Add new comment

For example, rather than cutting out the word "colonization" from any sort of a radical discourse, how bout a more essentialist and poetic understanding of it? If the word is used with more precision, it has to do with a "taking over" effect, historically/politically it has to do with colonies. The U.S. colonized Iraq in very recent history, but what the U.S. did there doesn't have much to do with the historical "colonies" that the left id-pols are repeatedly referring to. As white supremacist ideology has become more de-coupled from statecraft, so does radical/political discourse need to update its own use of terminology, but people don't because it's easier to keep referring to everything in terms of slavery and native american genocide, it's very similar to goodwins law how it all plays out. Whatever pulls the heart strings, well, that's what the activists will do! Cuz they are the thing doers, they make stuff happen!