celebratedrecluse wrote

I actually don't have any prescriptions, only a critique of the common narrativity and positionality I see, and the results which seem to stem from it.

It's not like there's no reason for it to be in place, people are responding to conditions on the internet and culturally which have toxic norms of their own. But in order to find out what those alternatives or futurities to Raddle discourse might be, I was assuming it would be helpful to identify the internal contradictions and ways in which it can be maladaptive, even psychologically harmful for those who embody it without having a critical lense.

I guess I want to be part of a process, of finding out how things can move from a place where people just feel guilty all the time. Guilt actually does not spur a lot of helpful actions, and can make people afraid to speak their mind or feel they aren't worthwhile to bother expressing themselves. So, too, do other factors, like dominant narratives which seep into radical spaces like this thread was originally about, and that's clearly another valid line of conversation to pursue.


celebratedrecluse wrote

Almost every single person from /f/chapotraphouse ended up leaving after some blow up arguments between genocide apologists who supported the government of mainland China and those who weren't comfortable with that being unchallenged. The few that stayed, have no substantial ideological distinction from the older users, in any way that I can discern.

I feel your self-flagellation over what is, from your articulated perspective, a hypothetical problem you haven't even observed... is indicative of the actual problem with Raddle as a community, which is the incessant pressure to moralize everyone into good/bad binaries. It's a liberal and hierarchical way of looking at the world, regardless of intent, and results in authoritarian interactions between users on this forum that stifle people's ability to communicate honestly or believe they have something worth saying when it doesn't conform to these discursive expectations.

It's one thing to critique someone's words or actions, it's another to start categorizing others, ourselves, as "insider/outsider", "good/bad" in some deterministic way. That sort of behavior is rarely useful for a discursive community based on disembodied discussion, like a forum. Except, for sure, in cases of entryism or abuse, perhaps certain others. I don't extrapolate this opinion into material, real-world relationships, where there is a lot more risk than simply having conversations on the internet.


celebratedrecluse wrote

okay hear me out, we all go to the voting store, we pick up some quality ballots, then we hold the cops down and give them enough papercuts on their fingertips that they eventually bleed out!


celebratedrecluse wrote

Now, national news is documenting another nation-wide surge in protest activity, just a little more than a month away from the elections. The president of the country is preparing to do everything in his power, which is substantial, to fuck up the elections process. By declaring victory early, he can count only the in person votes and discount most of the mail in ballots, which will undoubtedly skew toward his opponent, and there are many other tricks he is going to pull like selling off the postal office to the lowest bidder. And plus, people hate the other guy anyway.

There's a world historic economic depression, a deadly plague which may kill millions before it runs its course, and tens of millions are currently facing eviction. The homeless, usually, cannot vote easily, so this too plays to the short term advantage of the sitting government. People are angry and well armed and the election regardless of result will result in civil strife and bitter hatreds, long-simmering, are once again and with more force than ever before, boiling over the edge of the pot.

No, this is not my country. It's yours! Lol