I don't look at Novara enough to know if they've *never* mentioned the eugenicist slaughter in care homes, but I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case at all.
CW: sexual assault, disableism - this is beyond the pale trust me
Quote from Singer, just so everyone knows we're being fair to his "argument", which amounts to "he might have enjoyed it".
Bastani "challenges" him by saying he might devalue human life and particularly disabled people but not that he literally advocates eugenics toward the end of the interview (47:30). Bastani then allows him to pretty much monologue.
The video has over 12k views and only 53 down votes atm on YT. These people are promoting this shit.
@AaronBastani: why did you choose to platform Peter "murdering disabled children and raping disabled adults is a-ok" Singer then completely fail to challenge him? I can only assume you agree with him
I notice that it is primarily disabled activists angry about this or bothering to comment on it and that itself is also stunning
I think what really needs to be grasped here is that @novaramedia platformed a eugenicist advocate for disabled murder and rape *in context* of a eugenics campaign run by the British government.
This stuff is back as a real force. Silence is complicity.
There are people actually defending this holy shit
Still no word from Novara or Aaron
Look, we're past the point of plausible deniability. Aaron platformed a eugenicist, clearly knew about this and downplayed Singer's politics, and then Novara blocked the words "disabled" and "Singer" in stream chat.
Novara, or at least Bastani, are clearly pro-eugenics.
In that, they're following a long line of eugenics on both ythe right and left. This has always been a political stance that has found an audience among even communists (although I must stress, the social democrats are more consistently awful about it).
Today, it is clearly gathering steam again - the right putting it into practice (care) and the social democrats bringing into acceptable public discussion (Novara) again.
If we are going to fight this, then we cannot retreat, we cannot accept anything so simple as an apology.
What we must insist upon is a position of advance. We must demand disabled liberation, beginning with a socialist care service - that is, disabled people's ownership of the care and medical services they require, and the abolition of the care home, the founding of community care.
If a eugenicist is in your organisation, make sure they are expelled.
If a eugenicist is given a platform for propaganda, then unmask them and set out clearly our demands.
Do not bow to this tendency. Do not tolerate it at all. There can be no inch given.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I don't particularly care about an apology, although I suppose it's noteworthy that this statement doesn't contain one. What's worse is that they again skirt the question of what Peter Singer actually advocates - which is eugenics.
This being missing allows this to proceed as if they've just "upset" disabled people, rather than platforming an advocate of a political philosophy which calls for the annihilation of disabled people. Platforming a eugenicist is not a fucking "mistake".
Like, it's astonishing anyone would need to "reach out to disabled activists" to know that eugenics is a reactionary political position.
I'd also be wary of that "we acknowledge this was good faith" because it's building to a position where they say continued criticism is not.
The people making money on $GME are not the proletariat. The people making the money on $GME are, at best, the petit-bourgeoisie and labour aristocracy, but mostly just Blackrock. markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/bl…
"Revolutionary praxis" is when you enrich one of the biggest investment firms on earth further. The richer BlackRock gets, the more revolutionary it is.
No, I will not let you enjoy imagining that class struggle is an investment portfolio
If your response to Britain reaching 100,000 COVID deaths is to wax lyrical about Corbyn and to insist everything would be fine if we had "just locked down soon enough" then you aren't analysing the pandemic, you're canvassing for the Labour Party.
What would resigning do aside from put a different Conservative eugenicist in power or lead to the election of a man who has agreed everything that the present eugenicist asked for?
Pretty definite stance here from Pompeo. Gonna get wild soon if it's gonna get wild.
The imagery of having Mike "regime change" Pompeo say this is quite stark.
Idk if it's just what 4 years of every potential bourgeois opposition being utterly useless and incapable has done to my brain, but I always get the feeling Trump is gonna be able to pull something off when people laugh and say he couldn't possibly.
Biden's political project is to attempt to not resolve any contradiction in any direction for as long as he can. A hollowed out interregnum, with continuously escalating police, far-right and imperialist violence and no vision but the grey of quietly stated margins.
The violence of US imperialism - even its fascist "excesses" - will continue unabated. Its police departments will riot when they please. Fascist terrorism is already normalised to the point of being an electoral stance capable of winning around half the electorate.
What remains is a split bourgeoisie atop a decaying empire that has no route to stop its fall. Trump forced confrontations over these contradictions; Biden's entire job is to prevent "embarrasment" - that is to find what bourgeois unity can be built among the blood of decay.
Trump's lame duck Presidency (the bit after a new President is elected) kicks off with a purge of the Defence Secretary. Always a good sign that wannabe dictators totally don't do.
Replaced with the recently appointed and now former head of counterterrorism, Christopher Miller, a “yes man” in Esper’s words.
Look, I don’t think this is coup territory or anything yet, but man, that is a *posture*.