rambling_lunatic

joined 10 months ago
[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 18 minutes ago

Conservatism is tends towards some degree of authoritarianism.

There are no policies that are uniquely conservative, or uniquely anything for that matter. When taken together, however, you can see conservativism form before your eyes.

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 0 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I did. In another comment in this thread, I put in the effort of writing a multi-paragraph comment with citations.

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 2 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

Sure thing, chief.

Neoliberal economics (low corporate taxes, weak regulations, privatization, weak welfare system, government intervention is used to facilitate further market expansion and prop up big businesses).

Large budgets for the army and the police without much external oversight, while still maintaining some level of restraint on what they can do.

Making it harder to get a visa and even harder to get a citizenship.

Hard-line stance against what are considered vices by the society the conservatives in question inhabit.

A preservation of the monarchy in countries which have them.

Incentives to give birth.

Goddamnit my face got leaked

Bro Labour has been a generic neoliberal party since the times of Tony Blair, if not earlier.

The only weakness of mini minotaurs is Tartar sauce.

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (3 children)
  1. This is a few individuals. These individuals are old and thus in the group that is most religious. In another response in this thread I linked a study by Levada showing that for most Russians, religion is either minimally important or not a part of their life at all.
  2. Fukur said we will never be free from homophobia until everyone rejects religion.
[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Where are you from?

I have not used the word "doctrine" at any point in my comment. If I had to guess, you're referring to the "old laws" from the opening paragraph. These old laws are from Tsarist times.

You contrast secular and authoritarian societies as opposites. They are not necessarily so. A society can be both.

When you ask if my approach would be easier in a secular or religious society, you are mistaken in how you construct the question. First, a secular society does not preclude religiosity among its members. Second, the optimal approach would be a pluralist one.

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

Up until fairly recently, Orthodoxy was not a strong influence on Russian life.

According to this Guardian article, British Muslims have no chill, but more than a few Muslims on the mainland are chill with gays, particularly in France.

You seem very centered on Abrahamic religions. Pretty much all Western neopagans are tolerant of homosexuals. Francis Cabral, a Jesuit missionary, recounts with disgust about how homosexual relations were tolerated by Japanese Buddhists. Hsing Yun, a Taiwanese Buddhist who died last year, specifically said that homosexuals must be tolerated. Haitian Voodoo has two deities associated with homosexuality. Various indigenous religions in America have similarly tolerant views, and the term "two-spirit" comes from them.

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Okay :)

The old homophobic laws of Russia, rooted in religion, were repealed under Lenin (Khoroshilova 2017). The reintroduction of crackdowns of homosexuals began during Stalin (ibid.). The Comintern began linking homosexuality to fascism and moral degeneracy under Stalinist leadership (Healey 2001, p. 183). Eventually, the USSR banned sodomy due to a conversation between Iagoda and Stalin, with Iagoda linking homosexuality to counterrevolution, degeneracy, corruption of the youth, and pedophilia (ibid., p. 184-187). This was then reinforced in propaganda by Gorky, who famously said "Destroy the homosexuals - Fascism will disappear" (ibid., p. 189-190).

I will skip over legal changes of most of the post-Stalinist era of the USSR, as they matter little in this context. What does matter is that the USSR continued to be strongly antitheistic and anticlerical. As a consequence, religiosity isn't intense in Russia, and many aren't religious at all (Agapeeva 2021).

Now let us look at modernity. Putin is allegedly religious, but his dislike of homosexuals is definitely secular in nature.

Analysis of his homophobic comments and the justifications of anti-gay laws reveal the same preoccupations of Stalin and Gorky. The law against being gay in public was described as preventing the propaganda of homosexuality towards children (Roberts 2013). In an interplay with nationalism, the LGBT movement is seen as an influence from the degenerate West, bent on corrupting the Russian youth. This is best seen in the designation of prominent Russian gay activists and organizations as foreign agents (Human Rights Watch 2021) or the use of the English word "gender" to describe things they despise.

Note how at no point have the protagonists of this story described homosexuality as a sin or invoked God. Indeed, the first half of this text is dedicated to Leninists.

Anecdotally, I see this in my personal life as a Russian emigre. Many people in my family hold minor homophobic views, framed typically as disgust, seen universally as Western and liberal in character. All of the Russians I have personally heard expressing a disgust or dislike of homophobia are atheists.

Now for the alternative solution:

According to Pettigrew and Tropp (2008), the three main ways of reducing prejudice against a group is through increasing understanding of that group, lessening anxiety about the group, and improving empathy towards that group, with the second two being stronger factors. Contact with the group accomplishes all three. This is supported anecdotally by tales of bigots changing their positions when they found out their own loved ones were gay.

One should note that a lack of empathy and high levels of anxiety about boogeymen are the hallmarks of a conservative worldview.

Therefore, combatting homophobia is best done through increasing visibility, which is the function of "outness" and pride parades, and through combatting conservativism and the reactionary gender roles that led to the birth of homophobic attitudes in the first place. This would in turn entail a battle against class society in general, but that is a discussion for another time.

Works Cited:

Khoroshilova, Olga. 2017. "1917 Russian Revolution: The gay community's brief window of freedom". BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41737330

Healey, Dan. 2001. "Homosexual Desire in Revolutionary Russia: The Regulation of Sexual and Gender Dissent". University of Chicago Press.

Agapeeva, Kseniya. 2021. "Religiosity During the Pandemic". Levada.ru. https://www.levada.ru/2021/04/14/religioznost-v-period-pandemii/

Roberts, Scott. 2013. "Vladimir Putin says anti-gay Russian laws are about ‘protecting children’". Pink News. https://www.thepinknews.com/2013/06/26/vladimir-putin-says-anti-gay-russian-laws-are-about-protecting-children/

Human Rights Watch. 2021. "Statement by Russian and International Human Rights Organizations in Support of Russian LGBT Rights Activists under Attack". Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/11/19/statement-russian-and-international-human-rights-organizations-support-russian-lgbt

Pettigrew, Thomas F., and Linda R. Tropp. 2008. "How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators". European Journal of Social Psychology 38 (6): 922-934. doi:10.1002/ejsp.504.

We were talking about homophobia. The concentrated effort to suppress religiosity is a whole other can of worms.

 

"Special military operations", eh?

 

Dear Americans,

I am not an American. Were the Floyd protests anywhere near as chaotic as they were portrayed in the press? I recall hearing that most protests were nonviolent, just slightly property-damaging. Thanks!

Sincerely, rambling_lunatic

 
 
 
 

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/james-herod-making-decisions-amongst-assemblies

https://libcom.org/blog/sam-sanchez/mandated-recallable-delegates-04092007

I have had thoughts akin to these articles for a while, and was glad to see that I am not alone.

The articles discuss the friction between mandated delegation and federalism. While they ultimately propose extremely similar solutions, Herod rejects the language of federalism and delegation, while Sanchez preserves it.

Thoughts?

 
 
 

 
 
view more: next ›