I came across a post requesting to remove Nutomic from the Lemmy devs due to a comment he made here. In it, he suggests that the ruling class promotes both LGBTQ+ rights and transphobia as a means to create division among the working class. I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this perspective. Do you agree or disagree with his viewpoint? What other topics do you believe are used to divide the working class? Let’s discuss!
LGBTQ rights are workers rights. We’re all in this together. The ones arguing against those rights, are the ones being divisive. Support for equal rights, should never be a question.
I do also understand where Nutomic is coming from, though. Using these issues to create that division is cynical politics, and that is a problem. But that should never be used as an excuse to drop the fight for equality.
The ones arguing against those rights, are the ones being divisive.
Lol. Very “no you” energy
One side is literally advocating for inclusivity, while the other is arguing against it, my man.
Which you’ve deftly countered with ‘nuh uh’! Don’t have an actual argument against the actual ‘the people peddling divisive rhetoric are the actual problem’ argument?
I’d really love to hear how the people saying that all workers rights matter are the ones really being divisive here, rather than the people who are trying to keep workers out of the movement.
The issue with the idea of using queer rights to create division is that our existence is not up for debate. “Queer people deserve a happy life” and “queer people should not exist” are not equal stances that merit equal consideration. Our existence is not a game piece for someone else to play with.
Also, the ruling class never promotes us unless it’s to line their wallets.
Moral ideas can still be used to stoke division, though I doubt that’s the case here. I firmly believe the LGBT hate in America is Russian social media influence. They are who are stoking the flames.
Get down on the ground and talk to people. Even in my deep red county, no one gives a fuck about persecuting LGBT folks. Problem is, they’re like I used to be, “Don’t have a dog in this fight.”
When gay marriage was being debated, I finally came around to the idea the gay rights are civil rights. We need to get back to that messaging.
“Queer people should be as miserable as the rest of us”
our existence is not up for debate.
Also, the current administration might have something to say about that
It’s the working class’ fault. They divide themselves only because they fall for these arguments that x-topic is more important than class issues. The distractions the elite utilize are not sophisticated. We fall for them because we’re dumb.
Personally, I think all of this “Person X holds an officially wrong viewpoint on this one singular issue, so let’s attack them and create as much division as possible and take energy away from defending ourselves against people who hold objectively wrong and dangerous viewpoints on 100% of the issues and are actively trying to destroy us” thing is silly. But that is me.
The Lemmy devs are a little bit unusual in that I have problems with their overall politics (even if we actually agree on more than we disagree, probably), not just a one issue. But even in that case, where it’s a sizeable difference of opinion (instead of WE CAUGHT THEM BEING BAD ON THIS ONE ISSUE FUCK EM FUCK EM FUCK EM), I don’t think should be a reason to “divide” from them. People are allowed to hold viewpoints, even allowed to contribute while holding those viewpoints, even if I think they are wrong.
I feel like this is the best approach. An ally is an ally. If they have weird, socially unacceptable, or poorly thought out ideas, but they
- aren’t acting on them,
- don’t promote them,
- still act in good faith on issues we have in common,
then they’re fine for the stuff we care about. The right has built a big tent because they understand this. We’re only holding ourselves back by subjecting each other to purity tests.
As always, there are limits, but generally we need to build more coalitions.
I don’t want to exile them per se but I do have a huge problem with the way they manage their instance, and I think a boycott of that instance has become the only reasonable way to respond to their abuses of power.
If they ever stop being thought police then we can reconnect. It’s not their politics or views that are the problem, it’s their behavior. Even though, yes, I also think their politics are extremely toxic.
In it, he suggests that the ruling class promotes both LGBTQ+ rights and transphobia as a means to create division among the working class.
I will never understand how these phobes don’t understand that they are the ones promoting division in the working class by othering people who could be comrades.
If you’re othering people for what consenting adults do behind closed doors, you are the problem.
It can be true that something is both an important right and used unethically by people that don’t actually care about the topic. See Rainbow capitalism as a very related example. Nutomic is right that identity politics are used to create division among the working class, because anything that can create division will be used to do so.
See Rainbow capitalism as a very related example. Nutomic is right that identity politics are used to create division among the working class, because anything that can create division will be used to do so.
I mean that part is accurate. But abandoning whatever issue it is that is being used to create division is not the answer. They use all kinds of legitimate issues to create division. The solution is clearly to get rid of that whole concept where disagreement = division. Not to say that it’s just “all good” if I think people deserve human rights, and you don’t. We can still work together on some things, sure. I’m still going to give you hell about your bad point of view. A lot of people on the left seem to have this concept like it has to be a monoculture, like everyone has to see all issues of right and wrong and good and evil in exactly the same way, and if you don’t see it my way, then you’re a total shit and an enemy on purpose and I need to try to destroy you first before even trying to attempt anything against the right. And that tendency is one that the right absolutely loves to exploit, and they have wild success at it.
