• 18 Posts
  • 255 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: January 14th, 2024

help-circle


  • cw: white person’s take on racism and race relations

    you’re right that complaints about anti-white racism are usually just racists making noise, and also that systemic racism against whites doesn’t really exist because the social power dynamic in place favors white people. a white person still however might experience interpersonal racism, and while this too needs to be examined and understood in the context of the prevailing white-preferential power dynamic, it isn’t not racism just because it’s not institutional.

    i want to be explicit and clear that i am not attempting to equate the odd moment of relatively tame discrimination experienced here and there by the average white person to the adversity experienced by non-white people every fucking day of their lives without cessation.

    rather i’m just very dissatisfied with the notion that aggression against someone based on their racial characteristics somehow ever isn’t racism. worse, the implication that there must be a systemic element present for something to be “racism” leads to the conclusion that a black man who virulently hates latinos cannot be a racist, because black people do not have institutional power over latinos - which is very obviously nonsense.

    as near as i can tell this idea derives from the old slogan “racism equals prejudice plus power” which is fine as shorthand for the idea that institutional racism, like, fucking exists, but lately seems to have been reduced to a kind of thought-terminating cliche that gets hauled out and spat in peoples faces as a “fuck you anyway” in lieu of seizing on a teachable moment.

    which of these would you respond better to? “abuse against you doesn’t count because of your inherent unchangeable physical characteristics”, or “yeah that really sucks that that happened to you, feels shitty doesn’t it? now imagine that’s your entire life everywhere you go.” one is just going to make a person harden up and double down. the other might actually get someone thinking about shit, and that’s how we win, by invoking empathy in hearts and minds instead of making everything into adversarial bullshit when it doesn’t need to be.

    it’s inaccurate, adds to the noise, sows division, and does less than nothing to change anyone’s mind.

    that said op meme is hilarious and dude needs to chill tf out. also that podcast is really good.


  • that idea came from carl jung, and was largely informed by applying ideas from chinese texts on internal alchemy translated by hellmut wilhelm, during a time when it was all the rage for rich western fucks to go appropriating and syncretizing a bunch of shit none of them understood, often toward the end of servicing a proto-eugenicist-at-best narrative about atlantis or hyperborea or whatever the fuck.

    so like my number one is that occultism of that era and the modern pop occultism that derives from it (9/10ths of your “witchy” friend’s shelf full of pristine lewellyn titles) tends to be gravely mis- or malinformed at best. neo-hermeticism in general tends to be rife with this type of stuff, because theosophists and thelemites alike had a gigantic orientalism-boner for egypt.

    number two is that chinese internal alchemy and chinese chemical alchemy (for lack of better terms, i’m atrocious with chinese) were/are two entirely separate disciplines, the former of which is still practiced and both of which are documented enough that it is clear they are not metaphors for each other. jung was essentially comparing apples to oranges in order to understand schnauzers.

    number three is that the number one bit of advice about studying taoism that i get from chinese speakers is to avoid the wilhelm translation of basically anything, so like even the already unrelated ideas that jung was injecting where they don’t belong are likely innaccurate to the actual tradition.

    number four is that i’m currently studying medieval and reniassance magic and the notion of alchemy as a metaphor for self-therapy seems pretty foreign, and the notion of transmuting metals is not only clearly very literal but a consequence of the prevailing model of physics of the day.

    number five is that “late-victorian-to-early-modern-era scientist thought [insert unrelated thing] was an ancient metaphor for the field he pioneered” is such obvious bullshit and jung’s tenuous association says much more about jung and the prevailing cultural perception of ancient peoples in jung’s time than it does about either alchemy or psychology imo.

    tl;dr medieval alchemists were clearly proto-chemists, alchemy as a metaphor for spiritual or psychological development is a novel creation of one or more coked out victorians because it made them horny to connect their pet ideas to the wisdom of the ancients or whatever.










  • comparing internet comments when americans can’t locate a 2000 sq mile city-state with an unpronounceable name on a map in central eastern europe versus when europeans fail to understand the scale of a damn continent on the same map is some wild contrast ngl.

    if you don’t realize that a country which spans most of a major continent (which you have seen depicted next to your own continent on every world map for your entire life) is not the same size as spain or france, then the issue is much deeper than nationality.