/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

It's been established as part of imageboard culture for such a long time that I don't see how it could be any other way.

The problem with us using words like these so often (as a normal part of speaking) is that it gives the wrong impression. To the average outsider it makes us appear not just politically incorrect, but right wing. It makes it seem like bigotry is tolerated here, and in order for people to realize that's not what's going on, somebody has to give them a convoluted explanation about the history of using these terms. Now maybe you think that because the current left is swallowed by wokeness, that this is a good thing, that we should have a place where we can say whatever we want (a view I sympathize with), but is that all we are? Don't we close ourselves off to growing our numbers (especially people who are far outside imageboard culture, like the typical proletarian or typical academic)? Sure some people like that might stick around, but do we really want to be applying a filter like this to the site's userbase? It's not like we're on 8chan anymore, where we can expect anybody blowing through to already have been filtered by imageboard culture.

OP is a faggot.

there's no such thing as imageboard culture lol
most of the stuff people attach to 4chan is just niche memes that became arbitrarily hegemonized after a while and for no particular reason and now a bunch of people mindlessly repost them
it's just dumb mythology at the end of the day

>>684431
People mindlessly repeating memes is basically just normal human culture tbh

For a marxist imageboard people LOVE following online traditions here.

We absolutely should continue to use -fag, not just to be "edgy" and "politically incorrect" but to reclaim the word from people who use it as a slur. Words aren't magical incantations defined for all time by some predetermined process. They mean whatever you want them to mean. Using -fag in the way that imageboards do kills a few birds with one stone.

Firstly it filters out the sensitive crybabies who care more about political correctness than political power (this is a whole topic unto itself frankly).
Secondly, as I already said, it reclaims the word from being a slur and thus helps the process of disempowering bigots by turning it into a general term not tied to LGBT people specifically.
Third, following from the second point above, and through diligent explanation of our use of the word to newcomers our use of "-fag" serves as an object lesson in social constructivism and the power that we have to determine social reality. This is important because it can be used to break normies out of the capitalist realism kind of mindset, that things are the way they are and we can do nothing about them. Teaching people that it's possible to shake up and redefine social reality is in fact quite a useful tool in opening the door to class consciousness.

The issue isn't that using the word is bad or confusing, but that perhaps we don't use it responsibly. Are you here merely to consume le funny lefty memes or do you want /leftypol/ to actually be good for something, like effective propaganda and education?

🆄🆈🅶🅷🆄🆁Faggot
🆄🆈🅶🅷🆄🆁 🆄🆈🅶🅷🆄🆁
🆄🆈🅶🅷🆄🆁 🆄🆈🅶🅷🆄🆁

Op is a fag that loves trans Jewish Arab ketchup crusted 🆄🆈🅶🅷🆄🆁 dicks

>>684411
Textboards (4-ch, BaI, etc.) renounced saying -fag already before 2010 not because it was offensive, but because it was associated to chan culture and it attracted the wrong kind of retards.

>>684411
It had been a hallowed tradition since the ancient days, heretic.

i don't know why this is on leftypol and not meta

>>684411
>>684442
>>684447
lol look at this place, it's like half /pol/ converts and the ones that aren't are people who hate 4chan but can't stop acting like they're still posting there. even the side boards are embarrassingly trying to imitate 4chan and then acting offended when you tell them to fuck off because it's "board culture" guys!

remember what marx said about simple commodity production and markets inevitably leading to capitalism when denouncing dumb ideologies like market socialism? well something similar happens when you're still acting like a channer in 2021+1 and then end up wondering wow how did we end up turning into a shithole, if only there was something we could've done about it, some sort of example we could learn from to know what to avoid

>>684448
2007 isn't ancient, and even if it was, who cares. as an oldfag i find a lot of shit i used to do on 4chan/w4ch in the early 2000s fucking embarrassing today and i'd bet my ass that most people still doing it today are actually children who only found out about it via kym or maybe ED

>>684411
Personally I think it's a product of a bygone era, and this thread just shows that leftypol cares more about "returning to tradishun" as opposed to realising the dialectic and moving on. It had its time to shine but as culture develops so must we. F*g is just outdated 2017 lingo. True, in the chan-language sense it was defined as someone who was obnoxious. But now that we live in an era of post-irony it doesn't really apply.

>>684444
This, but the question is do we still use it in a derogatory term, in which case, why bother? Poe's law will just kick in and we'll be back at square one. Or do we use it in a positive light.
>Ur a f*g.
Yes, and?

