MeowZedong

1

MeowZedong wrote

I don't know, I'm not a medical professional and I don't know where you live. Keep that in mind as you read this comment.

If you want to donate blood and not just get tested, I don't know of any anarchist communities with their own blood bank. To be honest, if you live in a country with a national healthcare system I would just go with that. It's more likely to have enough reach to make sure your blood goes where it needs to be.

2

MeowZedong wrote

I see the opposite ("it's not race, it's class") line of thought a lot. I don't know about America specifically but while bridging the wealth gap in general is a worthy thing, bridging it based on white people just ignores the specifics of how PoC get screwed over on a constant basis.

Thanks for sharing this.

1

MeowZedong wrote

I get there's value in amplifying women's (and especially WOC's voices) but I personally think a boycott is the right call here. Twitter doesn't care what you're amplifying, as long as it drives traffic and eyeballs to their content. It's still giving twitter the status it wants as a platform.

A boycott seems more sensible because it drives home the point to twitter, to users who are less aware, and even to other platforms who could step up their game that they need users around and that people can drop twitter.

I don't know if this particular boycott was thought out in advance but boycotting looks like the way to go going forward. Platforms need to stop taking users for granted and users need to stop giving sites the importance they want to have.

1

MeowZedong wrote

To add to your last paragraph, the way that if you accept a guy doing something that just seems like a kind gesture some guys will assume you now owe them something (sex) or that you're into them.

" how sad it must be to think that there’s no kindness for the sake of kindness. "

you hit the nail on the head with this one, I agree completely.

3

MeowZedong wrote

Yes! I think it's really important to emphasise the existence of safer roles and how necessary they can be. Not everyone is able to go out and do some rioting, not just because of being afraid to lose their mortgage but because of stuff like disabilities or having to take care of kids or whatever.

4

MeowZedong wrote

My opinion might be unpopular here but here it goes.

For a lot of people, there isn't much of a choice in terms of getting "in the system" in some way or another. Many people have responsibilities like kids, aging relatives, or sick relatives who depend on them. Many, if not most, people depend on the system in some way or another to put food on the table and a roof over their heads and will take these opportunities in a heartbeat because nobody likes to starve.

I think anarchism should be something oriented towards others, not just ourselves. Historically, many anarchists were "in the system" (like people working in factories they didn't own themselves). To me that's part of the point, when you can't just drop everything to go live off the grid on your own terms, that's all the more reason for wanting things to change.

Ask yourself, what do you want? How do you see your workplace and your community? How can you use what you have to help change things? This can mean getting more involved in local anarchist groups, helping create a space in your community where people can support each other and rely less on the system, whatever.

If you're asking about your beliefs in a more personal sense, that's just work you'll have to put into reminding yourself of what's important to you and what you believe in, instead of just letting get yourself settle. Maybe remind yourself that this system where you've gotten a good deal is the same system that screws over many people and denies them even the opportunities you've had.

Sorry if this is unclear, English isn't my first language.

1

MeowZedong wrote

I have mixed feelings about this.

This article is spot-on in pointing out the need to grapple with the way different communities have different experiences and degrees of complicity with racism.

I personally feel like there's some value in having an umbrella term. I feel like it's helpful to be able to find people who have more experiences in common with me as well as different experiences so we can learn from each other and support each other. It's like the value people see in acronyms like LGBTQIA despite problems (like biphobia and transphobia) within that community, because it gives people a way to find and help each other.

I'm not sure what a better alternative would be. "Non-white" seems awkward, like saying "non-straight" or "non-men". Acronyms, maybe.

I'm not American and I've seen PoC and close terms (like translations) get used in multiple countries. That's part of its strength to me, it's a loose enough term that it can be understood but it's also descriptive.

Thoughts?