The Political Definition of "Queer"
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 มิ.ย. 2024
- New Discourses Bullets, Ep. 94
Queer Theory is one of the most destructive ideas ever to have been loosed onto our society from the halls of academia, as we have documented in the recent book The Queering of the American Child (amzn.to/3K2HovQ ). But do you know the definition of "queer"? Do you know that it's not possible to be queer, only to act queer? Do you know it has almost nothing to do with gay people? Do you know it's virtually guaranteed by definition to encourage pedophilia? All this and more is available in the original definition of "queer" as it is used in Queer Theory. Join host James Lindsay in this episode of New Discourses Bullets, where he reads and explains the original definition of "queer" from David Halperin's 1995 book Saint Foucault: Towards a Gay Hagiography (amzn.to/4bmHaM2 ).
New book! The Queering of the American Child: queeringbook.com/
Support New Discourses: newdiscourses.com/support
Follow New Discourses on other platforms: newdiscourses.com/subscribe
Follow James Lindsay: linktr.ee/conceptualjames
© 2024 New Discourses. All rights reserved. #NewDiscourses #JamesLindsay #Queer
As a non binary bi-PoC (aboriginal & inuit), wheelchair bound, neurodivergant, cross eyed, su-s-sufferer of a stutter who is also the parent of a left handed, red haired, fur-baby, trans-agist 38 year old who identifies as a toddler I fear the direction with which our c-c-ountry is going!
your mom is right
🫰🫰🫰🫰🫰
and furry. don't forget that u are a furry.
and here I was thinking I was the only one.
🤣😂🤣🙃🤣
"Abuse of words has been the great instrument of sophistry and chicanery, of party, faction, and division of society." ~John Adams
Queer theory opposes principle on principle.
Excellent synopsis.
Edit: Ah, exactly what James said; I usually read comment while listening to the video 😅
"We all should be opposed to queer theory on principle, because queer theory is opposed to principle on principle."
-James Lindsay
And they dialectically synthesize into principally
Or principless?
@@6Sparx9 resulting in a normalization of psychopathic influence (the dialectic is a 'folding process').
QUEER: dismantle, disrupt, defiance, political, wothout principles, anything goes
Got it! 🐿
Leftism in a nutshell.
The words you use here though, those are for a large part things that they are trying to do to our current system, which is (though barely passing as) Capitalism.
So if Queer means that you're inherently political, defiant of and aiming to disrupt and dismantle Capitalism, the logical conclusion is that "queer" means "Socialist".
@@TearThatRedFlagDown Eh. Idunno. I'd interpret it as "Chaos." They simply want to destroy. They're irrational people. I don't suspect the irrational could even construct a Socialist society. I won't take your perspective away from you though. 🐿
well anything goes so long as it is anti normative
Get the Foucautl!
I see what you did there.
That’s my Sartre joke
@@englishguy9680it's all rather satyrical , ain't it ?
It astounds me that ZERO normies ever question, what's the Q in the LGBT.....alphabet. I like to highlight to people it's political
You would think they would know what they so strongly support and want to shove down society’s throat. It’s an acceptance free for all that has spiraled into revenge of the nerds
That's the alchemy. Or magic if you will.
Like Saruman manipulating the King Of Rohan until he was a decrepit husk of his former self. Notice how a man who has ever felt malaise and anxiety can emphasize with Theoden.
He let everything pass him by until his son died....and then he woke up and realized how long he had been derelict in his duties as a father and king.
So many parents feel lost when their kid comes to them spewing nonsense and insanity so they resign themselves to it with a weary head bowed.
And imagine every alternative being captured. An entire world of worm tongues....No end to them and the vile poison they spew.
Notice how so many trans identifying people are on the spectrum. They do this on purpose.
The word has been chosen carefully to be a word that had traditionally been synonymous with "gay", and an insult, so people don't feel comfortable saying it, never mind questioning it.
@@PenTheMighty can you elaborate on the spectrum part, are you theorising they tend to target autistic people with the ideology and for what reason?
@@Moon-Labs Autistic spectrum people are known for having trouble distinguishing face or gender. It's an issue with processing that can be overcome with social learning, practice, and patience. They also have trouble with social concepts and are known to be overly trusting of people they bond with.
Now imagine someone trauma bonding with someone like this and manipulating them into a mindset where they can't process reality. It's not an accident that leftist meltdowns are often akin to autism spectrum tantrums and outbursts.
