Remigration has had a massive conceptual career,” Martin Sellner — leader of the Austrian chapter of Generation Identity, a pan-European white supremacist network — tweeted in his native German. “Born in France, popularized in German-speaking countries and now the term of the hour from Sweden to the USA!”

It was a succinct and accurate history from Sellner, a 35-year-old who typically trafficks in vicious lies and conspiracy theories, particularly about Black and brown people. He has been at the vanguard of pushing “remigration” — a euphemism for ethnically cleansing non-white people from Western countries — into the popular political lexicon in Europe. Now Sellner was seeing his favorite little word all grown up, moving overseas in service of the 45th president of the United States, who has promised to implement the largest mass deportation of immigrants in U.S. history if elected back to the White House in six weeks’ time. Trump’s use of “remigration” is the latest instance of the GOP’s intensifying anti-immigrant rhetoric in the run-up to November’s election, underscoring the degree to which one of America’s two major political parties is sourcing many of its talking points and policy ideas directly from neo-fascists.

“Trump’s rhetoric about ‘remigration’ has its origins in the international far-right,” Jakob Guhl, a senior manager of policy and research at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, explained to HuffPost in an email. “The term remigration was popularized by groups adhering to Identitarianism, a pan-European ethno-nationalist movement, as their policy to reverse the so-called ‘great replacement.’” “The great replacement theory is a conspiracy theory which claims that ‘native’ Europeans are being deliberately replaced through non-European migration while suppressing European birth-rates,” he continued. “This theory has inspired numerous terrorist attacks, including the Christchurch massacre, where 51 people were killed, as well as attacks in Poway, El Paso, Halle, Buffalo, and Bratislava.”

Donald Trump takes inspiration from far-right European anti-immigrant extremists by using the term “remigration” to call for the deportation of undocumented immigrants.

[beguines]

Jodi Dean's Crowds and Party, while noteworthy for privileging the communist subject over working-class consciousness, demonstrates that even contemporary returns to the communist party have not divested themselves entirely of the economism they partially critique. Although Dean's argument for the necessity of a communist party is a significant development in a context that treats this concept as orthodox and old-fashioned, her focus on the necessity of its form and not its substance becomes a serious theoretical obstacle. "The problem posing itself today," she writes, "concerns less the details of party organization . . . than it does solidary [sic] political will. Can the Left's wide array of associations come together in a way that will achieve a real political advance?"

By failing to recognize that this "wide array of associations" might not be able to come together outside of a doomed big tent socialism, Dean does not seem to grasp that this "wide array" is often divided by very significant political differences. Although the exploited and oppressed masses might be united against capitalist exploitation in general, they are not necessarily politically united in key areas. Should internationalists unite with groups that, while being vaguely committed to socialism, have no problem with Zionism or other national chauvinisms? Should communist formations that treat feminism as important unite with those formations that dismiss it as "petit-bourgeois" and thus foster misogynistic practices? So when Dean complains about a "left realism" that is fragmented

"into an ever-expanding array of populist, liberal, progressive, trans, pluralist, green, multiculturalist, anti-racist, radical democratic, feminist, identitarian, anarchist, queer, autonomist, horizontalist, anti-imperialist, insurrectionist, libertarian, socialist, and communist persuasions, and treats this fragmentation as 'symptomatic of such a realism . . . [that is premised on the assumption] that collectivity is undesirable and that collectivity is impossible,"

we should ask what kind of unity she desires. Dean is correct to recognize that a politics that begins by focusing on difference rather than solidarity will be doomed to failure, but it is also correct to recognize that a project of solidarity must begin with an understanding of significant political differences. (Many of these political differences, we should again recognize, are the result of different subject positions that are generated by various forms of oppression.) Drawing clear lines of demarcation in the realm of politics and deciding upon what must be included or excluded from this basis of solidarity is necessary. To start with a big tent socialism of the 99% ignores the multitude of distinctions that will, if forced into a false unity, produce the most cynical form of solidarity: my comrades are not imperialists, racists, homophobes, TERFs, sexists, etc. And any movement that attempts to enforce a solidarity between all of these problematics, thereby ignoring the material fact of actual oppression and exploitation, will possess the most cosmetic unity and eventually collapse under the weight of its multiple contradictions.

