therealmidnite

2

therealmidnite wrote

You know, I prefer Trump. I really do. I can look at Trump and immediately see a piece of orange-ey excrement that somehow attained the ability to speak - a perfect representation of the political establishments lording over us. But Obama? Listen to him for ten minutes, and you can't bring yourself to believe this is the guy that unleashed drone-warfare on the planet... or all the other shit he caused. People like Obama is far, far more dangerous than the likes of Trump.

2

therealmidnite wrote

Depends on the type of fash troll, really. I hate the Jordan Peterson-type clones. I've found that it's best to just antagonize the crap out of them right off the bat - whatever you do, don't try to "prove them wrong with facts". Acting dumb and asking nit-picking questions about every little thing they say can also work.

1

therealmidnite wrote

I had a much longer reply typed out before this site decided to kill it, so I'm just going to give you the short version - before accusing people of "amorality" or deciding what activities actually require said "amorality" (with nothing but baseless assumptions about what "amorality" actually means in the real world), perhaps it's best to actually know something about "amorality" in the first place? Because I've pored over every line in the various translations of "The Art Of War" far more than any other book - and I have yet to find one line in it that can be described as "amoral" (with the possible exception of some of the "notes" added by different observers throughout the centuries, of course).

1

therealmidnite wrote

Yep, that's me. And no, I've never considered giving up my unfair advantages - probably because I'm not really sure whether they really are that advantageous, or even whether they're in a form that can be "given up" (spending twelve years being brainwashed by a fascist regime isn't actually something I think should be given to anybody else).

2

therealmidnite wrote

People who are stupid or naive enough to believe that the glorified popularity contests they stupidly or naively call "democracy" will even pose the slightest obstacle to fascists should be ___________, ___________, and _______________ before being _____________ (with a twist), and/or ___________________ . Marginal ______________ is optional, but desirable in the case of ______________ .

YOU complete the sentence.

2

therealmidnite wrote

Sorry if I sounded hostile. It's an uphill battle trying to educate doubly-addled whiteys about socialism while this lot is constantly blaring their thinly-disguised nativist populism in the background. Notice how the media in South Africa almost has a blackout on Abahlali, while literally obsessing over nearly everything the EFF says or does? No coincidence, that.

6

therealmidnite wrote

It's going to require far, far more than diatribes against the authoritarian left to close the huge gaping wound that the left has been haemorrhaging credibility from since 1920. What is required is a complete theoretical consensus to finally and permanently sever the anti-authoritarian from the authoritarian as thoroughly as the anarchist's theoretical understanding of the fascist separates him or her from said fascists. Anarchism has consistently failed to produce such an effective consensus during the last century, and one has to wonder whether such a consensus can be constructed purely in "traditional" anarchist terms - after all, even us anarchists still conform to the practice of aligning our politics according to 200-year old French seating arrangements. Perhaps our politics have grown too dogmatic... I don't know, but I have always suspected that if there's a future for anti-authoritarianism, that future may not necessarily be anarchist.

3

therealmidnite wrote

White people don't need to learn different languages... they need to confront the realities of white supremacy and their own place in it (for which their own language is quite sufficient). The problem isn't that white people don't understand other people's cultures - the problem is that they don't understand their own. And this liberal self-help book style feel-good non-racialism (such as learning the "the others'" language to supposedly "understand" something they don't have a chance in hell of understanding anyway) has actually been an obstacle to achieving that - it's simply another way of externalizing the problem, when the problem is, in fact, internal. Being able to speak another person's language doesn't disqualify anyone from Washington's ditch. In fact, quite the opposite - it makes the dirty work more efficient. Just ask any South African cop.

1

therealmidnite wrote

Mandela was dead wrong - just like he was dead wrong about a lot of things. I can throw a brick in this little town I'm stuck in and hit some racist alt-right sympathizing National Party apologist who can either speak or at least follow Zulu or Sotho. If you can't see "the other" as a human being in the first place, learning his or her language isn't going to have much of an effect.

2

therealmidnite wrote (edited )

I hate governments.

No. For further reading, see answer 1.

No. For further reading, see answer 1.

I am not aware of any action on my part that has benefited the DPRK's nuclear weapons program. Or anyone else's, for that matter.

Nope. For further reading, see answer 1.