And hell, there's an element of leftist shitposting that we can harness from turning f*g into a compliment.
http://www.critical-theory.com/13-deleuze-guattari-part-ii/

>Because Deleuze felt that philosophy teachers were “looked upon as court jesters,” he decided to play the part. “When he felt tired, he played the musical saw for his students.”Deleuze’s over-the-top style caused one student to yell “fag!” during class, to which Deleuze responded, “Yes, and so?”

>>684457
man i really need to get around to reading d&g one of these days

I really, really like it that a leftist board becomes literally reactionary (in both senses of the word) whenever "chan culture" is brought up.

>>684454
2007 was 15 years ago.

>>684460
why? they're charlatans

>>684470
calm down peterson

>>684470
Not an argument.

>>684472
i ain't a conservative, foucault is my favourite theorist besides marx himself
>>684474
why do i need to make an argument

>>684411
>It is widely adopted on imageboards and off them
It's so fucking pathetic when I see people acting on social media like they're on 4chan, i.e. using the funny arrows, calling others "anon", etc.

>>684470
>>684475
You might be thinking of Derrida. Deleuze and Guattari had a pretty consistent framework under the unnecessarily obscure language they used, and admittedly only did it because according to them it's a must in French academia.

>>684478
they had a consistent framework and not much else tbh

We aren't liberals.

>>684488
We aren't /pol/ or 4chan, either.

i can't tell if these are trollposts or serious anymore

>>684499
yes and the reasoning for that is so much more than language, if you think otherwise then honestly you shouldn't be on the internet let alone here

>>684509
>the reasoning for that is so much more than language
Not really. You see the same behaviors from those shitholes being replicated here and the massive drop in quality that comes with it. Your posts are a good example of this.
This thread is just a bunch of people trying very hard to fit in and get internet cool points.

>>684512
so /pol/ which posts holocaust denial shit all the time is the same as /leftypol/

its all in jest i dont hate gay people or anything and i don't think most gays care about it either, at a certain point you don't even register that the fag you say is the same as the slur

I hate reaction images.

>>684517
We have threads where people have no idea of the terms they're using all the time. Threads loving jails, hating "lumpen", fetishizing work, unironic support for the death penalty, larping with historical figures and grayscale pictures. It might not be the majority but it's fairly obvious there's a sizeable population here that are just /pol/tards who recently converted to leftism.

Check the side boards. There's a bunch of threads (at least the ones that haven't been deleted yet) that are exactly what you'd see on 4chan today and their respective OPs getting mad because you aren't willing to tolerate the same generic bait threads being made here, a place that supposedly is its own new thing. Also /siberia/ isn't a leftist /b/, it's just a generic /b/ at this point and not the original cool one from Futaba or the first year of 4chan.

This thread itself has a lot of users saying something is good because, well, it's the way it's always been done! It's (internet) tradition! If you disagree you're a newfag, a liberal, whatever else; I will not go back to 4chan but you need to go back to twitter, reddit, etc, etc.

>>684523
Gay people might be okay with using "fag" themselves but I seriously doubt they're fine with straight people doing the same. Not that there's any way to check that on an anonymous imageboards of all places, anyway.

>>684532
>Not that there's any way to check that on an anonymous imageboards of all places, anyway.

exactly, we can literally be anyone of any sort of race or gender and theres no real way you can track any sort of ethnicity or sexuality here unless you came right out and said it, we're basically a shapeless, unformed mass we have no identity and honestly when you have no identity and you're surrounded by people with no identity then slurs kinda lose all meaning

>>684551
the posts are still shit

>>684552
thats fine to think that but its also fine for me to call you a faggot

>>684551
>>684552
Slurs might lose all meaning but they do not become any less annoying. I give leftypol one year before we become just like 4chan and every 5 posts are about "transhumanists" in some way or another.

>>684554
people have been saying that since the start of the site i remember people on /r/socialism saying that this place would become a haven for third positionism back in 2015

>>684555
sorry not the site, the board

>>684553
deep

>>684475
you made a claim that they're Charlatans. Back it with evidence.

>>684555
I was only talking about the obsession with trans people on imageboards, which is fairly recent in the grand scheme of their history.
I do feel leftypol has become way too much like 4chan recently, not in its ideology but in post quality, anyway.

