Yes I get that. I‘m looking forward to reading the comment and article you have linked and thanks for the insightful perspective. I hope you have a lovely day
valentinesmith
interesting, thanks for writing it down like this.
If you allow the random question, is this persistence of class between communes also the reason you shifted from anarchism to Marxism? Because I think you do make a persuasive point and would like to know what changed your trajectory/mind.
Ja genau, lass sie uns noch mehr normalisieren und so tun als wenn sie nicht den ganzen Staat aushebeln wollen. Sollte man definitiv entspannt und locker mit umgehen, is ja auch voll die legitime Partei /s
Ich habs wirklich nicht vermisst Spahn‘s Ideen zu hören.
Ich denke viele Leute werden dir da unterschiedliches Feedback geben, wann sie es als rassistisch empfinden. Es ist aber ein sehr typischer Moment von Alltagsrassismus. Vor allem weil ich als Empfänger der Frage ja auch niemals wissen kann, ob du es „nicht abwertend“ meinst.
Alleine die Erfahrung immer in eine andere Schublade gesteckt zu werden, ist meist schon die Rassismus Erfahrung.
Ich finde die Frage in vielen Kontexten legitim, wenn klar ist das mein Gegenüber wirklich an mir als Person interessiert ist und nicht versucht mich schnell zuzuordnen.
Leider fühlen sich halt auch viele PoCs (mich eingeschlossen) nicht wohl in dem Therapie Setting wenn unser Gegenüber weiß ist. Ich muss halt hoffen, dass meine Erfahrungen Ernst genommen werden und ich nicht in der Behandlung selber wieder mit ner Rassismuserfahrung konfrontiert werde. Ich denke diese Spannung sorgt auch dafür, dass je nachdem wie früh oder wie die Frage gestellt wird, es auch negativ wahrgenommen wird.
In deinem Beispiel ist es zum Beispiel real ein Dialekt, der die Frage triggert und nicht die assumption: ah andere Hautfarbe du kommst von bla. Manchmal sind es solche Kleinigkeiten an denen ich es zum Beispiel festmache ob ich die Frage komisch/weird/unangenehm finde oder ob jemand einfach interessiert ist. Aber auch PoC experience is natürlich kein monolith.
I think they are thinking of the statue of liberty because she was in the news recently that the one French politician asked for her back. But yes, totally not the same statue/person referenced
I mean yes sure couples have to communicate but relationship anarchy isn’t really about who does the dishes but if a relationship includes sharing finances, includes financially / emotionally caring for each other or if it is potentially a „purely“ sexual relationship. Or just a platonic relationship.
The anarchy is not meant in the same way as its political ideology counterpart but states that you do not adhere to established rules or hierarchies within traditional relationships.
Maybe as a relationship anarchist you want someone you only fuck from time to time but you also want to share finances but you don’t want emotional sharing. This would be an uncommon constellation that could be easier to make sense of using their concepts. You could also obviously get there with other means but likewise maybe this also generally just wouldn’t work/vibe with you - which is also fine.
I really just wanted to give people the chance to engage with potential tools to talk about their relationships differently and maybe that helps.
Either way connecting and communicating with people and partners is always complicated and you have to train it and keep the communication working. So yeah it might be more complicated but maybe thats why it might work for different folks.
I‘m not that deep in relationship anarchy and in a currently monogamous queer relationship.
I do think the difference lies in the traditionality you have touched upon in that you and your partner have a script / rough idea that has/is guiding aspects of your relationship and that relationship anarchist would want to explicitly frame/structure themselves in most of the relationships they engage in. This is more in the direction of: my romantic partner is also a partner I share finances with or plan to cohabitate with or think about offspring with etc.
I don’t think there has to be an inherent value judgment in this. Different people prefer different things so I think it always works out and either way you have to communicate with your partner in what works in your relationship. (Who does what housework, what do esch of you want out of the relationship, etc.)
I mean you can be heavily invested in a relationship as a relationship anarchist.
The anarchy part is that you do not take for granted how a relationship should be structured and that you are open to have very unique and consensually agreed upon aspects in your relationship.
If you want commitment and reliability and loyalty you can for sure ask for it and name it as something that is essential for your relationship and if they do not give it to you it might just be best to split ways.
Of course I understand that there will be people who weaponise relationship anarchy to just do whatever the fuck they want to and rationalise/justify their behaviour but I think the concept isn’t condemnable per sé. There are also people who weaponise therapy speak to gaslight and I wouldn’t want to generally talk bad about therapy.
Just wanted to give a counterpoint because I think engaging with relationship anarchy and for example looking at a smorgasbord can even help monogamous people to figure out what is important to them and what they want.
I think your comment reads quite combative.
I think with the context of the Meme, yes there are some people who call you and you just know its gonna be a huge annoying phone call that you should just avoid and text the person after because some people just wanna talk your ears off.
I dunno if we have to do the: omg millenials/gen alpha is too phone anxious thing.
And sure its called a mobile phone, but as an argument that feels somewhat pedantic nowadays. Primarily its a mobile internet connected computer nowadays I would say. I use the camera/ texting/ social media functions way more than the real phone capabilities. Maybe thats different for you but I don’t think it’s uncommon that its one of the lesser used functions.
Sure if people are too anxious to pick up the phone and it negatively impacts their life they should get help for it. I don’t think we should shame them in that case though. It feels to me like shaming depressed people when they cannot find the energy to shower, which I would similarly feel is inadequate input.
Ich hätte jetzt nicht erwartet, dass die Wirtschaftswoche einen so langen scharfen und vorwerfenden Artikel gegen Merz rausbringen würde :D
Vor allem die Vorwürfe und Verfehlungen der letzten Wochen nochmal so einzuarbeiten.
Ich denke aber auch, dass ich nicht sehe, dass Merz so gut ist im Taktieren oder generell in der Lage wirklich gute Koalitionen zu bilden geschweige denn vorausschauend zu planen oder Probleme wirklich anzugehen.
Aber das fühle ich bei der ganzen CxU schon nicht von daher ist es vielleicht auch nicht sonderlich nennenswert als Einwurf. Es werden/bleiben wilde Zeiten :(
Thanks for sharing, it really did feel like a sketch out of the movie.
I guess I would also focus on the dog and the niece when they are more approachable and not as combative and so many people in your family are changing quite profoundly
I hope you have a lovely day without phone calls!
I mean I can kinda see the point of using kings instead of oligarchy. But using oligarchy is a bigger stab at the billionaires in the room as well so I still think it captures a bigger part of the problem.
Otherwise I think I‘m down for her saying that she wants to get stuff done but I mean is she? I‘m totally uninformed but being highly ignorant it reads a bit like a whatever statement. Like you mentioning it is also just a performative act so yeah shrug
I do think the Dems have a problem in establishing words and totally losing the plot or narrative control over their words. Woke totally slipped into an insult and I don‘t think that was an unavoidable thing. I think if Dems would go for more public social policies they would get a lot of the votes back they have been shedding but I think their oligarchic interests are in their way. Like Harris could’ve just campaigned on getting SOME change done and I think more people could’ve warmed up to her but that particular ship has sailed.
Thanks for linking the article and centring the discussion.