They are literally going after people who haven't had time to develop an understanding of the world and their relationship to it. Children. It just so happens that autism spectrum individuals are more susceptible to this brainwashing, as they're working with a slight handicap.
As for evidence, the WPATH files is a good start. There is also a deep dive into the Tavistock Institute. This crap is being pushed and Autistic kids are a stochastic casualty. Anyone neurodivergent is at risk of being warped by this in ways that more normative people wouldn't.
It's not an accident a lot of the people who spout and believe this crap are literally insane.
So queer(ness) is just a word for a defiantly unprincipled activist contrarian.
At least I get why they invented a word for it 😅😅
But most people don't know about the "politically defiant" part. (Queer)
So in the more acceptable context that most people THINK it means they are just odd, different, or quirky. (queer)
Thus, not all queer people are Queer people, and the Queers hide from criticism behind the casual goofiness, general harmlessness, and sense of pity so often associated with the queer group.
Years ago before I knew anything about this stuff I had a teacher for a psychology class on how to do counseling. And she told us she was Queer. A friend asked me what Queer was. She was from a more traditionalist culture thats like untouched by lgbtq stuff. I said “not straight, not gay, not bi. none of the above”. That was my beat guess. The whole term is a mindfuck it turns out.
Queer used to be a derogatory term. Thngs hat were queer were bent, crooked, twisted, not right, bizarre, not someone I want to spend time with, too strange ... things like that.
Like James said, it's an explicitly political identity.
What he neglects to mention is that it means "Socialist", they also use other terms like "radical" which means the same thing.
Definition of "queer" from David Halperin's 1995 book "Saint Foucault: Towards a Gay Hagiography" with comments from James Lindsay:
(4:26) Unlike gay identity, which though deliberately proclaimed in an act of affirmation is none the less rooted in the positive fact of homosexual object choice, queer identity need not be grounded in any positive truth or any stable reality.
(5:55) As the very word implies, queer does not name some natural kind or refer to some determinant object.
(6:39) It acquires its meaning from its oppositional relation to the norm.
(Lindsay: That's a choice, a political position against the norm.)
(6:58) Queer is by definition WHATEVER is at odds with whatever is the normal, the legitimate, the dominant. THERE IS NOTHING IN PARTICULAR TO WHICH IT NECESSARILY REFERS. IT IS AN IDENTITY WITHOUT AN ESSENCE.
(Lindsay: Queer is an oppositionally defiant political position taken up against anything considered normal and legitimate and dominant. It's a war on the normal and on legitimacy. Queer as an identity without an essence means it's not essential a person. Queer by definition cannot be found in reality.)
(9:49) Queer then demarcates not a positivity (Lindsay: positivity means actual fact), but a positionality vis-a-vi the normative. (Lindsay: It's political.)
(10:16) A positionality (Lindsay: Same as a political position) that is not restricted to lesbians and gay men, but is in fact available to anyone who is, or who feels marginalized, because of her or his sexual practices. (Lindsay: Anyone who feels marginalized or chooses to be marginalized can claim queer identity regardless of sexual orientation.)
(11:07) It could include some married couples without children for example, or even who knows, some married couples with children, with perhaps very naughty children. (Lindsay: Queer Theory eliminates principles on principle. Any transgression can be embraced, including pedro feel ya.)
(12:31) Queer in any case does not designate a class of already objectified pathologies or perversions. (Lindsay: It's not about kink.)
(12:44) Rather it describes a horizon of possibility whose precise extent in heterogenous scope cannot in principle be delimited in advance. (Lindsay: It's about anything goes, no limits.)
(13:20) It is from the eccentric positionality occupant's political stance. It is from the eccentric political stance occupied by the queer subject that it may become possible to envision a variety of possibilities for reordering the relations among sexual behaviors, erotic identities, constructions of gender, forms of knowledge, regimes of enunciation, logics of representation, modes of self constitution (Lindsay: Trans.), and practices of community, for restructuring that is the relations among power, truth and desire. (Lindsay: Take home - Queer is a political stance, with little to nothing to do with gay identities or any identity. Queer is not natural by its own definition. It is not rooted in positive truths or stable reality. It's a war on the normal and the legitimate.)
Are you an Ay Eye?
Brilliant summary
Excellent, Thank you
I'd like james lindsay to debate scholars in these fields. His online presence sites him as infamous for being superficial with concepts. As an uneducated layman, i have no idea what points are "right" within mainstream philosophy/theories. This topic is so niche that it can be obscured in the textbooks. I want an actual debate with specialist in the field.