>>684564
nah

>>684565
kinda funny that we went from posters wanting to be anime girls, moot's "i wish to be the little girl", etc in the 2000s to calling everyone a transhumanist in the 2010s onwards

also "no girls on the internet' evolved to calling anyone claiming to be a woman a transexual too

the real clown world were imageboards themselves

>>684565
the obsession with "queers" has been around since even before gamergate i think. at least around the tumblr raids. trnnyhate is just a recent manifestation of long-held open reactionary cultural views beyond just "language"

>>684565
if "post quality" is a problem then try to actually improve it yourself, invite some friends to the site you think would contribute meaningfully, banning naughty words isn't gonna really help you in any way

>>684454
>lol look at this place, it's like half /pol/ converts

i mean the site is called leftypol.org, where do you think most of the original userbase came from?

>>684575
>if "post quality" is a problem then try to actually improve it yourself
Another funny thing to say on a leftist imageboard. Solve structural problems by changing your attitude! As impotent as thinking proprietary software is going to be defeated if only everyone just switched to Linux.

>>684576
/lit/?

I have the 'fag' pass, grew up being called it, and I'm more than fine with it. It keeps out radlibs, and creates a sense of community and camaraderie. I find it charming.
It's in the same vein of multiracial friend groups throwing around every racial slur in the book. The crassness creates an atmosphere of mutual respect.
I truly believe in that method of disarming through desensitization. Whether it's to your taste or not - it works.

Thanks to the efforts of shitlibs to make this phenomena taboo, I will redouble my efforts to say faggot as much as humanly possible to drive out the likes of you.

>>684554
>I give leftypol one year before we become just like 4chan and every 5 posts are about "transhumanists" in some way or another
I've dipped in here on and off since the 8ch days and people were saying this even back then. I wouldn't worry about it.
We are intersectional, antiracist red communists. We might say offensive things, but I think most people here sincerely want true equality.

>>684576
most of the original userbase is on twitter and fbi.gov these days, definitely not here

>>684576
All around the internet, actually, even reddit after the reddit catgirl purges.

Perhaps there is no "right" or "wrong" answer to the question. Perhaps there is only a choice, with different consequences depending on the path you choose. Maybe what should be done is to examine how the situation plays out and consider if changing it produces an alternative outcome that is preferable or not?

>>684576
/pol/ wasn't always nazis, it used to be all kinds of people. Lolberts were the biggest group which is why Ron Paul was meme'd. So not "/pol/ converts" but a lot of /pol/ users who left after /pol/ got overrun with nazis.

>>684580
maybe the e-celebs

>>684574
At least back then they tried to mask it under a pretense of only hating those darned "SJWs" who get offended by everything and not just gays in general, or maybe I'm misremembering. It definitely played a part, though, you're right.

>>684582
>/pol/ wasn't always nazis
Holy fuck no. Even when it was called /n/ it was deleted exactly because it had way too many unironic nazis and racists posting in it.

>Lolberts were the biggest group
Yeah and I wonder what happened to all those libertarians a decade later.
Hint: "2016."

>>684582
>>684585
/pol/ was deleted i think a total of 3 times because of the same reason each time: stormfront aka neonazis lol

>>684589
>>684585
yeah stormfront eventually took over the board each time, but there were always plenty of people posting there who were just interested in current events. The problem is once the stromfags finally took control of the board (particularly on 8chan where you had create-your-own-boards), they used moderation to effectively stop any other kind of politics from existing. That's how /leftypol/ split off. There were a lot of /lit/ users too, which is part of why the board used to be a lot heavier on theory.

>>684593
8chan's /pol/ would just outright ban you for even slightly left wing beliefs, also if you were right wing but against trump for whatever reason

4chan is kind of just dead. i remember in the early 2010s it was at least a little lively. now it's just wojak and pepe and chad spam and barely restrained cultural reaction and nothing else because any poster of worth was scared away or just moved on

>>684411
Being able to speak freely without libs policing your language is the only thing that makes this site better than other online lefty forums.

It is the lynchpin that prevents this place from degenerating into reddit.

Once you start demanding that one word be removed from our vocabulary, sooner or later it'll end with 5 autistic transhumanists demanding we jerk off to them or be banned. It happens every time and its enough to make even the most committed communist wonder why the fuck we even bother anymore.

>>684606
t. 8gag

>>684606
>Being able to speak freely without libs policing your language is the only thing that makes this site better than other online lefty forums.
Being able to speak freely is when you adhere to pre-2010 4chan speaking conventions, and the more you pretend you're an oldfag, the freer your speech is.

