A recently released Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) document titled “Domestic Terrorism Symbols Guide”* links common protest symbols to “terrorism” — another marker in a common theme of conflating militant protest for social justice with deadly terrorist violence within the United States. Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Brennan Center have raised warnings about such documents, citing inadequate protections for people’s constitutional rights.
I am honestly loving your take on the subject. It actually made me think a little about what you are saying and the fact you are very respectful in your wording is wonderful.
Can you explain reactionary brainwashing of minorities a bit further?
Many far leftists I have run into have been very controversial or just plain rude so having someone speak plainly and respectfully is a nice change of pace.
I find your lack of irony refreshing, too.
I’m confused by your question though, can you clarify your choice of using the word ‘of’ in the question “brainwashing of minorities”?
It’s so rare to run into a reactionary conservative that’s so curious about left-leaning politics, thank you for your curiosity
I try to keep my perspective unbiased which is difficult because I am human after all. When conversing with someone that brings up interesting perspectives and does not devolve to name calling I try to speak with them further because those are the ones who’s reasoning skills tend to be more developed and make for better conversations over all.
From how I understood what you were saying, there is a reactionary brainwashing of sorts. Perhaps I was incorrect in my belief that you meant of minorities specifically. I may have read it incorrectly.
Thanks for acknowledging your imperfect interpretation.
I used scarequotes in the phrase you are referencing, perhaps that is where your confusion is stemming from? Brainwashing was used in your comment, I was simply making a reference to your usage.
The point: reactionary politics identifies the “outsider” as the subject of opposition. Radical leftist politics identifies oppressive systems as the subject of opposition.
Hence: the use of firearms by one group is simply not comparable to the use by the other.
Hopefully that clarifies things for you.
Yes it does, I appreciate that. Thank you.
Would you agree that reactionary politics is highly based on raised emotions or high tension to the outsider? Or perhaps a lack of understanding? Or maybe a lack of depth in sight?
When identifying an oppressive system what are the markers of such a system? What qualifies as oppressive? Is it subjective to an individual or is there a science behind it?
Reactionary politics is less a coherent ideological framework and more a reflexive rejection of social change. It’s almost by definition oriented against minority social groups.
Oppressive systems exist in all types, and there’s a great deal of study that deals with it. If you’re genuinely curious to learn more, I’m Foucault is who I am most familiar with and would recommend for anyone wanting to know more about structural analysis.
I appreciate that information. I will look into it. I appreciate your willingness to speak with me on these matters. It is always nice having civil conversations. I hope you have some wonderful days ahead and happy holidays.
Thank you both for the interesting discussion!