#Countering Racism with Justice

[pumpacti0n]

We should always be aware that it isn't some innocent mistake that authoritarian "leftists" have constantly failed to acknowledge systems of power other than a vulgar "anti-capitalism" or "anti-imperialism", like they've carelessly left out an ingredient in a cake recipe.

"Whoops, we've acknowledged one abusive hierarchy, but the other ones slipped through our fingers, silly us!" Nope. The reason this analysis of power isn't included in their ideology and praxis is because they consider these hierarchies useful to their projects.

This is why they'll mock or ignore discourse related to youth liberation, disability justice, gender self-determination or anti-patriarchal struggle, for example, or engage in apologetics for capitalist regimes in other countries -- they want to "have their cake, and eat it too".

A key reason why "the left", as some might call it, is not as powerful as it could be isn't because of some lack of discipline (or "degeneracy"), but rather a lack of intersectionality, a criticism that many of those within the black radical tradition, (black feminists and transfeminists more specifically,) have been highlighting in one way or another for at least 50 years.

Authoritarian "leftists" don't want to sacrifice the power that these hierarchies afford them, which explains why they're largely not opposed to prisons, borders, police, the enforcement of gender roles and even capitalism itself, if it's under the purview of the "socialist" ("workers") state and its bureaucrats.

And this is why I keep putting "leftist" in quotes...We're not free until we're all free, so the implication that we should settle for addressing one or two systems of domination while allowing all the others to flourish until we address them in some vague point in the far future is a distortion of what truly radical liberatory politics should entail.

It's simply a myth that we can address capitalism while leaving racism, ableism and misogyny etc. intact, as if they aren't mutually reinforced by one another, as if fascists and reactionaries will forget that they exist once capital is abolished. This is a fantasy, a delusion.

Authcoms love to pose questions like "without a state to enforce class rule, how will the proletariat defend itself?" but a better question would be: "if we fail to acknowledge the hierarchies that atomize and disempower the masses, how could we ever be a threat to capitalists in the first place? how would abandoning the most vulnerable populations serve the interests of the "working class" and "anti-imperial" struggle?

For example, (cis) women make up approximately 50% of the world's population -- so if women are still subjugated by patriarchal rule and the gendered division of labor, how will we have the numbers to fight?

Similarly, a significant portion of the world's population are currently incarcerated. If we don't abolish prisons, allowing the State to continue extracting labor from prisoners and destabilizing untold millions of social relations in the process, how can we hope to match or exceed their powers?

If we do not challenge the capitalist, productivist logic of endless resource accumulation, with its constant pollution of the environment and the displacement and erasure of indigenous peoples and non-human animals, there will be no habitable planet left for us during this "revolution", because we will have destroyed all of it in the name of profit...so what would be the point?

These aren't minor concerns that we can put off indefinitely, and it isn't some innocent mistake that they are left out of the discourse, but are instead deliberate attempts to co-opt liberation struggle for the sake of advancing counter-revolution and authoritarian projects.

It's no wonder then, that they are eager to dismiss any criticism of their projects the result of "western propaganda", as if these same critiques aren't leveraged by very people belonging to populations they constantly tokenize whenever it suits their agenda.

They'd much rather treat every marginalized community as some monolith or as primitive victims in need of saving and representation by a vanguard. This chauvinist, colonial, assimilationist, antisocial attitude is endemic in (often white,) authoritarian circles, because it forms the basis of their position towards racial and gender hierarchies, that they are a natural and inevitable factor of organization itself. They are wrong.

In this sense, they aren't meaningfully different from the capitalists they pretend to hate so much. In truth, they are just jealous and greedy for more cake.

[txttletale]

what do you think of "extremism". i see it used often in the context of like, horseshoe theory, the "extreme" right is like the "extreme" left, or at least the two sides of the same coin, and i do have to wonder if that's not obscuring what's actually happening to profit a "both sides" narrative.

like for example, i think that right-wingers becoming "extreme" is simply a natural conclusion of their ideology. tbc i don't think that becoming, like, a fascist isn't "extreme", but whenever i see the word "extremism" used in this context the implication is "passed the tolerable threshold for bigotry" even tho i think that any kind of sustained bigotry was just going to turn into that anyways.

meanwhile for the left, i can actually sort of see an argument for that being the case, but most cases of "extremism" there usually seem to be fundamental misunderstandings in the ideology they're pushing for which leads to blind dogmatism rather than actual social-political analysis and activism, if that makes sense. i don't know if that counts as "taking it too far", which extremism would imply.

what do you think?

'extremism', much like 'totalitarianism', is an obfuscatory tactic to delegitimize radical positions by posting a false equivalency to fascism, racism, &c.

furthermore, because what makes a position 'extreme' or 'not extreme' is of course profoundly contingent on the status quo, the broad and nebulous concept is similarly used as a repressive cudgel against all dissent and the existence of marginalized communities. for example, prevent (the uk's "counter-extremism" program) is basically just a vector for state-sponsored islamophobic harrassment. in fact, the uk government has recently unveiled plans to use broad and far-reaching charges of 'extremism' against any group or ideology that 'undermines the uk's institutions and values' (!)

so, yeah. i don't think that the concept of 'extremism' has any value outside of that paradigm of proscribing acceptable relations to the status quo & power and tarring socialist, anti-imperialist, and social justice causes with the brush of some unspecified equivalency to fascism and hate groups. silly concept for unserious people

[pomodoriyum]

https://archiveofourown.org/works/64478734/chapters/168899158

*slaps this bad boy down on the counter* I NEED. to go to bed.

chapter summary:

Cornelius Hickey wakes up, for real this time. Silna disappears.

TWs for this chapter: brief anti-irish sentiment, and the usual sexism/racism from the white dudes.

