People have a knack of really over simplifying feminism like “feminism: the radical notion that women are people” or “feminism is literally just believing in equality” like… no its not its so much more complex than that ask any dingus if they think women and men should be equal they’ll probably say yeah but their actions and thoughts probably majorly contradict that so quit acting like anyones a feminist if they vaguely believe women are ok humans
please end me, i love w way to much
it’s like when you look at the series from a distance it seems so mismatched and weird. some… jazzy noir influenced cyberpunk dramedy detective thing? with dinosaurs sometimes?
BUT FUCK IT, EVERYTHING MIXES SO WELL, DOUBLE IS THE BEST THING EVER UUUHHHGHHHHHH…
…capitalism intends to kill us.
Violence is our only option.
This is life or death.
I can barely afford the insulin that keeps me alive. I have to take precious time off work when I have an infection so bad I can hardly walk (and walking is my way to work). This system makes survival difficult because capitalism rejoices in our suffering. It rejoices in our slow demise.
Actual problems with feminism
- excluding POC, mogai, disabled and especially trans women
- ignoring issues that do not involve the U.S
- not realizing that feminism is for women to realize that they can do what they want and thrashing women who are feminine or wear religious attire
Not problems of feminism
- one teenage girl saying she hates men because 5 men catcalled her while walking home from school
Levittown, the Long Island community where Bill O’Reilly grew up, holds a unique place in history for two reasons: It was the original subdivision, a mass-produced town of neatly uniform, affordable Cape Cod homes that would serve as a model for postwar suburbs for decades to come.
And it was available only to whites.
The latter detail — now at the center of an epic standoff between O’Reilly and Jon Stewart over race, suburbia and the legacy of “white privilege” — wasn’t an innovation specific to Levittown. Racial discrimination in housing wasn’t merely commonplace in the 1940s and ’50s; it was government policy. The Federal Housing Administration helped finance the construction of many suburban places like Levittown on the condition that they exclude blacks. And it underwrote mortgages to white families there with the expectation that their property values would only hold if blacks did not move in.
At first, the requirement that homeowners in Levittown not rent or sell their homes to minorities was included in the deeds to their homes. Yes, homeowners in Bill O’Reilly’s hometown were contractually bound to keep out blacks.
So typical of conservatives like Bill O’Reilly to NEVER acknowledge they are a product of privilege. A “whites only” town and Bill pretends to not have a clue? What an asshole.
beard culture is weird and if u subscribe to it i probably want you to stay at least 500 feet from me at all times
Educate, agitate, organise. The phrase has been around for years but the ideas it encapsulates are still radical. We live in a world where we are encouraged to be passive. We are all consumers. We watch, we read, we observe, and some of us wait, hope and dream. These words go against the grain. You can’t build a revolution by watching from a distance. There comes a point where many decide that they are tired of sitting on the sidelines.
This is a big step, we decide we want to change our dreams into reality. We want to be part of the process, participants in the struggle. Revolution changes from being a ‘nice idea’ to being a concrete activity. This is the point where we start thinking about what revolution means. No longer do we wait for things to get better, instead we start creating the conditions we want. There are a number of alternative ways we can go. Some throw themselves into activism, committing themselves to various campaigns. Some become demoralised and revert to being observers (and often bitter observers).
An additional option is to join a revolutionary organisation. There is no blue-print available to revolutionaries, letting us know the steps we have to follow to achieve our aim. There are many ways in which a revolution may come about, but this is not to say that we can say nothing now about the process of creating revolution. Without revolutionary organisations, much of the work we do, as activists, can only be for the short term.
'Don't mourn, Organise', Joe Hill said before he was executed by the US state. It's nothing more than common sense to say that two heads are better than one. The more people working together, the more that can be achieved. But organisation is more than the coming together of kindred spirits. As well as co-operation, organisations provide a framework, a strategy, a way of linking all the work we do, of maximising its effect.
Capitalism is a pretty big system, we must also organise on a big scale. With organisation we can cut it down to a more manageable size. After all what is revolution but the culmination of many successful struggles. No revolution happens overnight. Sixty years passed between the first anarchist ideas arriving in Spain and the Spanish Revolution. Successful revolutions do not occur spontaneously.
Without revolutionary organisations that have built on and expanded on the skills and information gained in struggle, there would be no successful revolution. In Spain anarchists organised together. Together they learned from their experiences on the ground and used their knowledge to help others win the campaigns they were involved in. Before the revolution of 1936, there was the Barcelona Rent strike of 1931. Nothing is inevitable, it could have been otherwise. Early victories could have been forgotten, instead they led to later ones. Why? Because anarchist organisations were there to link these struggles.
Being in an anarchist organisation means more than having friends to help you out in your day to day work. It means being part of creating history, of knowing that the work leafleting today, is laying the foundations for a future society. Organisations help build links between different campaigns, between different areas and communities. One campaign won’t topple the system, but a network of struggles, supporting and encouraging each other, can spread and grow to be a formidable opponent. It is the role of an anarchist organisation to weave all the threads of opposition together.
The WSM is a small anarchist organisation. There is much we cannot yet do. But there is much we can do. We do have an influence, and we can use that influence to help build towards a revolution based on freedom and equality. We can help people win. We’ve written much about the Federation of Dublin Anti-Water Charges Campaigns. Along with other groups and individuals we worked very hard in this campaign. We believe that people have power to change the world, and until they use this power we’ll be stuck with the present system.
