A note to liberals about good corporations

•20 February, 2014 • Leave a Comment
A lot of liberals try to separate the good from the bad corporations.

What is a good corporation?

A good corporation is a corporation where the workers are self-determined and have complete democratic control of the means of production and their wages.

A good corporation is a corporation that doesn’t make a profit or have a profit motive.

A good corporation is not a corporation.

Anything else is just different degrees of evil.

I learned an important lesson today.

•28 June, 2013 • 1 Comment

No, it wasn’t “go to sleep at a normal hour.” That will be a lesson for another day, unfortunately.

But I did learn how to conserve my energy when debating. Just one step at a time.

See, I got a couple people’s attention on Twitter when I criticised somebody for retweeting something with a homophobic and sexist slur in it. I was lucky that they were respectful enough and simply started debating me (instead of insulting me). I responded to some, but selectively. Here are examples of what I responded to:

“But I’m not homophobic! I love gay people and women!”

“You’re being a bit touchy. You shouldn’t let things get under your skin.”

Things I didn’t reply to:

“This really pissed me off. Bitch is just a word, who cares.”

“Bitch you should have to repeat yourself bitch.” (Referring to the fact that I had to repeat myself on a couple occasions)

Note the vitriolic undertones in the second lot. It may seem like a no-brainer, but I usually bite when I see anger thrown at me. This time I decided not to respond, and it worked out well. The three who responded to me less angrily (I won’t say politely, because one of them did call me “illiterate”) all left the argument in a neutral way. “Good luck with your endevours,” “I respectfully agree to disagree,” and “It was nice knowing you. Take care.”

Now, this is not to say that other people can’t get into more anger-laced disagreements, or that you don’t have the right to stand up against oppression in an aggressive manor. It’s just that I cannot handle that kind of confrontation. It burns me out, and then I can’t work to contribute to society the way I hope to.

So I really hope that this is the beginning of a less angst-ridden path for me, on the subject of debating and disagreeing.

 

***If you would like to contribute towards preventing further angst, please read my comments policy before commenting.***

Just an illustration

•11 June, 2013 • 4 Comments

I had a lot of difficulty finding an American political spectrum to my liking on the Internet. This is probably the closest:

AmericaPoliticalSpectrum

The “space available” would be where socialists sit. What I refer to as “liberals” are: “progressives” (those who would be in the “center” on this spectrum) and Democrats, on the center right.

A better spectrum, that I created, is this one:

PoliticalSpectrum

Just in case you didn’t know that liberals irritate me

•29 May, 2013 • 31 Comments

RecordStraight

From Being Liberal‘s page on Facebook.

I’ve written before about why I do not consider myself a liberal. I rejected the label many years ago.

I want free healthcare;
Healthcare is a basic human right and free healthcare is entirely attainable.

I don’t want money for nothing;
But fundamental human needs like food and shelter should be met for EVERYBODY.

I don’t expect any election to bring the result I want;
I want the entire system to change to bring about real, direct democracy.

I do want businesses to be unprofitable;
As the profit motive breeds sociopathic behavior.

I don’t want the wealthiest Americans to pay for everything;
I want there to be no “wealthiest Americans.”

I do not understand why liberals spend so much time apologizing to the Right. They try so hard to find common ground, as if finding common ground with people who have sociopathic beliefs is a good goal. “No no no, it’s not that I want FREE healthcare, god no, how silly!” No, it’s not silly. It’s not even particularly liberal, in other countries. In many countries, free or almost free healthcare is just a given, and it is appreciated by people on the Right and Left.

There’s this tendency for liberals to waste their energy distancing themselves from socialists as much as possible. “We don’t want money for nothing.” I don’t know very many people who think that everybody should get money for nothing. Ironically, money is so abstract nowadays that it is the wealthy, the people who invest and speculate, who receive money for literally nothing. It drives up the prices for food and housing – you know, those non-abstract things that people actually need. It is these basic necessities, the resources themselves, that should be shared, or in terms that neoliberal economists can understand, be “free.”

