Add new comment

Yeah, I'm awful. I'm Hitler. Because I disagree with you. That's how it works, right?

The whole punching up/down thing is dubious, because what's up and what's down? Would you seriously say that an impoverished white working-class man shooting a black female billionaire politician, even if he's a Nazi, is "hitting down" rather than "hitting up"? Clearly she's higher up the social ladder all-axes-considered than he is and he is therefore "hitting up". If his action is objectionable then it's for some reason other than "up/down". Is a white middle-class woman allowed to defend herself if a black working-class man tries to rape her, or is that "hitting down"? Are we meant to support ISIS because they're "hitting-up" against the European Christian West and the Alawi-minority Syrian elite? I could carry on with this forever. Fuck, even Hitler thought he was "hitting up" against the "elite" and the foreign powers dominating Germany, so I could flip the fash-jacketing right back atcha.

In my view I'm hitting-up not down by attacking idpols because I'm a marginalised person driven out of most anarchist and left spaces by a bunch of middle-class college kids, most of them white, who hold neoliberal-adjacent positions and are utterly unprepared to make any allowance for difference. But it's justified because of ideology, not because it's "hitting-up". Idpol is an authoritarian ideology which is corrosive of the struggle to destroy authority. And I constantly see idpol middle-class academics, lawyers and journalists hitting-down on white working-class men, people with so-called mental health problems, and members of their own demographics who disagree with them, without regard for anything but ideology; they only use the up/down criterion to crybully. I've seen a white middle-class American idpol tell a working-class Mexican Marxist to go kill themselves, with a picture of a noose, and none of the other idpols seemed to mind.

Safe space policies are based on behaviorist psychology which is a WHITE AMERICAN ideology based on separation of mind from body and the illusion of perfect rational self-control, plus the misreading of emotion/affect as strategic choice. They have the effect of requiring perfect self-control and ideological conformity in a manner which excludes most of the working-class, the abuse-traumatised and others with psychological problems. In practice they are "unsafe" and manipulated by a minority of rhetorically-skilled wannabe dictators who keep everyone else in a state of fear lest they be called-out, viciously abused, then banned. These mini-tyrants will of course feel "safer" from the existential threat they feel when anyone challenges their power.

Also please note that I avoid giving any details about my race, sexuality, gender or gender identity, class, disability status, etc., partly because it's irrelevant to my arguments (I'm not an idpol), but also for security reasons and to not give opponents ways to bully me. This often leads to assumptions I *must* be a white, cishet, middle-class, non-disabled man... but you have precisely zero proof for this. You're stereotyping as usual.