Fic summary:

Francis and the others have finally escaped the arctic circle. Silna has freed herself from the worst of her burdens. The problem is, they have to handle justice now. This one, peripherally, is about a court martial. (the other half of this-- the fun half-- follows silna through the arctic and is mostly about her living her life normally and beautifully with the land! i love her and i refuse to abandon her even as the focus of the series shifts to center on the english & their ways of inflicting/perpetuating violence on each other and the place they live!)

[mariacallous]

Environmental justice (EJ) in the U.S. has become a sociopolitical challenge to pursue a movement that counters environmental injustices that threaten the viability of many communities. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines environmental justice as “the just treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of income, race, color, national origin, Tribal affiliation, or disability, in agency decision-making and other Federal activities that affect human health and the environment.” We can categorize environmental injustices based on their physical impact and social or community impact. Physically, when populations are targeted by developments such as highways, schools, businesses, and housing developments, they are relocated or displaced. These social or community changes lead to a loss of social cohesion, social capital, and can lead to social isolation. Their combined effects can relocate social challenges such as poverty, job access, health care access, and school overcrowding to other geographic communities. Some of the other challenges can come in the form of pollution which exposes communities to new public health risks, therefore contributing to broader and localized climate change.

There are many tools that can be applied to explain the impact of environmental injustice on various segments of the population. One approach is to use critical race theory (CRT) which offers a powerful lens to understand how policies and laws are applied unequally, dislocating and disrupting communities of color. By examining how race and power structures influence where polluting facilities are located and environmental policies are crafted, CRT sheds light on the roots of environmental injustice and paves the way for solutions that promote a cleaner, more equitable future for all. The integration of CRT in environmental policymaking not only exposes these injustices but also guides the development of solutions that foster a sustainable and just society. Specifically, we propose that policymakers prioritize the voices and needs of marginalized communities through CRT-informed legislation, which could include stricter zoning regulations, enhanced environmental protections, and increased investment in community-led environmental justice initiatives. By doing so, we can work toward dismantling the structures that perpetuate environmental racism and ensure that all communities have equitable access to a healthy environment.

[thoughtlessarse]

On January 29, Palestinian organizers in New York City gathered at a park for a vigil to mourn the one-year anniversary of the death of Hind Rajab, a 6-year-old killed last year alongside her family and paramedics by the Israeli military in Gaza. At Zuccotti Park in lower Manhattan, attendees laid candles, alongside photos and art of Rajab. That same day, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled “Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism” that “demands the removal of resident aliens who violate our laws” and calls on the Department of Justice to “protect law and order, quell pro-Hamas vandalism and intimidation, and investigate and punish anti-Jewish racism in leftist, anti-American colleges and universities.” It comes on the heels of an earlier anti-immigration order signed during Trump’s first day in office that called for increased vetting and crackdowns on visa holders and people trying to enter the U.S. based on their political and cultural views. Emboldened by the pair of orders, Betar U.S., the American branch of an international organization founded by the early Zionist writer and settler colonialist Ze’ev Jabotinsky in 1923, took to social media ahead of the vigil for Rajab, which it derogatorily dismissed as a “Jihad rally.” Betar invited its supporters to show up and “assist @ICEgov⁩ in deportation efforts,” promising to “document all attendees” to submit to the Trump administration as a part of his recent orders. At the vigil, a small group heckled attendees, yelling, “Show us your faces so we could get you deported” and “We’re with ICE,” then repeatedly chanting, “ICE, ICE, ICE,” according to video posted on the group’s accounts. “We’re here for a 6-year-old girl,” one vigil attendee pleaded to an NYPD officer, before being drowned out by counter-protesters accusing them of a “fake genocide” and using “human shields.” After the vigil concluded, Betar claimed on social media to have identified the attendee using face-recognition technology and said it had reported him to the Department of Homeland Security. Free speech experts and Muslim and Palestine solidarity advocates worry that such harassment and discrimination from Betar and other far-right groups will only spread thanks to Trump’s recent orders. Amid growing calls to deport political foes and defenders of human rights, they fear a new climate where political speech is silenced — and those brave enough to speak out risk severe punishment.

continue reading

[vzyt]

Blog Post Due 11/7

1.What are some of the ethical challenges of digital activism in the era of social media?

There were many ethical challenges that digital activists faced in this era of social media. In such contexts, so much of digital activism relies on a dependence on not necessarily secure platforms in order to keep sensitive information private. It may result in endangering the activists and their communities they are trying to protect. The dissemination of false information or propaganda degrades the credibility and integrity of activism. The veracity of any information at all, being distributed by activists, needs to be something with which activists concern themselves. Inadvertently, some activist voices lift over others by some activists or movements, thus marginalizing less dominant voices within the activist community. It is particularly the case for intersectional movements, where already underrepresented groups-like women of color-do not have an equal presence. In those aspects, activists have to create frameworks that balance efficacy with ethical considerations, especially on privacy, transparency, and accountability.

2. What potential does digital activism hold as a transformative force in the struggle for social justice?

Activism can indeed be truly transformative for social justice since it gives voices to the marginalized, including mobilization in an inclusive manner, and accomplishes campaigns in real time. Social media, online petitions, and digital campaigns are examples of ways activists work their way around media gatekeepers, create global networks, and mobilize support on a scale unimaginable previously. This kind of democratization of activism is far-reaching; challenging power relations can amass concrete changes through public opinion, policy, and even corporate behavior. Digital activism makes people active agents of change irrespective of geographical or social confines.

