Thread by @cricketcrocker

More white feminism on display here, it’s not lost on me that it calls for “intersectionality”

Gonna do another thread, but basically? It’s very disingenuous to say the Proud Boys movement is“racially flexible, with women at the bottom of the hierarchy”

https://twitter.com/annolivarius/status/1052135141697617920

That account has a smaller reach than I do, but I don’t hesitate to hold a lawyer responsible for her obviously self-serving and inaccurate summary of a political phenomenon.

Get with the program, Counsel.

The thread that she is boosting specifies that the Proud Boys worldview is one with white men at the top, but happy to work with anyone who isn't a white man, as long as that person is willing to occupy their 'rightful' place in the future fascist hierarchy.

Let's be clear--PB aren't merely White Nationalist. They're more flexible than Nazis, Classic Flavor, because they're more willing to work with those they're eventually planning to enslave or exterminate.

A thing that the original thread didn't specify and was evidently missed by My Learned Friend was that in spite of the fact that women aren't allowed to be Proud Boys (big surprise), a key tenet of White Nationalism is one that places white women in a place of power and safety.

Limited power, it's true. And abrogated safety.

But that's not nearly the same, not even CLOSE to the same, as putting women categorically at the bottom of the hierarchy.

Proud Boys do NO want to enslave or exterminate their women, oh no.

They want to return them to a place of gendered power. Cis straight white women who want to have babies and raise large, disciplined families? Who want to support their husband's values and thus be treated like princesses in their own homes?

They will get everything they want.

And I agree, that's very different than liberation.

White women, you should probably be against this.

But as a demographic in what is currently the United States, you're definitely not. How do I know this? Because you vote for Trump, you stan Hillary, and you believe Kavanaugh.

So, will white women have incomplete freedom and agency in the Proud Boys' ideal world?

Absolutely.

Is that the same as having women be "firmly at the bottom of the hierarchy"?

Of course it's not.

The bottom of the hierarchy will be Black, Indigenous, and other women of color. The bottom of the hierarchy will be Black, Indigenous, and other men of color.

If they (we) are allowed to continue existing.

Trans people, disabled people, they will not even have that option.

The bottom of the hierarchy will be the people who are forced to help raise and clean up after your enormous broods of perfect blond children.

The bottom of the hierarchy will be the people you force to do wageless labor to support your unrealistic standard of living.

The bottom of the hierarchy will be the people who are dispatched as cannon fodder to fight your husbands' little wars.

The bottom of the hierarchy will be the people whose land you have stolen and whose bones, customs, and cultures you use as toys.

My Learned Friend has missed the main point of the original thread and of the existing threat to what we'll charitably call liberal democracy.

It isn't that "women" (by which white women almost always mean "white women") will be at the bottom of the hierarchy.

What is it, then?

It's that Proud Boys are smart enough to disguise their racism as things that white people cannot readily identify as such.

It's that fascism is a thing that is easier to market, when you make a little asterisk next to your main tenets and only later reveal your full plan.

Counsel might think that this is conjuring or slippery slope. Some of you may think that as well, so:

There is no way to have a racially intersectional fascism, folks. That's not how the current power dynamics (which will shape future power dynamics) function.

Sure, it may start out as a focus on militarization. It may start out as a multiethnic coalition in favor of hypernationalism and toxic masculinity.

We all know that's not where it will end.

How do we know this?

Because once there is an established hierarchy, once it is reasonably stable or enforceable?

Then the people on top start taking more from everyone else. They believe it's their right. And short of a blood-soaked revolution, they will not be stopped.

Racism won't stop if white men have more power.

The global genocide of indigenous people will be speeded on its way by the rise of militarized white men governments.

Oh, and those other "not white" hyper-military nations?

Will not last long.

In closing, I'll draw your attention to Counsel's own summary of the hierarchy she fears.

She fears the hierarchy when women are at the bottom.

That is the hierarchy against which she wishes to mobilize.

But as we all know, it can only be this simple after the eradication of BIPOC.

So what My Learned Friend is doing, in spite of her nod to intersectionality, is ignoring the clearly stated fact of planned racial hierarchy.

And focusing only on what can affect white women.

Thank you for your attention.

My tip jar is in my bio, and anything you put into it goes to help a young single Indigenous mom.