They'll never do it because queer academia has pretty much adopted the position of James being not only an adversary but a violent adversary, able and willing to promote his followers to commit violent actions against the "queer community". The only way they would accept to debate him would be if his opponent has a disproportionate advantage, like having a multitude to silence his speed, or a biased moderator.
Thanks for all the necessary information. On D-Day especially we need to be reminded of what we are fighting
@@promethiac2641 People do things they don’t desire all the time.
@@promethiac2641 When your alternative lifestyle is the opposition of anything normal, then yes we have a problem with it.
@@promethiac2641 If fighting results in victory then you must fight, and victory means the demonic pdfs lose.
@@promethiac2641 Live however you want. If you think everyone should bow to your choice, expect criticism. Does that clear up things for you? I edited my response so you wouldn't cry.
@@promethiac2641 Several norms are worth keeping, for example not f*cking children which many of the Queer pioneers support.
Sorry we won’t accept those “alternatives lifestyles”
“Oppose reality”. They tear down every “reality” because acknowledgement of reality is STABILIZING, and “stability” opposes their “chaos, conflict, and confusion”. Thanks James.❤😊
Since Queer theory has become dominant in academia, it has therefore become what it is opposed to, and must, according to its own principle, be opposed.
No morals.
And a rabid opposition to the mere _existence_ of morals.
My husband and I thoroughly enjoyed this. Thanks
In others words they are admitting its not about "being born" and "not having other choice". It's about redefinition of good and evil.
Though I completely agree with this, one of my very close friends considers herself queer, but more in the late 90’s lesbian way. I feel bad for her because the way she defines herself seemingly was co-opted by this political version of queer.
In the late nineties some people called themselves "erotically straight but culturally q****" which at the time seemed like a nice way of trying to fit in in homonormative spaces. Who knew in the next quarter of a century they'd take over and demand gays become q****normative?
Yeah, i view it similarly. "Queer" within this political context and "queer" as a "most fitting description of personal identity chosen for themselves by the person in question" are two separate things, with separate meanings and separate fields of relevancy.
And it's important to remember that, since many people conflate the two. Both those who support "queerness" in the philosophical context, and some of those who denounce it. Which is by design of "political queerness". But none of that has any impact on anyone who doesn't bring this "political queerness" into matters of identity. Some do, and most don't. So while it's definetly a real, distinct thing, it's also not something to be applied prescriptively to people who don't care about it, despite what proponents (and some opponents) of this "political queerness" like to claim.
@@anonymouseovermouse1960I did the same Queer/queer trick in one of my comments 😅
It's easy to use people who belive they are one definition when those that want to exploit them have a very different definition and youe friend is just trying to be a decent person.
Pride comes before the fall. The indulgence (by the ego) in a special, academically defined identity, for the purpose of being interesting and different, contains within it the seeds of disappointment.
This cannot NOT lead to pedophilia, rape or snuff.
God bless James!
It's about distrupting societal order.
He says "homosexuality [...] is a modern form of ascesis", p.78.
Ascesis is a religious concept. It involves suffering.
Homestar wunner ! 🏠⭐
I’m gay and that is bs.
@@soniaalvarez1584the full quote is longer. It is so crazy I have to always check if I got it right:
"Homosexuality is not a psychological condition that we discover but a way of being that we practice in order to redefine the meaning of who we are and what we do, and in order to make ourselves and our world more gay; as such, it constitutes a modern form of ascesis."
Oh, my gosh, I'm Q because I'm a Libertarian atheist! So, I'm a rich, straight, cis-gendered white male, and I'm part of the LGBTQ+ class! It's literally anyone who wants to be in it!
James' status as the #1 gay studies author is thoroughly deserved. Thanks for helping normal somohexuals stay sane, Dr. Lindsay! Happy 🇺🇲 pride season.
I know the real definition: weird or strange.
James, of course, is describing the "Queer Theory" that is predominant in IDpol nowadays
@@mcfarvo Yep. I think he should do a much better job of explicitly differentiating these things, especially when a single word can have radically different meanings in radically different (or sometimes even very similar) contexts. Otherwise it's easy to interpret these things as James conflating two separate things, even though we know for a fact that James is aware that the same word can refer to distinct things.
@@anonymouseovermouse1960he probably could have fit that in here... probably just an oversight, as he's discussed such linguistic chicanery many times before.
Every person in the world needs to hear and comprehend this.
Bacon Lettuce Tomato,
Uhm...
Gravy, and uh
Quinoa!