3. How does Black Twitter function as a counter-narrative compared with mainstream media?

Black Twitter serves as a counter-narrative to mainstream media. It is the avenue by which Black people can express themselves, elevate their voices, and discuss issues of racial equity and social justice that are often underrepresented or poorly handled by traditional media. This is important because mainstream media has historically been biased against or misrepresented Black people and communities. By offering up an alternate platform, Black Twitter allows users to talk back to stereotypes and fills the space for activism and creates dialogue about issues usually hushed or sensationalized by the mainstream press.

4. How does Black Twitter mobilize its use of humor and satire in handling serious problems such as racism, police brutality, and inequality?

Black Twitter uses humor and satire to deal with and call out much larger societal ills. Through humor, the users can make light of the absurdity of racism, inequality, and police brutality as they simultaneously critique and bring awareness to these subjects. This would loosen the tension but at the same time also be more attractive to people. Satirical comments on social media can serve to make difficult topics more palatable, even as they spur conversations and fight back against oppressive systems in poignant and effective ways.

Lee, Latoya. Black twitter: A response to bias in mainstream media. 

Classifying Forms of Activism.pdf

[gayhenrycreel]

thoughts on my blorbo bleebus and the social justice villain trope

its very common in media (looking at you marvel) for a villain to legitimately have ideas and goals that are objectively good, with the exception that this goal requires unnecessary murder (why did Thanos kill 50% of people when he could just double resources? why didnt the heros double resources?).

for the purposes of this post, im going to ignore the details of Edward Creel theory for the most part, because Henry is almost completely irrelevant to what i have to say. this post is about Vecna/Edward. i will call him Henry for simplicity.

in the first shadow, we see that Henry is extremely anxious and shy, wants to be normal, and cant be normal no matter how hard he tries. he is very awkward, and is pressured to be normal via heteronormativity (im sorry shippers, he did not consent to that kiss. Patty assaulted him). [Edit: the play has been changed in small ways over time. the original scene was sexual assault, but the new one is not. arguably this strengthens themes of heteronormativity]

Brenner even says Henry should just be normal. the reason for this? its an abuse tactic. Brenner is breaking down Henry's will to be himself, reflecting how wider society also does this.

Henry's relationship with Patty is ruined by people demanding he be normal, both by Patty and Brenner (Patty is also a victim of heteronormativity. without it she would understand that a romantic relationship is not a requirement for her to be friends with a boy).

since Henry was banished to the upside down, he appears to be almost entirely controlled by the mindflayer, which weaponizes his pain.

in his monologue, Henry states his goal of making a world where conformity does not exist. this is said while flayed, and its not the mindflayers goal, but rather a radicalized version of Henry's feelings about his suffering. the mindflayers true goal is to infect earth, and promises Henry a world in which people like him will be safe. no more forced labour, no more heteronormativity, no more conformity (no one has media literacy anymore so i will say it directly: the mention of reproduction being involved in a life of forced conformity has a subtextual meaning of heteronormativity, reinforced by the heavy implications that El is Henry's daughter that he was forced to have).

i feel that this is much different from Thanos and Ultron being vaguely correct in some ways while also being evil (because the narrative says social change is evil).

Vecna is an autistic man who wants to be safe but is also possessed by a demonic entity that benefits from radicalizing him. i suspect that this makes the possession easier, and on his own Henry wouldn't be so extreme.

i think Brenner represents right wing ideals: he forces conformity, he doesn't allow employees to leave (living in a factory type deal), children grow up with no community because of him, he quite literally creates super soldiers designed to be perfect for oppressing people like some sort of nazi.

this would mean Vecna represents the countering leftist extremism: an ideology created from pain, the goal is simply a total destruction of the Enemy without deconstructing right wing beliefs such as "personhood is able to be revoked" which itself stems from "humans are superior" which allows humanity to be removed from someone at the oppressors will (look at racism. human centrism allows this shit to happen).

Vecna doesn't seem to have a strict goal, because his goal is just to destroy what hurt him. he is so hurt that he doesn't see the difference between his abusers and people who are part of his abusers society.

this is the same thing at the roots of things like terfism and the rise of leftists supporting the taliban. its bad logic like "these people are trying to kill what hurt me (christianity, men), so they must be righteous even if the collateral damage is extreme".

what these people don't realise is that the "collateral damage" is intentional. sometimes they even want the "collateral damage" to happen.

like many inexperienced anarchists, Vecna wants to destroy authority without understanding any way of replacing it. this of course is because the mindflayer does not intend a replacement. a lack of communal organisation results in authoritarianism rising again.

this is different from other instances of the social justice villain because in the context of the mindflayers control, its clear enough that Henry is not a bad person, but the mindflayer turns his pain into hate, becoming just as dangerous as what hurt him.

[realjaysumlin]

Countering Stereotype Threat | Learning for Justice

Nothing is easier to get rid of if you don't have any idea of how to counter it. Racism is the easiest thing to remove out of our mind because race is a social construct and it's really easy to counter and it will make people who call themselves white either look extremely ignorant or make them extremely mad, who cares about what they believe in or think?

You don't help matters if you identify them as they do, this is something that we should always tell them whenever they use the white card, because there's no such thing as white people. This is an identity that they invented and we must destroy this stupid and ignorant ideology.

They don't know any better because for them whiteness is normalized and you don't allow them to escape from their own poison because it's poison to everyone else who doesn't live under the system of whiteness.

Never identify yourselves based on the narratives that they have bestowed on us, this is something that you return that label back to them. If someone calls you a nigger, you tell them that you are not white because this word belongs to them, not us.

They invented it to demean Black Indigenous People globally, so why would you take on an identity that destroys your self confidence? No humans in their right mind would take ownership of something that destroys them. If you do? Something is definitely psychologically wrong with you and you need to seek professional help.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Julian Adorney, Mark Johnson, and Geoff Laughton

Published: Jan 10, 2025

Many critics, including several featured in these pages, have been actively combating Social Justice Fundamentalism (SJF) at the intellectual level. This is vital and necessary work.

