1182

submitted 7 months ago by RothyBuyak@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

103 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] BaumGeist@lemmy.ml 82 points 7 months ago

Has any online leftist ever talked to an ancap? It's not that they suppirt oppression outright, just that they don't care if it doesn't affect them. That's why their ideology makes sense: they don't consider that they'd be the proles, they'd be the capitalists.

Coincidentally, that's why most authoritarians support their brand of oppression: in their specific genre, they're the winners and the losers can go fuck themselves. And no, they don't consider that they're just paving the way to their ineviable overthrow

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 25 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It’s not that they suppirt oppression outright, just that they don’t care if it doesn’t affect them

So they support oppression outright.
"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor"

(never mind that they openly support capitalism, and capitalism by design and necessity is oppressive, so either way, you're not making the point you think you're making, or worse, are being not even neutral in the face of "an"caps ambitions of oppression, but actively arguing in its defence)

[-] BaumGeist@lemmy.ml 6 points 7 months ago

the point you think you’re making

There's a difference between wanting to opress people and wanting something that oppresses people for its other effects. The forner is unrelatable and outright evil, the latter is something most people do without even realizing it

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 4 points 7 months ago

Intent to support and support in effect are separate things. You can do one without the other. When you conflate the two, it muddies the water (although it is still good to point out that accidentally supporting something is still support)