So, in modern day "Queer" could mean hetero or straight? "Queer" just means "Not the norm". Since "Gay" has been normalized, "Queer" is now "straight"? This is all so stupid
If you're not fat, you're "straight sized" or "in a straight-sized body" because to not be fat is what the ciswhiteheterophallogocentric patriarchy *wants* you to want to be.
Correct.
Hetero & Homonormativity lead to the creation of queer.
Not just 'not the norm', but actively rejecting that norm for the sake of not wanting to adhere to any norm or standard, as it's too limiting.
Queer is anti gender binary , you don’t have to be gay to be queer . The drag queen story time is intended to teach children that changing gender is as easy as changing outfits . Queer people don’t like trans people because trans people support the gender binary. Homosexuals also support the gender binary .They believe homosexuality is just as conservative as heterosexuality. This isnt about sex though is all about destroying capitalism .
@@rey_nemaattori And that's only a component of it, since many of these political theories tend to have quick defnitions which sound concise on paper, but which don't actually make any sense when examined deeper. Which is why definitions aren't enough to understand these kinds of theories, in philosophy, sociology etc especially.
For example, socialism has very quick and concise definitions, all of which misrepresent the actual thing being discussed, because they're simplified versions of the whole thing. To truly understand the meaning of a theory/ideology, such as socialism (and thus, what is being meant by that phrase in a particular conversation) one has to go to a preferred author who explains every micro-connotations and common claims of theories/ideologies which fall under the umbrella of "queer theory", or "socialism", or really even any other "theory" you can think of. And then you have to parse that, and see what is seemingly being meant in the context of the conversation.
Cuz as a rule, these things cannot be understood in the first place if you rely on concise, streamlined definitions.
And even when you do that legwork to actually understand what that ideology/theory claims, you have to remember that it's just a bunch of opinions stitched together and paraded around as something bigger than what it really is. Which is another pattern i see in different theories and ideologies.
And then it's also extremely useful to be able to differentiate "this specific bundle of opinions called queer theory" versus whatever "queer" might mean in the context of the current conversation. Because if a person says that they identify as "queer", then you can generally infer whether they mean that in the ideological way or non-ideological way. Because though the word is the same, there's a world of difference between a person self-identifying as "queer", and self-identifying as a "queer theory follower".
So, in summary, human language is convoluted, and when you're talking about things which require precision, settle for nothing less. Things tend to resolve and clarify themselves on their own once you do that, though it takes some practice to find ways of breaking down and analyzing what's actually being said in a way which works for you. And it's not easy either way lol, but it is interesting.
It sounds very much like the colloquial British usage of the term. Very much like we would use 'weird.'
You could also refer to David Halperins more recent book "How to be Gay" where he says that Queer is a "non-identity"
4:01 thenk you. As a person with a lot of "queer" identity markers how hase a huge bone to pick for the "queer " movement it's refreshing. The queers have excluded anyone ( yes including non binary Trans) how dares to speak up ( as for myself . I might not be in the noram but i don't care what other people do. Including being traditional in any way )
Based
This is a good one everyone should listen. And timely.
Man, I don't care about the content. But it's some good ASMR. If you'd record just like reading a book, I'd listen.
The intro music to these and his longer videos are both excellent 😊
Always on point
My response to endless shouts of "Rebel, Rebel, Rebel!" is, "The only way to truly rebel that is still left is by refusing to rebel."
It seems to me that this is very close to the best response to queering.
Brilliant as always.
Good talk.
So since the norm is to have less than three children and we have eight, does that make us queer?
If you defiantly boned your wife to politically impregnate her to restructurally birth a baby that you could uncouple from reality together..... yeah
Flip all that if your not the one with a weiner 😮
The tolerance of intolerance is showing some cracks.......
@@promethiac2641 No more tolerance for the death and decay cult.
Odd, strange, different, unique, atypical, unconventional… that is the word itself.
Can someone please help me find an episode of new disc courses? I’m looking for the episode where James talks in depth about the Marxist attempt to force people to accept “mad” people in education and in every day life? It was like this whole episode on how they are trying to, intentionally but children up against people affected by “madness” I think he kept using that word madness. I searched new courses madness, and I didn’t find it so if anybody could help me with the name of that episode, pretty please.
So the question I have is what is it that you want to do that the current society deems 'inappropriate', which forces you to dismantle the 'norms' of the current society so that you can do the thing you want to do with impunity, and not be seen as doing something 'inappropriate'?