However, people rarely adopt ideologies solely because they find them intellectually compelling. As social psychologist Jonathan Haidt explains in The Righteous Mind, “Intuitions come first, strategic reasoning second.” What this means is that we often embrace ideologies because they appeal to us on a psychological level, and we then use reason to justify the beliefs we already desire to have. Haidt notes that our moral reasoning is “a skill we humans evolved to further our social agendas—to justify our own actions and to defend the teams we belong to.” He warns that our stated reasons for holding certain beliefs are “mostly post hoc constructions made up on the fly, crafted to advance one or more strategic objectives.”

Haidt’s insights prompt a crucial question: If intellectual arguments fail to address the core reasons people are drawn to SJF, what other strategies might effectively counter this ideology at a deeper level?

Addressing this question is vital, given the numerous negative impacts of SJF ideology on society.

Firstly, SJF is detrimental to the state of science. Science is supposed to be about advancing the frontiers of human knowledge and seeking truth. However, when peer-reviewed papers describe how participants waded into the waters of the Great Salt Lake to marry brine shrimp (no, really) and then “ma[de] love to the lake,” it’s hard to see how this advances science’s noble goals. When academic papers suggest that infants are inherently “queer” and proceed to sexualize them, science’s goal is being bastardized. When SJF scientists argue in a paper on HIV transmissions that we ought to normalize “barebacking” (having sex without condoms), they risk doing immense harm to at-risk populations. When scholars receive advanced degrees and professorships by publishing such nonsense, it is bad for the academy, which plays a vital role in creating and disseminating knowledge.

SJF ideology also has harmful effects on our social norms. It is bad when prominent scholars advocate for bestiality (the sexual abuse of animals) or when scholars like Michel Foucault, the grandfather of Social Justice Fundamentalism, support the sexual abuse of small children. Similarly, it is harmful when psychiatrists present lectures titled “The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind,” which move us away from the goal of racial integration towards judging people by their immutable characteristics. While no culture is perfect and in any given culture some social norms may need to evolve, many SJF ideologues want to take a sledgehammer to the foundations of our society because they assume that all social norms—even those against sexually abusing children—are premised on racism, sexism, and other forms of oppression.

SJF, despite the noble intentions of many of its followers, lends itself to divisiveness. It lumps people (generally inaccurately) into either an “oppressor” or “oppressed” group, and frequently scapegoats or torments members of the group it has deemed the oppressors.

This divisiveness is partly due to Social Justice Fundamentalists exhibiting a high level of self-reported empathy. But empathy is inherently selective. As Paul Bloom, a professor of psychology at Yale, argues in Against Empathy, “Empathy is a spotlight focusing on certain people in the here and now.” This spotlight is bright but narrow; just as it bathes a couple of people in light, it casts everyone else in deeper darkness. Bloom points out that empathy “makes us care more about [the people we empathize with],” but it also renders us “blind…to the suffering of those we do not or cannot empathize with.”

In an ideology that divides the world into oppressors and oppressed, hyper empathy for the latter can coincide with—and even foster—remarkable indifference or even callousness toward anyone seen as part of the former group. This explains why many SJFs responded with glee to the murder of an insurance CEO earlier this month. Former Washington Post reporter Taylor Lorenz remarked that she felt “celebratory” about the murder. Why? Because “If you have watched a loved one die because an insurance conglomerate denied their life-saving treatment as a cost-cutting measure, yes, it’s natural to wish that the people who run such conglomerates would suffer the same fate.” When you lay all the world’s problems at the feet of a certain group of people, it becomes easy to root for the pain and suffering of those people.

This divisive narrative extends to immutable characteristics as well. For many SJFs, an individual’s value depends on factors like skin color and sex. Saria Rao and Regina Jackson dedicate their book, White Women: Everything You Already Know About Your Own Racism And How to Do Better, to “all Black, Indigenous, brown, and non-white girls, women, and non-binary identifying folks who are sick and tired of white women’s bullshit.” A piece in the Washington Post suggested that black and white women could never be friends because the author, a black women, didn’t trust white women on principle. Another Washington Post article put it even more bluntly: “I Refuse to Listen to White Women Cry.” Congressman Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) recently posted on X, “Dear White People, I don’t know why I feel the need to keep talking to you.”

SJF allows its adherents make pariahs of entire groups based solely on immutable characteristics.

This same story can be seen in our politics. In the Huffington Post, Andrea Tate describes how her sympathy for the (so-called) “oppressed” people, potentially harmed by a Trump presidency, led her to act with cruelty and callousness towards her Trump-supporting husband and his family. On X, a post by John Pavlovitz garnered 72,000 likes when he declared, “I will never forgive my family members and former friends for voting for him [Trump]. Never.” Empathy toward one group can result in callousness and cruelty toward another. These strains of SJF are deeply divisive.

Moreover, SJF ideology can negatively impact the mental health of its staunch supporters. A survey by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which examined the mental health and politics of 55,102 students across 254 schools, found a clear correlation: the further left a student leaned politically, the poorer their self-reported mental health.

One possible reason for this correlation might be the divisiveness of the ideology itself: a belief system that promotes cruelty and hostility toward opposing groups likely harms the mental health of its followers. Another reason might be the prevalence of a victimhood-focused worldview with little emphasis on personal agency among many SJFs. In their book Is Everyone Really Equal?, Robin DiAngelo and Özlem Sensoy use the metaphor of a birdcage to suggest that marginalized people cannot advance in society. In this metaphor, each problem is one bar on a cage, locking the person in an inescapable situation. This ideology encourages an external locus of control, suggesting that society is structured to oppress marginalized groups, and that these people can never overcome this oppression. However, fostering an external locus of control is terrible for our mental health, as it instills upon us the belief that our problems are insurmountable and our lives can never improve.

