liberalism in action

Liberals, we need you now to join an actual #Resistance to Trump, fascism, and capitalism, the latter of which will perpetually produce the conditions that breed the former. Support us in the battle against oppression, understand that these problems are systemic, and move to the left. Oppression can’t be defeated with centrism.

Oh and stop calling the cops on direct actioneers.

The Best Scene In Marvel History

Danny Rand: Claire says you’re a good guy. She says you’ve done a lot for Harlem.

Luke Cage: Yeah, I just want to help.

Danny Rand: Me too. That’s what lead me to that warehouse.

Luke Cage: You call that helping? You were gonna beat that kid within an inch of his life.

Danny Rand: Come on. I wasn’t gonna kill him.

Luke Cage: Sure looked like it.

Danny Rand: The Hand is dangerous. They murdered my parents, invaded the city I was sworn to protect.

Luke Cage: That kid’s got nothing to do with all that.

Danny Rand: Of course he does. He works for them.

Luke Cage: He needed a job.

Danny Rand: That’s not an excuse. You never fought someone to protect someone else?

Luke Cage: Of course I have.

Danny Rand: Okay, so what’s the difference?

Luke Cage: The difference is I live on their block. The difference is I’m not some billionaire white boy who takes justice into his own hands and slams a black kid against a wall because of his personal vendetta. Yeah, Claire told me about you on the way over here. Not all the mystical parts, but everything else.

Danny Rand: The money, that doesn’t define me.

Luke Cage: Maybe not. But that kid is sitting in a jail cell tonight, and you’re not.

Danny Rand: Neither are you.

Luke Cage: Not this time. But I’ve seen my share of injustice.

Danny Rand: The guy in the white hat, he’s just the beginning. You’re not thinking about the bigger picture.

Luke Cage: And you’re not thinking about anything but yourself.

Danny Rand: Hey, you know nothing about me!

Luke Cage: I know enough. And I know privilege when I see it. You may think you earned your strength, but you had power the day you were born. Before the “dragons,” before the “chi,” you had the ability to change the world without getting anybody hurt.

Danny Rand: … These people won’t be stopped that way.

Luke Cage: Oh, So you’re taking the war to the ones at the bottom, is that it? If I were in your shoes, I’d think twice about using that thing [the iron fist] on people who are trying to feed their families.


Originally posted by geekylaugifs

What Is Liberalism?

Oftentimes in leftist circles you can hear folks decrying liberals and liberalism. If you ask them why they hate liberalism, most of them will point you in the direction of Mao’s Combat Liberalism to better understand them, but this is a mistake. Combat Liberalism is effectively an internal memo, warning other communists of the need to avoid liberalism lest it be detrimental to their work. It details results of that ideology, but not causes. To that end, I’ve compiled a brief description of what liberalism is and why it’s bad.

The ideology of liberalism is denoted by three tenets:

  1. Free-market capitalism. Liberals believe that capitalism is good, or at least “the best we have”. While liberals may argue over how much intervention in the market is necessary, they all agree on the fundamental goodness of capitalism, and that it should be tweaked rather than replaced.
  2. The state and representative “democracy”. Liberals believe that the state is good, and that representative democracy is an effective means of creating social change and an acceptable level of participation. They reject any aims outside of the state, and try to co-opt movements towards state action (e.g. electing Democrats).
    1. Nonviolence: The liberal insistence on “nonviolent” protest (usually invoking a whitewashed history of Dr. King) is largely derived from state-worship. They see the state as the only legitimate user of force, and all others as violent looters and rioters; because of that, they refuse to even consider violence as a method of protest or direct action (e.g. antifascism).
    2. Indirect action and representative problem-solving: Linked to the lionization of representative democracy, liberals care little for direct action, even as indirect as blocking a street for a few hours. They believe that the power to change things is vested solely in those representatives, and that the common person shouldn’t bother; direct action, to them, is illegitimate for the same reason as violence.
  3. A focus on individual rather than class politics. Liberals see all social issues as issues primarily affecting individuals, rather than groups. In other words, they lack a class analysis; they see racism, for example, as the result of individual prejudices and “meanness” and something to be fixed at that level, rather than a system of structural violence against non-white peoples aimed at dividing the working class.

 Liberalism, as an ideology, is dangerous. These three tenets combine to form an analysis that is insufficient to encompass the whole of the enemy, and more importantly a praxis that is ineffective at combating it. It infects activists and ordinary workers alike, and railroads them into believing that they cannot change a society that benefits only those at the top. It railroads them into believing that the burdens they bear cannot be thrown off, and stands in the way of our collective liberation. It must be combated, for it is at the root of the struggle.

if the “male brain” and “female brain” theory is true (it isn’t) and socialization isn’t real (it is) then that means that males are innately more violent, more likely to rape, more likely to murder, more likely to abuse, etc just by their mere existence and not by any outside forces.

what do you suppose we do to combat that, then? it seems to me like the only way to irradiate male violence, if that theory is true, is to throw all males into a black hole and live in a female-only utopia. afterall, men are innately evil, right? 🙄

the scientifically proven fact that there is no gendered brain, only socialization, is a lot less of an extremist stance. we don’t have to kill all men to change the world, we just have to change how society views women and therefore how males are socialized. idk, that seems a lot more moderate to me. so why do misogynists so loudly reject a scientific fact that actually partially works in their favor?