Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

3

md_ wrote

Disagree with the proposal.

Pretty much agree with the analysis, those comments were clearly motivated by unchecked internalisations of white supremacy and queerphobia. But /f/mediation is the better approach for the specific cases. It's frustrating, but worth it.

There's of course a line in the sand, and eg /u/Rum_Rabbit is clearly in the wrong side of it, but I am willing to keep engaging cases like /u/dellitsni in good faith unless it becomes apparent that they do not act in good faith.

Generally, I truly feel that Raddle needs less moderation, not more. That doesn't mean let trolls and bots run free, but it means spending a lot of time trying to explain pretty basic systematic injustices over and over again to people you'd expect to know better, but don't.

-8

Rum_Rabbit wrote (edited )

There's of course a line in the sand, and eg /u/Rum_Rabbit is clearly in the wrong side of it

Why is that? I'm a communist against all forms of discrimination and I could be considered as "belonging" to many marginalized groups. I'm not bourgeois, white, straight, or cis and I have a disability. I just happen to consider identity-based politics, "punching up" at fellow proletarians, and call-out-culture, to be counter-revolutionary poison to the left. If this site is meant to be a hivemind where everybody has the same liberal positions it should be rebranded to reflect that instead of claiming to be a leftist alternative to reddit.

Suggestion: Rebrand to "Radlib"

8

Dumai wrote

liberal

you keep using this word, i do not think you know what it means

3

mofongo wrote

There are communist critiques of identity politics, yours just sound reactionary. None of the valuable critiques I've read consider calling out or having an identity based politic counter revolutionary.

3

md_ wrote

Why is that?

Because in all your posts around the issue of T_W's mediation requests, all you did was to superficially antagonise people through little more than name-calling.

I could be considered as "belonging" to many marginalized groups. I'm not bourgeois, white, straight, or cis and I have a disability.

I really don't see how your personal identities have anything to do with the topic. The quality of an argument is not a function of their identities... and that doesn't even apply here, because you didn't even present an argument, you just spewed buzzwords like " toxic privilege politics" and " totalitarian thought police".

I just happen to consider identity-based politics, "punching up" at fellow proletarians, and call-out-culture, to be counter-revolutionary poison to the left.

You might very well believe that, and if you start expressing those positions without the witch-hunt and the name-calling, I would show more good faith and make an effort to engage and disagree with you.

10

emma wrote (edited )

I really don't see how your personal identities have anything to do with the topic.

Really gets me when loudmouthed anti-identitarians like these (/u/Rum_Rabbit) turn out to be the biggest identitarians of them all.

Edit: clarify who I'm talking about.

1

md_ wrote (edited )

I resisted the urge of explicitly pointing it out, but yes. They actually did every single "liberal" thing they accused others of doing. That's one of the reasons I don't trust them to be sincere in their disagreement/objections, or whatever their name-calling is supposed to be.