This ideology has even infected many therapists, who ought to know better than to inculcate feelings of helplessness in their clients. As professor of psychiatry Mark L. Ruffalo told us:

There are some therapists who simply see their patients as passive recipients of experience who make no active contributions to, and have no responsibility for, their ongoing life problems. This approach aligns neatly with ideologies that cultivate a certain victim mentality--the idea that all or most of life's problems are due to external forces: society, the economy, various social ills, etc.

The most prominent strains of SJF ideology appear to exacerbate societal issues and harm their adherents.

For all of these reasons, it is essential that we do more to tackle this ideology. Simply refuting its principles intellectually, although necessary, is not sufficient. We must understand at a deeper level the reasons why people are drawn to SJF ideology in the first place.

Fortunately, talented scholars have already explored much of this terrain. In A Time to Build, Yuval Levin discusses the allure of this ideology:

...the activists are motivated by their commitment to an orthodoxy backed by powerful moral imperatives. They see their struggle as on behalf of the oppressed against oppressors…Their aim, as they understand it themselves, is not to crush dissent or dominate society, let alone to relativize the core philosophical underpinnings of the West. It is to combat the systematic, structural mistreatment of oppressed groups and to recognize their distinct experiences and challenges. As they perceive it, they act on behalf of justice…They implicitly seek to cleanse and to redeem society through acts of performative outrage against oppression and various forms of calling out oppressors. …this can be very powerful. The culture of activism in the university exposes students, often for the first time, to the argument that there exists a pervasive structure of social oppression in our society and simultaneously gives them means to address that injustice. It offers an entire moral system to students who feel as though society at large offers them no other such framework that they can respect.

Essentially, SJF offers its adherents a clear morality play—hero versus villain—and equips them with the tools to become (at least in their own minds) the hero. It provides meaning, purpose, and an organizing worldview, all of which are currently in short supply in the West these days. In short, it connects with its adherents on levels far deeper than mere intellect.

As April Lawson, a board member at Braver Angels, puts it:

A vacuum has opened up in campus moral culture—and in moral culture in America writ large—such that the vision offered by the social justice leaders is speaking to a deeply felt hunger. The movement’s ferocity comes from this hunger, and until we find other ways to speak to it, we will find that measured, logical rejoinders à la “I agree with you that racism is a problem, I just think your way of addressing it is counterproductive” will fall on deaf ears.

So, what alternatives can we offer to replace the ideology of SJF in people’s lives? We propose an ideology of unity and pro-humanism. We can affirm the fundamental truth that ideas, words, and actions may be worthy of condemnation, but no human being should ever be condemned. We can adopt and uphold the following mantra:

“I may disagree with what you say; I may even take action to limit your ability to harm other people; but I will never stop loving you as my brother or sister.”

This ideology is not a case of empty “anything-goes” moral relativism. It permits robust disagreement and the prosecution of criminals. The one thing it does not permit is the debasement of our fellow humans. We can attack peoples’ ideas and lock up violent criminals to protect the rest of society from them. However, when opposing a person’s ideas or actions, we must always maintain a profound love for the individual.

This pro-human ideology is the ideology of Pauli Murray, a queer-identifying black episcopal priest who proclaimed in 1945 that, “When my brothers try to draw a circle to exclude me, I shall draw a larger circle to include them. When they speak out for the privileges of a puny group, I shall shout for the rights of all mankind.” It is also the ideology of Martin Luther King Jr., who reminded his followers of Jesus’ words: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, and pray for them that despitefully use you.”

It is the ideology of Daryl Davis, a black musician who has convinced hundreds of Klansmen to abandon the Klan simply by being willing to see their humanity beneath their noxious beliefs. It is the ideology of Jamie Winship, a counterterrorism expert who has guided thousands of militant extremists to lay down their weapons and find peace by recognizing the shining human soul beneath the grime of their worst words and actions.

This ideology isn’t merely a nice-sounding idea. Every spiritual tradition worth its salt teaches the infinite value of every human being. Jesus encouraged his followers to love their neighbors as themselves. Indian-American spiritual teacher Prem Rawat emphasizes the need for every individual to recognize “the value and the preciousness of [their] existence.” Author Eckhart Tolle teaches that “we’re all one” and that “The recognition of the other as yourself in essence…is true love.”

Importantly, while these traditions are traditionally spiritual, there is nothing in their teachings inherently incompatible with a secular or materialist worldview.

This ideology has far more to offer than an intellectual refutation of the core tenets of SJF. It taps into the same hunger for meaning, purpose, and an organizing worldview that SJF ideology does. It invites us to become heroes by acknowledging the radiant worth of our fellow humans. It also fosters a sense of connectedness that is sorely lacking in our culture of atomized individualism.

In practice, this ideology looks very different from the expressions of SJF that we have discussed. Whereas SJF ideology often manifests as cruelty and callousness towards the outgroup of the day, pro-humanism looks like a rediscovery of the Golden Rule. It manifests as practicing safe sex, driven by genuine concern for one’s own health and that of both current and future partners. It looks like mourning the death of a fellow human, even if he worked in an industry that we dislike. It looks like sitting down at the kitchen table with people who disagree with us, understanding that differing policies do not diminish their worthiness of love.

On a larger scale, it looks like the Civil Rights Movement. This pro-human ideology offers the same morality, force, and sense of unity, providing a platform to stand together against injustice and oppression, as demonstrated by the millions of Americans of all races and ethnicities united by the firm belief that we are all our brother’s keeper.

If we can demonstrate the value of this ideology to SJFs, we can deal the most toxic strains of SJF ideology a crippling blow—which would be good not only for society but also for the Fundamentalists themselves.

