Journal of Other Forum Analysis (Volume II, Issue 2)

[Taco Bell Tower]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/bernie-sanders-defends-graham-platner-calls-him-an-%E2%80%9Cexcellent-candidate-and-the-next-senator-of-maine%E2%80%9D.1330780/page-20#post-146886832

On the contrary, specificity of one's beliefs and positions is a necessary building block for creating meaningful, efficient, and trusting coalitions. Blindly assuming that "we're all on the same side" only serves to muddy the actual goals of any given movement and put more vulnerable people and populations in positions where they realize they may have to undermine not just their beliefs but their sense of identity. It is dishonest, anti-intellectual, cruel, and frankly a waste of everyone's time when the inevitable red lines are approached while doing the work because the standard is simply "if you're not a Republican, you belong in the tent."

No. The reality is that "the left" is an extremely wide swathe of various and sometimes competing and contradictory beliefs and movements that widely are related by trying to build an entirely new society altogether, not simply reform the current one so Black and queer people are still doing imperialism, and it is inane to not deal with that reality at all. If you are too afraid to clarify your positions and to align yourself with movements that actually serve your interests and goals because you're afraid of division and judgement, then that is an issue with your immaturity and inability to self-reflect and constantly test and rethink your positions and beliefs, not with others' for "labeling you."

I am extremely comfortable with openly saying that I am in full support of the destruction of capitalism. If you're an exploited worker who nonetheless still unfortunately believes that capitalism needs to stay, I need to know that upfront before I potentially waste my time with you in "working together" towards whatever ends we could possibly work together as two individuals with diametrically-opposed ends. There's more shit to hash out first before we can get to actual material work, and I'd like to do that upfront than when we're in the planning phases of action.

Why even bother to engage with something like this when you eliminate 99% of people in the conversation because they don't want to destroy capitalism entirely? Is it just an absolution of guilt so that you can reject allyship in the name of pure ideology because you know it means absolutely nothing will happen and you don't have to do any actual work while riding a high horse of moral superiority?

NepNep

I have found and worked with plenty of people who understand the fundamental problems of exploitation, oppression, and environmental destruction inherent to capitalism and want to work together to get rid of it. We may have different ideas on how to get there at which point we can have adult discussions over those ideas, the opposite of the bad faith drivel you wrote in this post, but we at least see it as a goal to mutually work towards.

You still see capitalism as something that's salvageable. If what you say is true and 99% of people agree with you on that front, stop bitching about the 1% of people who disagree with you and go work with the 99% to pretty please beg the billionaires capitalists to give you a $17 minimum wage or whatever it is you want.

Lynnetto

I'm not bitching about anything, I asked you about your approach in good faith and you attacked me. I apologize if it makes you uncomfortable to question your extremely militant and exclusionary stance.

NepNep

No you didn't.

Lynnetto

I understand why you would want to frame any kind of questioning of your ideology as bad faith since it's difficult to internalize and reflect on criticism, but it wasn't. I am genuinely curious what you think you can accomplish when you intentionally reject such an extremely broad scope of allies.

NepNep

You can continue acting like this-

- is good faith, and I can simply be specific and direct and call you an asshole.

Do you want to apologize for being bad faith and actually have an adult discussion, or continue wasting my time? Makes me no difference.

Benny W is kissing NepNep's ass

I didn't read Nepenthe's comment as militant (please be careful) or exclusionary. It's direct speak. "Real talk". Straight to the point.

I believe they're saying don't waste their time by pretending you're in alignment when you're just going to pull back later on down the line. It's an absolutely frustrating process to go through.

Also they said collaborators may have "different ideas on how to get there." That's open, inclusive, and not militant.