The idea of an election in any country having the results I want is ridiculous. I don’t think countries should exist. They’re just territories marked by militaries; the human equivalent of pissing in the dirt. Elections are essentially frauds; democracy in Western “democracies” isn’t participatory or direct; it is an authoritarian rule of one of a handful of (or two in the US) parties that are at the beck and call of the wealthy. Choosing between a couple corporate puppets is not democracy.

Lord, how liberals love to go on about how much they love capitalism! “It isn’t capitalism that’s the problem, it’s unregulated capitalism,” they say, or “corporatism.” Despite the fact that the profit motive is what causes everyday human beings to behave like sociopaths, it isn’t the profit motive that needs to change, just how much the profit motive is controlled. God forbid anybody have the radical idea of getting rid of the root cause of our problems!

What exactly would be “their share” when it comes to the wealthiest Americans? Is there something inherent about them that means that they deserve more wealth than the average American? History suggests no. Wealth in our current system is primarily obtained through luck and privilege, by benefitting from a long history of exploiting other people, so why should we allow some people to have it while others don’t? There should be no “wealthiest Americans.”

Why can’t we all just get along?

•10 April, 2013 • Leave a Comment

My response to my friend on Facebook’s post:

Do you avoid walking down the street at night for fear of being raped? Do you see pictures of people of the beauty ideal of your gender plastered on billboards, TV, and magazines, to an extent that you cannot escape from them? Do you get tired of being called a bitch for ignoring catcalls or glaring at people who slap your ass? Do you have trouble speaking your mind for fear of being seen as a “bitch,” but also fear not saying anything because you might be seen as a weak female? Do you have to cover yourself from head to toe, and sometimes even your face, in certain countries? No? That’s because you’re male.

Do people follow you around in stores to make sure you won’t steal anything, just because of your appearance? Do people generalise your entire ethnicity as “lazy,” “violent,” or “ungrateful?” Do people call you a n**er when you walk down the street? Are you less likely to get hired or get into a university than a white person with the same or even fewer qualifications? No? That’s because you’re white.

Do you get people spitting at you and telling you to “get a fucking job?” Do you get paid barely enough to survive, no matter how hard you work? Did you grow up in a ghetto that has an almost inescapable cycle of poverty? No? That’s because you’re not poor.

This isn’t about who did what to whom first, it’s about what the consequences are, what we see in our society now. Systematic oppression of specific groups DOES exist, and you simply can’t argue that groups doing horrible things to other groups cancels everything out. Cause and effect exists. When people are enslaved for hundreds of years and then continuously oppressed, it has an effect. When people are treated like they don’t matter, it has an effect. To claim that there is an equal amount of oppression coming from People of Colour and women would be to ignore history and current society.

And it is absolutely essential to acknowledge history and to understand the roots of our problems. An economic system that was built by rulers and elites for the purpose of continuing their rule is not a healthy one. Comparing an economic system that systematically oppresses the poor to ones that liberate them, and saying that they are both valid, strikes me as strange.

Capitalism is a relatively new system that came about through the evolution of human greed, dissociation, and violence. It is an adaptation to specific times of scarce resources and hostile climates. Anarchism and communism are as old as human history. They evolved through humanity’s natural affinity for community, communication, empathy, and culture. There are things that are objectively detrimental to the human mind, and things that aren’t. To ignore this fact is once again to ignore cause, effect, and human history.

More self-improvement BS

•10 April, 2013 • Leave a Comment

Just in case y’all didn’t know how I feel about the New Age movement, the following posts are a good place to start: [1] and [2].

Stop. Just stop.

So this picture was on Facebook. I think I can sum up how I feel about it with my comments:

Because we are all responsible for how we affect others. Nobody lives in a vacuum. Language drove our evolution and is a powerful tool for hurting, helping, starting wars and revolutions.

To which, somebody replied:

I agree but it points out that you have a choice on how you react to other people’s words and actions. Tricky as it may seem but these words remind me that no matter what, I AM in control of my emotions/feelings.