[mariacallous]

If Donald Trump returns to the White House, close allies want to dramatically change the government's interpretation of Civil Rights-era laws to focus on "anti-white racism" rather than discrimination against people of color.

Why it matters: Trump's Justice Department would push to eliminate or upend programs in government and corporate America that are designed to counter racism that has favored whites.

Targets would range from decades-old policies aimed at giving minorities economic opportunities, to more recent programs that began in response to the pandemic and the killing of George Floyd.

Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung told Axios: "As President Trump has said, all staff, offices, and initiatives connected to Biden's un-American policy will be immediately terminated."

Driving the news: Longtime aides and allies preparing for a potential second Trump administration have been laying legal groundwork with a flurry of lawsuits and legal complaints — some of which have been successful.

A central vehicle for the effort has been America First Legal, founded by former Trump aide Stephen Miller, who has called the group conservatives' "long-awaited answer to the ACLU."

America First cited the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in February in a lawsuit against CBS and Paramount Global for what the group argued was discrimination against a white, straight man who was a writer for the show "Seal Team" in 2017.

In February, the group filed a civil rights complaint against the NFL over its "Rooney Rule."

The rule — named for Dan Rooney, late owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers — was instituted in 2003 and expanded in 2022. It requires NFL teams to interview at least two minority candidates for vacant general manager, head coach and coordinator positions.

American First argued that "given the limited time frame to hire executives and coaches after the season, this results in fewer opportunities for similarly situated, well-qualified candidates who are not minorities."

In 2021, Miller's group successfully sued to block the implementation of a $29 billion pandemic-era program for women- and minority-owned restaurants, saying it discriminated against white-owned businesses.

"This ruling is the first, but crucial, step towards ending government-sponsored racial discrimination," Miller said then.

Zoom in: Other Trump-aligned groups are preparing for a future Trump Justice Department to implement — or challenge — policies on a broader scale.

The Heritage Foundation's well-funded "Project 2025" envisions a second Trump administration ending what it calls "affirmative discrimination."

Part of the plan, written by former Trump Justice Department official Gene Hamilton, argues that "advancing the interests of certain segments of American society ... comes at the expense of other Americans — and in nearly all cases violates longstanding federal law."

Hamilton is America First Legal's general counsel.

Such groups have gained momentum with the Supreme Court's turn to the right — most notably its recent rejection of affirmative action in college admissions. The court ruled that programs designed to benefit people of color and address past injustices discriminate against white and Asian Americans.

In 2021, a federal judge blocked a $4 billion program to help Black farmers.

Earlier this month, another federal judge ruled that the Commerce Department's Minority Business Development Agency was discriminating against white people and that the program had to be open to everyone.

What they're saying: The Trump campaign directed Axios to the candidate's already stated positions bashing Biden's policies promoting equity.

"Every institution in America is under attack from this Marxist concept of 'equity,' " Trump said in 2023. "I will get this extremism out of the White House, out of the military, out of the Justice Department, and out of our government."

The Trump campaign's Steven Cheung added: "President Trump is committed to weeding out discriminatory programs and racist ideology across the federal government."

The NFL and Miller declined to comment. CBS didn't respond to a request for comment.

Between the lines: A CBS poll last November found that 58% of Trump voters believe that people of color were advantaged over white people — just 9% of Biden voters said the same.

Polls also show, however, that Trump is gaining support among Black and Latino voters.

Zoom out: Trump has portrayed himself as the victim of racism amid his legal troubles.

He repeatedly has said Black women prosecutors in Georgia and New York are "racist."

His political career really began in 2011 as the chief Birther-agitator, questioning Barack Obama's eligibility to be president.

When Trump jumped into the presidential race in 2015, he accused Mexico of dumping criminals and rapists into the U.S.

[haggishlyhagging]

The evaluation of Mayo's work [Mother India] and its impact has been left to such scholars as the authors of Marriage: East and West, who write:

The dust finally settled. It was conceded that Katherine Mayo's facts, as facts, were substantially accurate. It was recognized that she had taken up a serious issue and drawn attention to it, which had helped in some measure to hasten much-needed reforms. But at the same time her book had done a grave injustice to India, in presenting a one-sided and distorted picture of an aspect of Indian life that could only be properly understood within the context of the entire culture [emphases mine].

Thus Mayo is put in her place. We find here the familiar use of the passive voice, which leaves unstated just who conceded, who recognized. We find also the familiar balancing act of scholars, which gives a show of "justice" to their treatment of the attacked author. The qualifying expression, "as facts," added to "facts," has the effect of managing to minimize the factual. Women who counter the patriarchal reality are often accused of "merely imagining," or being on the level of "mere polemic." Here we have "mere" facts. Then the authors graciously concede that Mayo hastened "much-needed reforms," which gives the impression that everything has now been taken care of, that the messy details have been tidied up. Then comes the peculiarly deceptive and unjust expression "grave injustice to India." Mayo was concerned about grave injustice to living beings, women. Injustice is done to individual living beings. One must ask how it is possible to do injustice to a social construct, for example, India, by exposing its atrocities. We might ask such re-searchers whether they would be inclined to accuse critics of the Nazi death camps of "injustice" to Germany, or whether they would describe writers exposing the history of slavery and racism in America as guilty of "injustice" to the United States. The Maces go on to accuse Mayo of distorting "an aspect of Indian life." But what is "Indian life"? Mayo is concerned not with defending this vague abstraction (presumably meaning customs, beliefs, social arrangements, et cetera), but with the lives of millions of women who happened to live in that part of patriarchy called "India."