(Nutomic also in an extra irony takes it a step further, because his server will not just “divide” from you ideologically, but outright ban you if you try to say that some particular people deserve human rights.)
Sure, but the fact that some people’s basic rights and freedoms are divisive is not an excuse to abandon them. We can’t create a liberated society by accepting oppression. It needs to be confronted or changed in some way. I’m open to discussing the issue differently, or focusing more speech on other topics when possible but I’m not open to letting people be subject to state violence because their existence is unpopular. So what are we really proposing here?
Lot’s of people would like to strip social justice from leftist ideology and only view the world in a strict Marxist sense where class divisions are the only thing. They claim that a classless society will automatically solve bigotry so we don’t have to worry about that.
In reality modern racism and capitalism were born as conjoined twins and one cannot be understood without the other. Ironically, black radical thought in America has always been bifurcated and marginalized from other Marxists largely over the issue of racial capitalism. This in part explains black voter’s skepticism shown toward politicians like Sanders.
I think he’s really mixed up. He is saying that promoting equal rights for everyone is divisive. But what could be more divisive than dividing people into groups and assigning different rights to each division?
yeah but that’s nothing new ; decide and conquor
could list 100’s of other topics: race, gender, religion, abortion, prison, climate change, the police, etc.
Sounds like the classic leftist drama Monty Python was already making fun of 50 years ago. It’s never actually about what it’s claimed to be about.
I think all things need to be discussed but people just have to be smart and not try to 5d chess things. Look at your options and make the best decision. Remember that most of our problems are wealth disparity and even many of the 1% recognize it is not even good for them. I have known many farmers, union folks, retired, all sorts that like to vote against their interest because they get into some zero sum, us or them, mindset. By and large whats good for others is good for me. I would love to be the lowest person on earth in a society where that is a good life.
Yeah maybe but what can we do about it? I’m not gonna de-transition
I think the problem with calls for unity is that they’re never calls for solidarity with marginalized groups, but rather demands for silence.
The “progressive” movement in the US is without a doubt 100% the unaware foot soldiers of the elites. Every single thing the movement supports only helps to further entrench capital into power. The file and rank of the progressives are well intentioned, no doubt, and the goals are nobles. But because the idea is to solve problems from the top down instead of the bottom up, all it serves is to further create methods for capitalism to solve the internal contradictions that would otherwise result in its collapse. Furthermore it is not a democratic movement nor interested in democracy in any shape or form and saying so is as much newspeak as fascist saying the same thing. It is a technocratic movement that dismisses the wisdom of the masses for the wisdom of the experts, and I do not think that’s necessarily a problem in practice, the problem is that people, as stupid as they are, are smart enough to realize that either you believe in democracy or you believe in doing whatever is scientifically, statistically or mathematically is proven to be better but both things cannot be true at the same time. Honestly I feel like progressives would fare better if they actually had a mask off moment and actively campaigned on that.
either you believe in democracy or you believe in doing whatever is scientifically, statistically or mathematically is proven to be better
I don’t see how these are mutually exclusive.
If the best course of action is the only choice then there isn’t a choice at all.
For example we might know that universal healthcare is better for society in almost every aspect, however people might feel that they prefer lower taxes regardless of the benefits that universal healthcare might provide and so they vote against a measure to establish universal healthcare. This is the people choosing out of their own free will to vote against their best interests, democracy is ok with bad outcomes that result out of collective choice. The progressive movement is not ok with negative outcomes, and as such will always choose the best course of action.
Democracy is choosing the “best” answer by votes.
You assume that your answers are the best, but so does everyone else. Supporting an alternative doesn’t mean that you oppose democracy, it means you support raising awareness so more people will agree with your ideas and WANT to implement them.
What if the people never agree with you? What if you can never convince them that for example transgender women should be able to use the women’s bathroom? What if people elect officials that pass laws to make sure they can’t? Would you accept that outcome peacefully as part of the democratic process? Would you be content with what the people have chosen? Democracy can be as tyrannical as any other system, for progressives there is a moral imperative to not accept outcomes that hurt people even if it is done through the democratic process.
Things are scary now, I’ll give you that. But, we are a lot better with trans acceptance than we were 30 years ago.
There may be some setbacks from what’s happening now, but it will eventually lead back to progress and society will be a little better than it is today.