So i've encountered this man, Dave Farina (Professor Dave Explains.) I commented on one of his videos where he debates Muslim creationists if he had ever challenged radical leftists on what a woman is. Dude came out guns blasting calling me a dumbass and falling for conservative propaganda (because I defined a woman as a woman, mind you.) I was genuinely shocked as his videos were so professional and rational and he even says specifically that we cannot decouple sex from biology in one of his videos and says not to hop on the "woke" train (yet is so woke he refuses to define a woman.) It's crazy. The dude is completely ideologically possessed to the extent he attacks people for even neutral comments, while insisting he doesn't engage in ad hominems.
I like Professor Dave's videos a lot. As a science teacher, I have used them from time to time.
Farina's problem is his worldview is completely based on authority. His concern is that his videos accurately represent the conclusions of contemporary academia. And to be fair to academia, at least in science, it is right far more often than wrong. He is the TH-cam version of Wikipedia, with all of its utility and all of its weaknesses.
@@andrewstallard6927 wikipedia doesn't insult people.
Yeah that guy is a clown. I clicked on a video of his debunking Terence Howard's quantum mystical horseshit, and thought it was funny. The next video was him supposedly "debunking" some Tucker Carlson rap (IIRC) and it was just a string of invective and empty assertions. The usual "crime is a fox news talking point" kind of stuff. Basically everybody is just imagining it all, because they're racist presumably. I don't know what his background is but he doesn't present himself like a scientist -- he freely mixes evidence-based scientific claims, personal opinion and empty propaganda with no clear demarcation. Usually scientists are very careful about what their field of expertise is, what they're qualified to speak on, what they are saying in a professional capacity versus their opinion/ belief as a private citizen. This guy uses his apparent knowledge of one or two limited areas to make it seem like he knows everything on every subject, and uses that position with a credulous audience to imply that anyone who doesn't mirror his politics must be an ignorant hick -- because he's science-guy, so clearly the other side must be anti-science, right? It's _scientism_ . This illusion that leftist politics is all rational and fact-based when nothing could be further from the truth -- it's the most transparently emotion-driven "feelings over facts" ideology I've ever seen. But this is a thing the left does, they have these STEM nerd mascots who make scientific arguments where they can, then quietly slip into baseless assertions and naked propaganda where they must, hoping nobody will notice. The audience of liberal boomers just hears a bunch of big words and goes, oh obviously all the smart young people believe X -- well I know which side I'm on! That looks like the nice young man with the chain wallet who set up my AOL account for me! He knows what he's talking about! The details don't seem to matter bc the whole exercise is more like a sermon than anything else, it's about making faith in the leftist cult easier to sustain by creating the illusion that the condescending blue-haired nerds have it all figured out, so don't worry about the details, "Destiny" and "Professor Dave" have done all the heavy lifting for you.
Do you think you could make a longer form video where you start at the very beginning of when this nonsense started? As in like a chronology of the authors and their most influential books? Its a long history and I'm having a hard time building a comrpehensive overview
Have you ever done a talk on Franz Boas??
So, we can use queer again? We're back lads.
My gender is twisted and creepy.
What are the effects of Queer theory and other woke theories when they become multi-generational---what a horror!
What generation? They sterilize themselves.
Depending on how competent and loving they are, their kids may adopt their ideology or reject them completely. On average 80% of children adopt their parents religious and political beliefs.
LA Times has been publishing Queer propaganda for pride month and it’s stunning the amount of commenters on their publications who believe that “queer” is just a gay slur
Gay used to just mean happy and jovial before it became a political identity. Queer used to mean askew, not straight, off centered, deviating from the norm, weird. Now it's not enough to be "not normal" but you must be anti-normal.
We need to tradform the letter “Q” back to its quotidian quintessence.
Quickly and quietly, without question!
Tge really cute thing is that this can be used on whatever has become the norm. Everyone who takes it up is liable to be the next enemy of the people. 😅
Queer theory is the Opposite Day game made into a political position. If you needed proof that it is childish, there ya go
Coin “ Get the Foucault”
Slippery, amorphous language usage which serves their political purposes
Anarchism to its fullest.
Maybe naming a project the *Queer Majority wasn’t such a great idea after all 🤷🏽♀️
i'll take what is smear the. for 800 alex
⚔️⚔️⚔️⚔️⚔️⚔️
Promethiac is a queer. 😂
By socialist definition, yes.
Aka fussy Bs
I'm gonna hold my breath absurdum.
Literally Cloud CooCoo Land. heh.
Jesus, what amoral pseudoscience by Halperin.
Evil and demonic.
