Yes. It’s good to be self-aware and honest enough to properly represent your viewpoints. Saying your views “are just common sense” or whatever is dishonest.
I was misunderstood for I find this exact wording cringe for far-left is an invention of rightwing propaganda and in itself denies description. Hence the question.
It is a topic of it’s own discussion (and in r/anarchism and other spaces it was), but with how anarchy is coupled with disaster in a state-provided vocabular, many call themselves libsoc for example, e.g. I default to socialism or socdem. It is, by some degree, muddies the water, at least for those who don’t know these things intersect with big scary words.
The difference is, probably, more nuanced. Although both are kinda off-color in a public discussion, fascism unlike anrachism is about statism, nepotism, populism, exclusion, big capital and they hide that because otherwise their goals put clear would frighten off regular folks (and not the state and capital). Anarchism isn’t spoken directly because it’s the state’s dogma that scares people, while the causes are not even close but common and even though about by them already.
I call myself libsoc to randos, but I’ll gladly call myself anarchist as well if I know they’re not afraid of the word. Reactionaries however will bend themselves backwards to pass as centrists or “concerned citizens”. They will of course go all “the time for talking is past” when cornered.
It’s just a meme, but is it right to call oneself that in your opinion?
Yes. It’s good to be self-aware and honest enough to properly represent your viewpoints. Saying your views “are just common sense” or whatever is dishonest.
What, far left?
Average. /j
yup
Do you call yourself that?
Check out my bio ;)
You, like, don’t? You use existing go-to terms.
I was misunderstood for I find this exact wording cringe for far-left is an invention of rightwing propaganda and in itself denies description. Hence the question.
The salient point is that we don’t try to hide or disguise what we actually believe
It is a topic of it’s own discussion (and in r/anarchism and other spaces it was), but with how anarchy is coupled with disaster in a state-provided vocabular, many call themselves libsoc for example, e.g. I default to socialism or socdem. It is, by some degree, muddies the water, at least for those who don’t know these things intersect with big scary words.
The difference is, probably, more nuanced. Although both are kinda off-color in a public discussion, fascism unlike anrachism is about statism, nepotism, populism, exclusion, big capital and they hide that because otherwise their goals put clear would frighten off regular folks (and not the state and capital). Anarchism isn’t spoken directly because it’s the state’s dogma that scares people, while the causes are not even close but common and even though about by them already.
I call myself libsoc to randos, but I’ll gladly call myself anarchist as well if I know they’re not afraid of the word. Reactionaries however will bend themselves backwards to pass as centrists or “concerned citizens”. They will of course go all “the time for talking is past” when cornered.
What’s the problem with that?
I was misunderstood for I find this exact wording cringe for far-left is an invention of rightwing propaganda and in itself denies description.
I think I get your point. That’s why I prefer “radical left”. It’s also used as a derogatory term, but it’s actually a quite accurate description.
And you get to be radical.
I want us to choose these labels ourselves if we aren’t to make our own or trash them altogether (:
It’s not right it’s left.
Funny.