J. Moufawad-Paul, Politics in Command: A Taxonomy of Economism

[biandlesbianliterature]

 I have written this book because lesbians have saved me, gave me a home, gave me language, showed me a future. I have also written this book because lesbian has been weaponized, used to instigate, justify, and perpetuate anti-trans violence and vitriol. I have written this book because I want the generations that worry that lesbian has been or is being forgotten to know that we remember. I have written this book because I feel myself holding on to the political and identitarian commitments that served me but no longer serve my students. I have written this book because I feel scared to be branded as a lesbian scholar (rather than a scholar of the lesbian). I have written this book because I cannot let lesbian go. Mostly, I have written this book because I really do love lesbians.

[athousandgateaux]

The number one thing I try to get across to my students when I teach my course on queer politics and history is that being queer does not make you immune from having reactionary politics. That queerness does not have any inherent political content beyond what we assign it, and that it is quite possible (and common even!) for people to occupy a structural position as queer (i.e., be non-normative in relation to established social norms of gender and sexuality) and also subscribe to conservative, reactionary, and even anti-queer ideologies. "Queer" as a political movement, starting in the early-1990s, purposefully took on an anti-normative position, but contemporary queer identity (which is so far divorced from the anti-identitarian roots of the early queer movement it's laughable) does not involve an anti-normative, or any other specific political stance.

[thoughtlessarse]

The demonstrations on Saturday came as political parties gear up for September parliamentary elections where the far-right could make significant gains. Police in Vienna said on Sunday that they detained more than 50 people as they clashed with protesters trying to disrupt a march by hundreds of right-wing extremists. The demonstrations on Saturday came as Austria’s political parties gear up for September parliamentary elections that are expected to see the far-right make significant gains. Anti-fascist groups and left-leaning political parties had called for protests against a demonstration and march by identitarian and other hard-right activists, the Austrian Press Agency reported. Social media posts showed marchers in downtown Vienna with a banner calling for “remigration,” a term used to advocate for the mass return of migrants to their countries of origin.

continue reading

[beardedmrbean]

Following the police killing of George Floyd in the US, the Black Lives Matter movement was largely imported into Britain, with a rapid expansion of our own grievance industrial-complex. This disastrous superstructure peddled the myth that the UK’s social, political, and economic systems are deliberately rigged against racial and ethnic minorities. This form of aggressive racial identity politics from the US ��� a comparatively youthful country struggling to get to grips with the legacy of slavery on its own soil and recent forms of segregation – fundamentally undermined the credibility of the British anti-racist cause. 

I issued a warning over this in an article for this paper back in June 2020. Promoting the concept of “white privilege” – in a country where some of the most materially-deprived and culturally marginalised communities predominantly belong to that race – was always going to lead to awful outcomes. Yet public-sector organisations such as the BBC and the NHS, two woefully underperforming behemoths funded by the British taxpayer, time and again provided a platform for pro-BLM radical activists to pour scorn on one of the most tolerant, anti-discriminatory and pro-equality countries on the planet. 

BLM-mania also saw a flurry of corporations taking the opportunity to deflect attention away from their own business practices by jumping on supposedly virtuous causes of “racial justice”. Across a variety of sectors, a class of DEI “professionals” was ushered in – often as unproductive as they are divisive. Companies announced a range of costly initiatives, donations and hiring sprees, with little scrutiny. 

In mainstream politics, we were greeted to a cringeworthy image of Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and his deputy Angela Rayner “taking the knee” for a social movement that says it cares about young black lives but rarely flags the impact of gang-related knife crime in London. Labour MP Dawn Butler, no stranger to inflammatory language, weaponised Floyd’s death by calling for the Tory government to get its “knee off the neck of the Black, African Caribbean, Asian and minority ethnic community” in a House of Commons statement. All of this was a national embarrassment. 