Why is queer included in LGBTQ then?
It wasn't "included", it was forced on, just like the T was. Neo-Marxists are just going through revolutionary classes and trying to create more in order to create enough revolutionary energy to overthrow society. First, the gays were the proletariat. Then they got what they wanted and settled down quite a bit, so they had to add bisexual, and then trans, and then queer. Obviously, a lot of the gays got pissed off about this, just like the feminazis got pissed off about the gays stealing their spotlight and favored treatment. But they won't switch sides because they can't now. They'd lose their victimhood status, however lowered. They're all just a bunch of rubes being played by Communists in their attempt to find or create a revolutionary class of sufficient power.
To give straight, white progressives a tier on the oppression ladder so they can be marginalized too.
operation human shield.
Because LGB were made a protected class in the 90s. Now trans is a protected class too.
It's a matter of time before sole queer would be the same, at which point they'd be above the law and a danger to society due to their their lack or rejection of limits, boundaries(even personal ones), rules, taboos, social norms and what not
It's exactly why I took queer in order to subvert the letter people. They let you in, then you influence them back to reality. It takes time.
In Britain a Queer is what we call a "shirt lifter!"
Did a jew write this?
Okay, here is what queer means without convoluted nonsense in a 16 min video. "Queer" means Socialist.
You didn't understand a thing from what he just said.
"Socialism" is a specific ideology, with its own set of rules.
Queer ideology rejects all rules. It's literally "Whatever I say, goes."
It's chaos incarnate, an opposition to any and _every_ social norm that can ever exist.
@@promethiac2641 You must be incredibly dense to not realise by now that what we're dealing with are Socialists.
By all means keep believing all this nonsense about gnostic sex cults, but all of that is total horse shit and it's holding us back from winning.
@@promethiac2641 If you don't realise by this point that Socialism is the problem and that they're using identity politics to destabilise the system, causing problems in order to destroy capitalism, you must be incredibly dense.
You realise that these are methods that Mao used too, don't you? Stuff like queer and black are so-called "red identities" which means that they're Socialist.
It really ain't that deep, bro. 100 IQ'ers like you should be able to grasp this.
Cultural Marxist Socialism to be more precise
@@johnbrown4568 I don't really care about what specific type tbh. All Socialism is bad and should be fought by any means necessary.
I don't think Woke is the primary threat. They're not the one's flirting with nuclear war.
Nuclear war with whom? The other Communists and former Communists? Yes, Woke is the primary threat.
Woke IS the primary threat. You can't even deal with the people flirting with nuclear war until it's cleared up. Woke absconds truth. You won't even know or be able to deal with TRUE threats until you can cut past it.
The Biden administration and the EU/NATO are overtly flirting with nuclear war. They are woke. The woke elements in the world are the ones flirting with nuclear war.
This would be easier to share if it didn't have a bullet from a gun in the thumbnail.
Be dangerous. Share.
You look like a guy whose friends hate guns
Testicleless Statement
@@Knuck_Knucks I did share this quote from the book a number of months ago because it blew my mind.
@@hrossaman Fine work. didn't it feel good? 🐿
'Woke Marxists' is a bit of a misnomer, considering most woke postmodernists are anti-Marxism and anti-materialism. Most woke people are either anarchists or radical liberals. 'Marxism' has just become a boogeyman word at this point. I feel the same way about the left overusing "fascism".
The anti Marxism and anti materialism seems to be linked to the far left violent extremists allying with the Muslim world to enact violence on the current regime. They have to betray their own values, but it’s for that momentary win, so they don’t care. They’re unified with that, but not with the anti Marx and anti materialism sentiment. That’s why I say this.
Woke people see life through an intersectional, oppressor/oppressed lens. That's cultural Marxism.
Judith Butler hasn't just publicly advocated for a "communist ontology"?
The fist of power symbol isn't being used by woke racists, woke queers, woke feminists, woke anti-colonialists?
Most respectfully disagree with you. James is calling a spade a spade. All governed redistribution is, by definition, Marxism. The Marxists use these social weapons to reign chaos. 🐿
But I 100 percent agree with you on the relative “everything i dont like is fascist” left wingers and the “everything I don’t like is communist/socialist” right wingers. Theyre as stupid and myopic as eachother. Two cheeks of the same ass…
Thank you for saying 12:18 It's not what anyone wants to hear 🥲 PS the word “naughty” is a socially acceptable concept. “Sometimes people are naughty” they trespass. Oh well, it happens... We accept it happens and we carry on 😔