So I responded:

Nobody is in complete control of their emotions. And this attitude blames the victim and takes any responsibility from the perpetrator. The body and mind are very similar. Just as you wouldn’t say, “How can someone hurt your ‘body’ when your ‘body’ is part of you?” Emotional harm is very similar to physical harm.

If somebody breaks my arm, would you put any responsibility on me? Maybe I didn’t defend myself well enough? Or if I hadn’t been there in the first place, they wouldn’t have anybody’s arm to break? Some people are better at martial arts or self-defense – does that mean that those who aren’t are partially responsible for being physically harmed? Similarly, just because some people have more control over their emotions or thicker skin, does not mean that EVERYBODY has the same amount (or should have the same amount) of control over their emotions.

I was bullied [badly] as a child. I will NEVER blame myself for how I was affected by that. I will never claim that I was responsible for having my feelings hurt.

When a white person calls a Black person a racial slur, the responsibility is the white person’s. I will never say that the Black person was too sensitive, or should have controlled their response. The N-word was used to psychologically and physically oppress and enslave an entire race of people for generations. THAT is the power of words.

I get very exhausted with a lot of people of the New Age persuasion, who continuously focus on the self without acknowledging that as humans, self-improvement is interconnected with community and social awareness and responsibility. I would not be the person I am today without my friends, teachers, and family. They supported me and helped me improve myself. They acknowledged when they were responsible for hurting me emotionally, as I was with them. There needs to be social pressure on those who do harm to act like decent human beings, and focus needs to be taken off of the victim, as our culture is so obsessed with blaming victims for everything bad that happens to them.

****Please read my Comments Policy before commenting****

A note for leftists who oppose the Israeli state (TW: Nazis and anti-semitism)

•19 February, 2013 • 10 Comments

1. Israel does not control the US. The US controls Israel. That tiny country doesn’t have all our politicians in their pockets; there are no Magical Jews(TM) who control the New World Order. Britain chose Palestine as the place for the new Jewish state because it was an advantageous spot in the Middle East to have a military superpower. The US supports Israel for the same reason.

2. The Nazi holocaust wasn’t “overhyped.” Just because other holocausts in history have been under-represented and underreported, does not mean that the torture and slaughter of 10 million people was over-hyped. That’s a false dichotomy. Let’s not forget the reason why the US joined WWII: Imperialism. They didn’t give a toss about the holocaust; they just didn’t want to lose power. No country joined WWII to save the Jews, and Jews weren’t the only people murdered in the holocaust.

3. The state of Israel isn’t “Jews.” It is an imperialst state, behaving the way that empires have always behaved. I am Jewish, yet I am not Israel – I have never supported Israeli policy or even the existence of the state (or any state for that matter). Just like opposing the Israeli state isn’t the same as being anti-Semitic, Jews are not Israel. There is nothing inherent about being Jewish that makes me more likely to want to slaughter and steal land from Palestinians.

4. Anti-Semitism isn’t radical. Hating anybody because of their culture or ethnicity (and yes, Judaism is also an ethnicity) is bigoted. Screaming that “Jews control the world!!” doesn’t make you unique or edgy. Saying “Hitler had the right idea” doesn’t make you a groovy anarchist (by definition, if you support Hitler, you are not an anarchist).

5. Not all Jews are white. Ashkenazim (white European Jews) are not the only ethnic devision of Jews. When you claim all Jews are white, you are stripping the identity of and negating the existence of Mizrahi, Indian, Ethiopian, some Sephardim, and many others. Many of these Jews are not even allowed into Israel because of the colour of their skin; instead they waste away in refugee camps.

6. If you are not Jewish, stop saying “Jews.” I know this is amusing because I just said it several times, but I am Jewish. “Jew” is a term that is, more frequently than not, used in a derogatory way by non-Jews (goyim) towards Jewish people. Just say “Jewish people.” I know it’s four syllables instead of one, but as long as you don’t have a speech impediment, it shouldn’t be a problem. Whenever I hear a goy say “Jew,” I cringe and wait for some anti-Semitism to be vomited forth. Seriously, stop.

****Please read my Comments Policy before commenting****

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.