Now, though, we seem finally to have come to our senses – and the BLM movement has been thoroughly discredited. Like many identitarian causes which are full-to-the-brim with rank opportunists, it has suffered from high-profile cases of fraud. In the UK, this includes Xahra Saleem – a high profile BLM activist. She was sentenced to two and a half years after it was found that she used her profile to raise money for young people in the St Paul’s area of Bristol and then spent it on herself. The judge said that money was used “not for their benefit but for your own, funding a lifestyle for yourself that you could not otherwise have afforded”. 

The prosecution said that, in the 15 months to September 2021, there were more than 2,500 payments made from Saleem’s account which included general shopping and bills, plus a new iPhone, hair and beauty appointments, clothes stores, Amazon purchases, taxis and takeaways.

Lessons must be taken on board from the era of BLM-mania. Attempts to coerce the wider public into believing that Britain should be ashamed of its history and appalled with its record on race relations should never be tolerated again. Because for all its flaws, Britain has contributed a magnificent amount to the advancement of humankind – and like many of my compatriots spanning a wealth of backgrounds, I am proud to call it home.

[archaeocommunologist]

So, per my request, syntaxblk added my name to the blocklist (and with the most detailed entry, no less!). As usual with this crowd, there are many funny aspects, but I wanted to draw up a few notes

1.) These people aren’t leftists. They have no coherent economic analysis. Their politics are an aestheticized jumble of “social justice” causes, and as such, they are laser-focused on speech acts, to the exclusion of all else. The only things they are capable of talking about or criticizing are the ways other people speak online: who is or isn’t “allowed” to speak on a topic, what words they are or aren’t “allowed” to use (see: “say her name”)—and that’s it. When it comes to the real world, they’ve got nothing.

2.) They are also hopelessly identitarian, and this stems from their adoption of afropessimist philosophy. You find similar “radical pessimist” notions in TERFism, third worldism, and certain strains of anarchism. The “oppressor class” is evil, which is why they oppress; white people are colonizers because white people are bad, not because colonization is profitable. This is an anti-materialist position that cannot create an effective politics. It’s a disease of powerlessness. It’s contemptible where it’s not just sad.

3.) #oh wow here we go calling black people psyops

William O’Neal was an FBI informant who infiltrated the Black Panthers in Chicago. He provided the FBI with detailed information about Fred Hampton’s apartment, and then slipped secobarbital into Hampton’s drink so that he would not wake up before the feds could assassinate him. William O’Neal was also a Black man. Identity isn’t a defense like you think it is.

[rametarin]

Leftist Antisemitism.

The hilarious part of leftist antisemitism is the only thing that causes them to arrive there, is simply not making an exception to Judaism and Jewish people in their ideology anymore, when they consider all the things they hate about non-progressive groups. They just have to not consider Judaism or Israel exempt when they consider them either Oppressors or Oppressed. Simply not allowing criticism of Jews and Judaism to automatically be filed under antisemitic because it criticizes and analyzes Jewish behavior and Jewish beliefs, on the idea doing so is inherently anti-Jewish.

They don't have to be wildly swallowed up in "far right" conspiracy theories about Jews and banks, or blood in the bread, or some religious belief in bringing on the apocalypse. They just have to not make an exception to Jewish culture when it considers ethnic identity important, Jewish religious beliefs and traditions as overriding modern secular sensibilities, and not make exception to Jewish traditional gender and sexual roles and practices. And apply them the same way they'd apply them to Christians and Europeans.

The quiet part out loud has always been Progressive Gentiles that observed privilege theory, critical lenses for sex theory and gender theory, would not make exception for Jews or Judaism when the time came- but, antisemitism was just that stuff ethnosupremacist whites, competing religions and competing nationalists did- not they, who constructed their policy on Jews based on the idea they could reform the "icky" out of Judaism or legally stamp out the undesirable elements with the state. And the quiet part out loud among Progressive Jews has always been, "These non-Jewish things are racist, sexist and religious demogaogery- but these criteria on bad things don't apply to me and mine religion or ethnic identitarianism, because Judaism is an exception to these characteristics just by being Jewish, and thus, valid. Simple as."