The final absurdity in this scholarly obituary is the expression "properly understood within the context of the entire culture." It is Katherine Mayo who demonstrates an understanding of the cultural context, that is, the entire culture, refusing to reduce women to "an aspect." Her critics, twenty years after her death, attempted to absorb the realities she exposed into a "broad vision," which turns out to be a meaningless abstraction.

Feminist Searchers should be aware of this device, commonly repeated in the re-searchers' rituals. It involves intimidation by accusations of "one-sidedness," so that others will not listen to the discredited Searcher-Scholar who refused to follow the "right" rites. The device relies upon fears of criticizing "another culture," so that the feminist is open to accusations of imperialism, nationalism, racism, capitalism, or any other "-ism" that can pose as broader and more important than gynocidal patriarchy. Thus the just accuser becomes unjustly sentenced to erasure. Her life's meaning, as expressed in her life's work, is belittled, reversed, wiped out.

Feminist Seekers/Spinsters should search out and claim such sisters as Katherine Mayo. Her books are already rare and difficult to find. It is important that they do not become extinct. Spinsters must unsnarl phallocratic "scholarship" and also find our sister weavers/dis-coverers whose work is being maligned, belittled, erased, deliberately forgotten. We must learn to name our true sisters, and to save their work so that it may be continued rather than re-covered, re-searched, and re-done on the endless wheel of re-acting to the Atrocious Lie which is phallocracy. In this dis-covering and spinning we expand the dimensions of feminist time/space.

-Mary Daly, Gyn/Ecology

[alllinesarebeautiful]

Day 440 Art Meditation, Deep Self, True Self, Highest Selves, Little Self

November 20, 2024, “Yellow Blue Brown Blended Tree Ring Art” 

Dear You,

I’m so grateful that so many of us are learning about, and tapping into what it means to be our higher selves - our highest selves. Michael Meade and his stories about living myths, uses the words ‘Deep Self’ and ‘True Self’ vs. our ‘Little Self’. G refers to our Little self as our “critical mind”, and it is our job in our relationship to protect the other FROM each of our ‘critical minds’ in our relationship. I like to call the states of being, ‘ego-space’ or ‘heart-space. It’s such a tiny example, but even within this tiny household of two, I can tell when G is in his heart-space … there is a grounded, calm arena of new lovely ideas. I always strive to stay in my heart-space longer throughout the day … By the end of the day I crumble, but I know it’s a practice.

This is what needs to happen more to counter all the toxic masculinity out there. The more we all talk about our experiences of heart the more one day someone will suddenly get it. That’s how it happened for me. For years I listened to Eckhart Tolle and then one day I just understood what he was saying about ego in a way I had never understood before. It was amazing.

The challenge is that the ego does not like to be identified. All the more reason to keep growing our heart spaces, speak about soul, and truth, and Deep Self and True Selves. 

But the good news is, you ban books all you want, try to control life all you want, when an opening like this happens it can happen any time, anywhere, and to anyone.

◎❤️

This week I made my first ever Vision Board! I am grateful to D for her recent exercise to create one. It’s incredibly empowering. It makes sense to me that I love it so much, I’m a visual learner. I really recommend this for all the other visual learners out there. It’s so powerful.

It’s hard to describe, but I feel a deeper love for all my Blue people out there. Everyone who stood up and voted for things that I cherish. Love, Empowering Humans, Protecting Mother Earth, Ending racism, Truth, Justice and Joy. I’m grateful for all the ways life is beautiful, and I hope that all the people who don’t understand this will heal soon. 

Adding 3 different bags to my store - “Yellow Blue Brown Blended, Tree Ring Art”.

A Utility crossbody bag, a Large organic tote bag and an Eco tote bag.

Sending lots of love & a few pics of baby me and my twin brother … With heaps of gratitude for all of life,

Anne

❤️◉ 

[ivo1112]

Blog post #6 due 10/10

How does the Internet both help and harm the spread of white supremacist ideas globally?

The Internet helps spread white supremacist ideas globally by making them easy to access and allowing them to reach a broad audience across different countries. It also creates spaces where people can connect anonymously, which makes it easier for white supremacists to share their beliefs and find others with similar views. However, this global reach also exposes these harmful ideas to people who can challenge and counter them. So, while the Internet amplifies these ideas, it also brings them to light where they can be addressed and criticized.

How might young people’s reliance on the Internet for information impact their understanding of race and civil rights?

Since many young people use the Internet as their primary source of information, they might encounter biased or misleading content about race and civil rights, especially if they come across white supremacist sites disguised as legitimate sources. This could lead them to misunderstand important issues or see all information as equally valid without recognizing credible sources. Young people need strong digital literacy skills to navigate these topics and understand the difference between reliable civil rights information and harmful, biased content.

Why is it important to examine how race influences technology rather than just focusing on access to technology?

Focusing only on who has access to technology, like who can use the internet, overlooks deeper issues about how technology is designed and whom it might harm. For instance, even if everyone has internet access, search engines might still produce racist or sexist results because of the way they’re programmed. By examining how race influences tech design, we can uncover hidden biases and work to prevent technology from reinforcing harmful stereotypes. This approach helps us ensure that technology doesn't just serve some groups better than others but is fair and beneficial to all.

How can social media campaigns, like the one for Trayvon Martin, make a difference in fighting racism?

Social media campaigns can raise awareness and bring people together to fight against racism. For example, when activists used the hashtag #TrayvonMartin, they could share information quickly and gather many voices calling for justice. This online support can lead to real-world actions, like protests and investigations. These campaigns help people understand the issues better and encourage them to take action in their communities.

Benjamin, R. (2020). Race after technology: Abolitionist Tools for the new jim code. Polity.

