>>24849>Being asked, gently, mind you, to listen first
For starters, it's not "being asked to listen", its demanding to take these people's claims as truth regardless of any evidence to the contrary, purely on the basis of the demographic they belong to- material analysis is rejected in favor of "lived experiences", and this is ONLY done to the benefit of predetermined groups. Again, what makes the "lived experiences" of such people any more "valid" than those of the most deranged /pol/yp? Why should I take one racist piece of shit seriously but not another, simply because you redefined the term to apply to one but not the other (despite the fact that any actual coherent argument against racism only applies to the conventional definition)?
Even if you take this poststructuralist nonsense seriously, who gets to determine which "lived experience" to listen to when they contradict eachother? Why is it invariably the radlibs that are favored over the Marxists, even when they're from the same demographic? Could it possibly have to do with the fact that the establishment favors such nonsense specifically because it ISN'T a threat to them in any meaningful way, and in fact helps push the general population to the right?>I daresay you cunts are “triggered.”>What are these dumb brocialists upset about? Don't they know this isn't racism, its "I Can't Believe It's Not Racism"?
How would you feel about a situation where the demographics are reversed, where the groups currently being elevated by such frameworks were the ones being asked to "keep quiet and be silent spectators"?