So now Progressive Gentiles and Progressive Jews are in an argument about whether this criteria to disqualify groups or instances from validity and declare them racist, sexist, homophobic and more, applies to Jews, or not. And if not, why doesn't this criteria that exempts them from the wrath of the state, also retroactively apply to all the other groups, behaviors and cultures and cultural beliefs that were previously declared to be racist, sexist and theofascist, and thus, intolerable, and safe to mock and deride as invalid?

It's going to be a hell of an argument, and may just come down to stamping feet repetitively until people have heart attacks at the podium.

[catdotjpeg]

Protesters acting in solidarity with Palestine interrupted the New York City Pride March on Sunday afternoon, blocking a float from a major LGBTQ+ organization as it made its way down the West Village’s Christopher Street. The action started at around 2:30 p.m. one block from the Stonewall Inn, when activists unfurled a banner that read “No Queer Liberation Without Palestinian Liberation,” distributed leaflets, and sat down in front of the float representing the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) to block it from proceeding, according to a report from Gay City News.

Footage of the action was shared on social media by the group Writers Against the War on Gaza (WAWOG), a “coalition of media, cultural, and academic workers who are committed to the horizon of liberation for the Palestinian people,” according to the group’s website. One video shows the protesters unfurling the banner and throwing red paint on the truck pulling HRC’s float as people in HRC shirts run out to intervene. Protestors sat on the parade route with a Palestinian flag and a banner reading “Palestine will be free” in red, black, and green. Another video shows New York Police Department officers arresting protestors as the crowd chants “Shame, shame!”

In a statement provided to Them, the group specifically called out pinkwashing, noting as an example a now-infamous November image shared by Israel’s official Instagram account showing an Israeli soldier standing amid the rubble in Gaza holding a rainbow flag scrawled with the words “In the name of love.” The caption read “The first ever pride flag raised in Gaza 🏳️‍🌈.” “But who among us felt anything other than abject shame when the rainbow flag was raised, purportedly ‘in the name of love,’ over a razed Palestinian neighborhood in January?,” the statement reads.“We refuse the identitarian navel-gazing that would tether us to such violent spectacles and their authors.” It continues, “There is no version of this where we pat ourselves on the back for fighting back, and then go back to ‘yes queen, glitter in the streets, corporate pride but watermelon stickers’ as we boots the house down fifth avenue behind our complicit ‘human rights’ organizations, hand in blood-stained hand with weapons manufacturers and the rainbow capitalists who use the language of our liberation to buy us into their military industrial hellscape while their lobbyists work against us behind closed doors.” A representative for WAWOG told Them that Sunday's protest was carried out by a group formed within WAWOG and comprising both WAWOG members and comrades. On the social media site X, the group wrote that HRC was targeted for its ties to arms manufacturers. Northrop Grumman, an arms manufacturer, is listed as a “platinum partner” of the HRC on its own donor website, alongside names of corporations such as Apple, Amazon, and Google.

[...]

When asked for comment, HRC directed Them to the organization's statement “Humanitarian Crisis in the Middle East,” last updated June 1.

“HRC’s mission is focused on advancing the civil rights of LGBTQ+ people in the United States and around the globe. Given our expertise, HRC’s work outside of the U.S. is focused on issues with a unique impact on the LGBTQ+ community, including the proliferation of anti-LGBTQ+ laws and policies around the globe," the statements reads in part.

According to Gay City News, onlookers joined chants of “Free, free Palestine,” as well as “Shut it down.” Some people on the HRC float joined in the chants, as well, per Gay City’s report. Police, some wearing rainbow NYPD insignia, zip-tied protesters’ wrists and denied journalists access to the protest to capture images of the arrests, Gay City wrote. The parade, which took place on the final day of LGBTQ+ Pride Month, was the latest example of pro-Palestine protesters using pride festivities to demand solidarity with people in Palestine. Earlier this month, protesters brought messages of solidarity to major cities across the United States, including Boston and Philadelphia. Disclosure: While not an active WAWOG member, this journalist signed an October 2023 statement from WAWOG voicing solidarity with people in Gaza.

-- From "Protestors Disrupted NYC Pride in Solidarity With Gaza, Blocking HRC's Float" by Mathew Rodriguez, 1 Jul 2024