Anonymous #2 1d

yes! however, the question is: SHOULD everything be political? our bodies, gender, race, etc shouldn’t be political, and yet they are :(

86

Anonymous #2 1d

almost worries me how many upvotes the post got when the wording feels so glaringly ignorant and the divide it’s attempting to pose is so unrealistically reductive

-19

Anonymous #5 22h

are you serious rn? homie the point is that everything in the column on the right is very obviously “political” whether we want it to be or not. this is a fact that should be obvious. what’s alarming is how many hundreds of members of this group are agreeing with a graphic designed by someone who doesn’t understand what “political” means

-8

Anonymous #5 22h

like how are you getting “What do you mean you ‘don’t want to debate your right to exist’” out of that. yes, homophobia and misogyny and fascism and racism etc are all Political Issues, there is no coherent definition of “political” which would exclude systems of oppression and the ideologies behind them. we’re all adults right here? is this the literacy crisis in action?

-6

Anonymous #4 22h

No it's actually not political. It's politicIZED. It's not that deep. I'm making fun of you for being naïve.

28

Anonymous #4 22h

Identity politics are not real politics.

21

Anonymous #5 21h

lmfaooooo you really said systems of oppression aren’t political 😭 I’m not the naïve one here babe. you could at least choose not to be so smug while you say shit that isn’t true

-5

Anonymous #4 21h

Systems of oppression are an error in our materialization of physical reality. They are bugs, not features.

19

Anonymous #5 21h

oh good lord you’re full of shit. that’s a patently goofy vibes-based assertion with no relationship to reality, and even if somehow it meant something demonstrable, it still wouldn’t serve as an argument that systems of oppression aren’t political. back to 10th grade social studies with you

-7

Anonymous #4 8h

the point of the post is that people shouldn’t have to debate whether or not someone should be equal to someone else bc of something like skin color or race or culture. why should hmm this person is black so they’re bad and fucking tax brackets fall under the same umbrella, according to your logic?

3

Anonymous #6 8h

I understand what point the graphic is *attempting* to make, but the definition of “political” objectively includes systems of oppression, full stop it’s not even cleanly separable like that because what tax bracket a person falls under is inevitably influenced by societal conditions such as, like I said, systems of oppression. i.e. people who experience marginalization tend to make less money due to systemic forces working against them

7

Anonymous #6 8h

“political issue” doesn’t just mean “something we should have to debate”. we shouldn’t have to debate the genocide in Palestine being an atrocity, but that’s still obviously A Political Issue and a vast array of different issues can fit under the umbrella of “political” without that indicating that they’re all of equal severity or carry the same level of ethical implications

0

Anonymous #6 8h

there’s a reason theoretical texts concerning systems of oppression are categorized as a form of Political Theory. taking examples from the post’s “Not Political Issues”, beyond marginalized identity: what constitutes a war crime and who wields the power to sign off on war crimes anyway = political conversation. the original nazis were a political party. I hopefully don’t need to explain how presidential abuse of power is a political issue?

0