Forward, comrade!

“The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism of the weapon, material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses.”

  • 309 Posts
  • 905 Comments
Joined 6 年前
cake
Cake day: 2020年1月7日

help-circle






  • It surely is not the case for someone going vegan or eating fast food. The only legitimate reasons to not eat meat or fast food is your own individual health, because your individual choices will only affect your individual outcomes. It’s idealist to believe choosing a different source of consumption will have an impact over the industry. For instance, McDonald’s main source of income is not even selling food, it’s rent and royalties from franchises all over the world.

    The liberal part of this idea is restricting political protest or activity to what you consume, basically transforming action into another individual form of consumerism.


  • Boycotting is a liberal form of struggle, if you can even call it that. Because it believes that your individual choice will have an impact on the outcome of a company.

    Going vegan won’t stop the meat industry from murdering millions of animals. You deciding you won’t eat from fast food companies will not affect their profits, because they exploit people internationally, and it’s unfeasible to organize a boycott in this scale.





  • I agree with you, pedophiles need treatment. It’s obvious their sexual attraction is not under their conscious control, since the condemnation and judgement of pedophiles is so big, no one would consciously choose to be a pedophile. There are studies which links sexual attraction to children to sexual abuse in childhood too.

    I disagree however with watering down, or diluting that with a lighter term, MAP, because it’s inadvertently promoting pedophilia through euphemism. Whether they are a rapist or not, a person can be a pedophile, and that’s it, we need to accept that situation. But the act itself, to have sexual attraction to children, is a dangerous thing, because we know children cannot truly consent.

    So the negative charge that comes with the term pedophilia did not come out of the blue, it’s a historical development. Pederasts in Greece certainly did not have this taboo over the word describing them. Creating a “neutral” word only removes this historical meaning describing the act. So the question is, should we use euphemisms for pedophilia?