If we come from a capitalist perspective, perhaps, we’ll see opportunism. If we help ourselves and those around us see through the pseudo darwinist propaganda of “inherent competitiveness and greed” of humans, we’ll be able to keep developing and implementing education that is aimed at self-realisation of human potential; and we’ll most likely see a decline in “laziness” and self-service. Speaking of anecdotal evidence, do you see yourself willing to give freely to those close to you, and what do you expect in return? I personally want to give to my fellow humans, and I have known many individuals who are alike.

Yes, and what about building a society in which everyone contributes according to ability and receives according to needs?

Interesting. I’ve had this poster saved for future reference, heh. I think we come from very different perspectives on this issue. I think ostracism from either side should not take place on an individual basis - individual representatives of marginalized groups should not be isolated from a movement, and their struggles should be acknowledged as a part of the collective struggle. “Identity politics” is a tactic that distracts our attention from our main goals of the universal liberation. Commodification of everything is absolutely happening; and we must address this through education - informal, if that’s all we have. We do have to be careful not to push folks away. Also, I do not see any necessity in moralising people’s sexual preferences. Monogamy is not in any form advanced or a sign of a highly developed society.

I’m going to offer a few of my personal thoughts, not based on anything in particular. It appears to me that you are pathologizing sexuality, not only homosexuality or queerness, all of it. Human sexual desire is based on seeking out pleasure. Humans like to experience pleasure, and are going to be seeking it out, no matter what the status quo is. “Unusual” sexual relationships must have existed always. There are traces of it everywhere - I am not just talking about the Hellenistic stereotypes; but the fact that people like sex, and have always looked for it; and human sexuality is often fluid - you may develop intimate relationships with whoever. Gender is questioned nowadays, and for a good reason - have you ever loved a friend, and have you ever had sex with someone you don’t care about? Love and sex have been perverted by monotheism, desire to control and manipulate (yes, some “traditional” values were a necessity at the time of their emergence, but what necessitates prejudice now?). Childhood trauma and religious upbringing may lead certain individuals to develop “unhealthy” sexual preferences (due to the taboo; the forbidden fruit effect). But the question is, what is “inherently” harmful about homosexual relationships? The statistics may be skewed because we have many, MANY victims of trauma and abuse go without help and develop their own coping mechanisms that may or may not be connected to sexuality. The expression argument you offered seem to fall in the same category - people may develop fetishes due to various factors (religious trauma included). I don’t think you realise how much harm monotheistic religious indoctrination has brought upon the entire world. Religion goes hand in hand with patriarchy and “religious ethics” go very well with capitalist propaganda of the myth of meritocracy and the just world hypothesis. I am also noticing you going the “good old days” route; and seeing religion favourably. Monotheistic religions HAVE SMASHED people’s bonds with each other and nature. Religion has contributed LARGELY to the perversion of human desire. F. Engels’ The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State gives a curious glimpse at the possible lack of “traditional” family in the past (the anthropological data has dated, of course; I’m not sure what the modern finds can point to). Overall, the fight for ALL of the oppressed people has to be our goal; yes, the performative imperialist pretence at diversity and inclusivity is a spectacle to divide us further; but we must cast aside individual views of ethics and strive for liberation of all.

Sure.

Please join. The splace is not meant for too much discussion of the aspects that may be controversial. We would like to keep the space open as long as we are not bombarded with bad tankie jokes (good ones are ok).

I only use it jokingly and when among good comrades.

Indeed. Guilt and shame for no reason are what I have been experiencing for years. Feeling guilty and ashamed for existing is what monotheistic religions perpetuate, and what I have actively been fighting against.

Thank you for your input and formatting suggestions!

Thanks! My second shot of the vaccine is coming soon ಥ‿ಥ

Not any time soon, our cases are rising daily ಥ_ಥ

Kazakhstan:)

Thank you for a great reminder, comrade!

The mountains. The trees planted by our great grandparents. The endless steppes. Squirrels that are fat and brave because everyone loves them and feeds them. Fresh produce, local and from our neighbors.

Also, the so called inclusivity campaigns aren’t promoting the rights of the oppressed per se; they more often than not appear to be a theatrical attempt to lure in more confused support for the status quo. The divine right for a self-centred existence - well said 😂

Apple products.

This is dark satire. The theme is xenophobia.

The text has been corrected: https://write.as/peace-labor-may/a-faceless-enemy-dy69

Not yet :) I was planning to catch up on reading in spring, so, hopefully, soon.

This. It’s easy to slip into the just world hypothesis with many self-help methods. Whilst taking responsibility for one’s own choices and actions is necessary, it is also crucial to examine the outside world through a lens of class antagonism. My firm belief is that no lasting change to one’s individual struggles is possible without the major shift in the social paradigm. It is especially important for the marginalized to recognize - the “pull yourself up by bootstraps” narrative needs to die. Nothing has helped me more than the good old dialectical materialism in terms of self-improvement and meaningful change to my day-to-day life. But Marx and Lenin are not very marketable to the self-help industry, are they?