ziq wrote (edited )

I guess it would make it easier for others to understand my intentions if I said 'slave morality' instead of 'morality', but that could be perceived as making light of slavery.

In an anarchist framework, we can understand a problem with this in terms of a tendency against mediation of various kinds. The resentful person, the moralist, is obsessed with the perceived agent of their their suffering – including that agent’s values - and seeks to invert those values and claim that inversion as moral. But not only is their entire existence then framed by themselves as a reaction to their oppression, their values are built on the same ground as their oppressors and are mediated first through that oppression. They are reactive, rather than active.

Another problem I always have is using the word 'reactionary' to describe this instead of the way it's used by leftists to refer to anyone who is rightwing. I'm always told off for 'misusing' the word.