Most don’t buy into the system, yet unfortunately they don’t change it. People will only take risks, stand up and fight if they believe there is a good chance they will succeed. This sort of self confidence doesn’t grow on trees, it grows out of winning. The water charges was such a victory. Some people in Dublin now know, that even if the state threatens them with the courts and jail, even if they’re condemned in the press and in the Dail, they will not be defeated, if they stand together.
It is of such things that revolutions are made, but it’s important to remember that initially the imposition of the charges was unopposed. Things could have turned out very differently. The water charges could have been just one more tax, unquestionably accepted. Initially only a handful of people were involved, meeting in small rooms, leafleting huge housing estates. But because those people were willing to give their time and commitment a massive campaign was eventually built and happily victory was ours.
It doesn’t take many people to make a difference. You don’t have to be a superman or woman, a genius or a supreme leader to change society. There are many many examples of how a few people, organised together can have a large effect. Our strength comes in our numbers and everybody makes a difference, in the short term, and in the long term. We all have to start somewhere. Take the next step, organise, agitate, and educate.
mushroomsugar asked: I think "____ game strong" is AAVE, so don't appropriate it
Oh it is? Okay apologies I’ll go edit them
Here’s the problem with this. AAVE is not this completely separate dialect and culture that does not overlap at all with Standard* American English and mainstream American culture. Words, phrases, and styles developed by black American speakers filter and diffuse into the mainstream dialect. If white people weren’t allowed to use AAVE, we’d also have to get rid of words like “cool” and “rock’n’roll”. Do some white people use AAVE to mock and insult black people? Of course, and they’re racist scumfucks and need to be called out when they do it. But to genuinely adopt phrases used by black speakers because you find them useful and enjoyable in your speaking, is not racist or “appropriation.” And furthermore, for the vast majority of words and phrases, this happened naturally, without anyone consciously thinking to themselves “this is AAVE”. They just learned a new word or phrase, found it useful or cool, and started using it. When “hella” spread around the American dialect, very few people consciously thought “Bay Area young people invented this”, They just heard it and started using it, because that’s how language evolves.
Alright here’s the deal. Using bits and pieces of AAVE isn’t cultural appropriation. It just isn’t. First of all, AAVE speakers regularly come into contact with non-AAVE speakers and AAVE leaks its way into mainstream English use. To imply that they don’t is ridiculous. That’s the first problem here.
The second problem here is that “appropriation” is used entirely wrongly and entirely too often on this site. Cultural appropriation should only be used to refer to when one group (usually white people) CLAIMS the creation of another group as its own. That’s it. If it doesn’t fit that definition, it isn’t appropriation. And here’s why!
The third problem, and the reason people need to stop fucking using “appropriation” as a term so loosely on this site is because it allows us to ignore instances of racism by calling them something else- a more technical, academic seeming term. So
- If you use another culture’s speaking pattern as a joke, that isn’t cultural appropriation. That’s being a racist. You’re literally making a joke about how other people talk. That’s racism. Not appropriation. RACISM. We have a word for that already.
- If you use another culture’s sacred symbology or something like that, it isn’t appropriation. It’s being clueless at best and thoughtless/insensitive at worst. It isn’t appropriation. The basic problem there is not theft of another culture’s items: the basic problem is not participating in a culture on that culture’s terms.
- If you use another culture as a prop or a joke, that isn’t appropriation. It’s racism. You’re pointing at a group and laughing. That’s just racism. Let’s not call it something else. Miley Cyrus isn’t appropriating black culture. She’s making fun of it. That’s racism. Easy.
- If you use another culture’s symbology inaccurately, again that isn’t appropriation. It’s being thoughtless and inconsiderate but it isn’t appropriation.
- If it isn’t one group claiming it created something it isn’t, then it isn’t appropriation.
There are several problems with insisting that white people participating in AAVE even in small portions is appropriation. 1- it lets white people off the hook for instances of actual racism by calling it something else, something which seems less intentional than it really is. 2- it assumes that white people already have a frame of reference for everything and should never have to refer to other cultures for ideas/concepts. That second idea is fucked up because:
- It assumes that white/mainstream/Western culture understands everything already. That’s literally just colonialism wrapped up in a nice liberal package people can use to pat themselves on the back.
- It ignores the fact that white culture (using that loosely, but I’m sure most people understand what I mean by this) actually doesn’t have a way to express everything. For example, “—— game strong” says more than just “you —— look[s] good.” There is no approximation in standard English. Standard English is not a perfect, all-encompassing language.
TLDR: use of AAVE in bits and pieces is not appropriation, and outside of tumblr I know very few black people who actually consider it to be appropriation. If you use it poorly, you’re just misinformed and will probably be laughed at. If you mock it, you’re just a racist. Stop calling every single instance of two cultures interacting “appropriation” because it allows us to ignore the fact that many times when people on here use it, we are referring to instances of racism and letting the racism itself go unaddressed by not calling it what it is. I only know a few black people ON tumblr who consider use of AAVE phrases to be appropriative or racist, and quite frankly I think that view 1- is simplistic and makes no sense and 2- would be laughed off by most black people who hadn’t been steeped in that narrative.