Daniels, J. (2010). Cyber racism: White supremacy online and the new attack on civil rights. The Journal of Popular Culture, 43(5), 1137–1138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5931.2010.00790_5.x

Senft, T., & Noble, S. (2014). The Social Media Handbook. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203407615

[liminalgoddessworld]

I had never heard of the term Afro-pessimism before but once it was described I understood it (perfectly). I've lived long enough to understand the ways in which the world is not only white supremacist but also, specifically, anti-Black. Once I saw it, I could not unsee it. I found that my mood was shifting from eagerness to learn about a new philosophy (new to me), to despair over the positionality of Black women in the world.

I remember thinking to myself - I wonder if Afro-positivity is a thing? Lo and behold, it is!

Afro-positivism, or Afro-positivist thought, is a philosophical and ideological framework that emerged in response to the historical and contemporary challenges faced by people of African descent globally. It encompasses several key aspects:

1. Positive Identity and Representation: Afro-positivism emphasizes the importance of positive identity formation and representation for people of African descent. It seeks to counter negative stereotypes and promote a strong sense of cultural pride and identity rooted in African heritage.

2. Empowerment and Liberation: Central to Afro-positivist thought is the empowerment and liberation of African peoples from colonial legacies, systemic racism, and socio-economic inequalities. It advocates for self-determination, social justice, and the dismantling of oppressive structures.

3. Cultural Revitalization: Afro-positivism promotes the revitalization and celebration of African cultures, languages, traditions, and spiritual practices. It seeks to reclaim and preserve cultural heritage as a source of strength and resilience.

4. Intellectual Sovereignty: Afro-positivist thinkers argue for intellectual sovereignty, advocating for African perspectives, knowledge systems, and methodologies in academia, research, and cultural production. This includes challenging Eurocentric paradigms and promoting decolonization of knowledge.

5. Social Transformation: Beyond cultural and intellectual dimensions, Afro-positivism aims for broader social transformation. It calls for inclusive development, political empowerment, and economic justice within African communities and among the African diaspora.

Afro-positivism draws on a range of influences, including Pan-Africanism, Black nationalism, African liberation movements, and critical race theory. It continues to evolve as a dynamic discourse that addresses contemporary issues such as racial justice, intersectionality, and global solidarity among marginalized communities.

[fairfieldthinkspace]

Higher Education Needs Courageous Leaders

Bob Hannafin, PhD

Program Director and Professor of Educational Studies and Teacher Preparation

Do you value academic freedom, diversity initiatives and the autonomy of institutions of higher learning? Does your institution struggle to honestly, and frankly discuss embedded racism and how it may serve to perpetuate rather than counter inequity? Are you interested in helping to lead the effort to take on the systemic elements of your campus culture?

Fairfield University’s Doctorate of Education (EdD) program in Educational Leadership with a concentration in Higher Education Administration is designed for current or prospective leaders who work across postsecondary settings such as student affairs, institutional advancement, admissions, marketing, communications, etc. The program prepares leaders to critically examine the systemic forces at play and take steps to create a more just and equitable campus culture.  

The program aligns with Fairfield’s mission of preparing educators for leadership and service through broad intellectual inquiry, the pursuit of social justice, and cultivation of the whole person. The program is tailored for individuals in leadership roles or who seek to take on expanded roles and responsibilities in their current work as higher education professionals.

One of the core goals of the program is to prepare professionals to advocate for just and equitable policies and practices, and who collaboratively develop actions and interventions.

Individuals who pursue the program will gain deeper insights into the theoretical and practical foundations of leadership in their profession. Candidates will develop knowledge of education theory, inquiry, student development, and how to use data to positively impact the practices of their institutions.

Fairfield’s EdD program offers a blend of practical and theoretical expertise in leadership, content area, and research/inquiry skills. It focuses on managing complex challenges within colleges and universities. The program is an applied, practitioner-based degree that prepares educators to address challenges they face on a daily basis. The cohort-based program provides opportunities to collaborate and build internal and external relationships and networks. Cultivating leadership skills and dispositions is central to this degree, and are increasingly valued in higher education.

I invite you to learn more about Fairfield’s EdD program for leaders in higher education administration.

[clairehadenough]

The martyrdom is really something to behold! She is just a itty bitty blog sharing an OPINION and all the meanies are coming after her :(

Not that she and her merry band of easily manipulated rubes have been harassing and cyber stalking a celebrity and anyone with the misfortune of being known to the fandom for months. No mention of trying to scam people and calling people Nazis and White Supremacists based off 10 year old tweets. No mention or acknowledgement of all the xenophobia and misogyny and threats to report to ICE for fraud on her blog. But remember, they are the good guys who care about anti-racism… which is why she is using White Supremacist tropes about immigration fraud? Their community commitment to anti-racism is very strong and entirely centered on a random actress being brought to Justice (for things people she knows did?). That’s what’s most important here.

We just have to remember that it’s just an opinion! Somehow it is both verifiable truth based on exclusive access to privileged information, expertise in PR, and very close contacts and also “just an opinion”. How convenient that it can be both at the same time depending on which narrative is more self protective in the moment. When the man himself counters with very public statements then it’s back to the vast conspiracy about how he is unwell and being controlled by the evil CAA and PR company. Honestly, yawn, she is just a discount bin Gatorfisch. For those unfamiliar, Gatorfisch is a notorious troll lwho has done all this before in the Ben Cumberbatch fandom. So much so she was even profiled in a major publication!

They also claim that people being fed up and annoyed with the cult and it’s weird brigading across the fandom is proof they are correct and “getting to close” to something. This is literally what trump would claim. They have obviously been taking notes from the masters of manipulation 😂😂😂 The only thing they are getting close to is falling entirely away from reality.

I wish she and her friends would make their bracelets and drink their water because the perpetual victimhood is very tedious

Couldn’t have said it any better! The similarities with Trump are just scary😅