Recent comments in /f/Whiteness

celebratedrecluse wrote

I mean, to be fair, who gets to decide who's white either? It's not like it's some concrete biological property, many of my friends are white & privileged in one country but when they cross an imaginary line they're suddenly brown or even black and their life is suddenly in danger of fascist violence. But in their home country, they're part of social groups that are like the primary recruitment ground for fascists & the officer ranks of the military.

There's also the visible number of reactionaries who are POC, who certainly enjoy and use guns in the furtherance of fascism. I wouldn't be surprised if someone I know was shot by someone like that, or their white compatriots, at some point in the next few years. Just because you have a claim to non-whiteness, doesn't really say anything about who you are or what kind of person you are.

There's also the issue that by doing what is said in the OP (at least I think, the post was removed), you're disarming vulnerable people like trans women, sex workers, people working in dangerous service industry jobs in male-dominated areas, those are just the first things that come to mind. So by all means, trigger the tankies, it was a reddit post. but if we're having a serious and nuanced discussion that's sorta disrespectful to a lot of people's desire to protect their personal safety in extremely hostile environments.

Of course, I totally get why this is a conversation that needs to be pushed to the front of peoples' minds-- the connection between firearms and whiteness. There's a lot of history there, it's certainly at the center of the dynamic of right wing political violence worldwide now too. And I'm not surprised that r/SRA suddenly becomes r/WhiteRightsAssociation when you post this type of stuff on there, a lot of people on the left have a fetish for guns/TheRevolution.tm because it's easier than interrogating your own privilege & working with others in a more intersectional and genuinely revolutionary way.

If you ask me, firearms are going to be an important tool for liberation. They are also going to continue to facilitate genocide. There's no reason to regard guns as a political object in and of themselves, whether by spreading them to everyone or restricting them to as few as possible. Instead, I am more interested in challenging the institutions of white supremacist gun culture, like the sellers & large manufacturers, but more importantly just keeping me and my people safe against the scores of reactionaries, white or otherwise, who have guns. And unfortunately that means we need heat to protect ourselves

6

Reply to comment by jahnu in Punching Nazis is a white privilege by Raven

jahnu wrote

It is possible to care and try to be an ally while still being an ass. We all do it. I sometimes feel the same when I, white queer male, have had straight allies of colour tell me "I feel your pain" and proceed to ignore my actual needs and perceptions. I'd still rather they try, because even flawed allies are better than none.

−2

kore wrote

Okay. I guess I'm just confused about why someone would be anti-civilizing if that necessitates being anti-social relations, based on the premises in this particular discussion. And also confused about how it would be possible to be anti-authoritarian if one must accept the authority of technology. I'd like to think that one can be anti-authoritarian and also make use of technology, which is I guess why I'm engaging in this discussion, to see what others think.

I appreciate your input, Raddle always makes me think pretty hard. To synthesize both our thoughts a little, I think it's interesting that somehow technology can sometimes be this really weird thing that is pretty pathological, like in your "iForest" example, but other times it can be pretty straightforward and helpful. As in the case of controlled burns. I think that's personally a shortcoming of some anti-civ arguments, the idea of "technology" being a monolith. I also think the tools/technology distinction is sort of flimsy.

Maybe a stupid thought, but if we try to control technology don't we have "authority" over it? ;)

1