>>684604
Going by numbers alone it's very much alive, but like you said these days most threads are exactly the same. I'm fucking bitter that there's much bigger chances of discovering cool new niche stuff on fucking twitter than on most imageboards today.

>>684606
This has to be bait.

>>684604
https://4stats.io/
4chan is having a resurgence in posting.

>>684606
Actually it's moderation that prevents this place from turning into yet another failed 4chan clone. We'd had more than enough "4chan… but with free speech!" attempts cleverly named [random number]chan that end up turning into exactly the same 5 S(hitposts)PH cemeteries one month in.

>>684606
Lol shut up faggot.
>It is the lynchpin that prevents this place from degenerating into reddit.
Ah yes, not being allowed to say le edgy no-no words is the number one bad thing about reddit, and not the fact that literally half the IPs are from Elgin Air Force Base, no not at all.

The -fag suffix stopped being about actual fags a long time ago, now it's just an imageboard-y way to call someone, an almost endearing way.

It's ok for me, a literal reappropiation, also this thread should be on /siberia/

>>684631
Also the karma system that automatically hides your posts from everyone if enough people downvote you.

>>684638
True, that part is so weird.

Speaking of which, I dislike that autist in chanspeak is now yet another term for calling someone stupid instead of using it for actual autists or people exhibiting autistic traits (like not understanding sarcasm).

>>684626
It's as awful as always. I'm 100% sure that almost everyone there is under 20. It's an extremely toxic place and unpleasant place since 2016 (even for 4chan standards) and the good oldfags stopped posting like a decade ago.

>>684626
it's p much stagnant long term, save for a few blue boards that jumped up since the pandemic

>>684604
This too, 4chan was seen as a "haven of creativity" in 2009-2010 when it was cool and funny in small doses, it was shit, but the kind of shit that you just kept returning to because it was so fucking stupid and funny and always active with new retarded shit coming out.

Ever since 2016 happened and pepe got the /pol/ treatment almost every meme is a rehash of pepe or wojak, or some /pol/ shit like super straight that is way too political to be funny after a month, the only purpose of their newest memes is to trigger liberals.

I miss 2010's 4chan, I miss the Fox News Van, longcat and I miss ZONE, it was truly a unique place.

>>684641
we shouldn't say any sort of word thats a slur as its demeaning, "stupid" is hurtful and has been used to harm those who are mentally disabled

>>684659
>4chan was seen as a "haven of creativity" in 2009-2010
I don't want to be That Guy but the stuff you seem to be talking about is 2005-2006, like that flash video from zone-tan.

>>684661
it's been used to demean anyone who makes bad decisions in their life. You can't just ban everything offensive.

>>684661
Well here we got an autist who is incapable of understanding context. :^)

>>684666
no but we can ban anything that can be used to harm other leftists, neurodivergent people, black people, indigenous people, disabled people and other disenfranchised groups in discussions

>>684670
You forgot to mention otherkin people to make your joke more heccin epic.

>>684673
this isn't a joke, language hurts people and it needs to be controlled in order to ensure that everyone has a safe and pleasant time using this site

>>684411
Samefag
Namefag
You're a fag
I'm a fag
Everyone's a fag
Fag

>>684674
XD

>>684674
God not every negro is a sensitive nancy boy.

>>684691
true but quite a few are harmed by language, it also reinforces settler colonial as well as fascist norms/ideas of people whenever harmful language (like the words you just used right now)

>>684674
No thanks fam.

The flaw with this logic is that wether or not we "should" change something is inconsequential to the image board community. The thing about imageboards is they allow us to, more or less, get away with whatever we want. I can say uyghur or faggot or whatever. Regardless if they are ethical to say or not. I more or less can with little to no consequences.

My point being is that this is the natural state that it appears to have taken over the years linguistically and the only way any change is going to happen is going to be homogeneous and natural like that. People can bitch about it all they want but there is no greater imageboard controlling speech like Facebook or reddit. It just isn't feasible.

>>684661
I'm sorry this isn't r/socalism you are allowed to call people stupid here.

>>684707
I have special permission from the world federation of gays, blacks, women and retards

>>684723
blacks is a slur, fuck off

>>684411
Using fag and uygha as suffixes and replacements for the word "friend", would unironically rob these words of their power. Fight racism, sexism, and homophobia by calling your friends fag and uygha.

>>684728
*gets beaten up in the streets*

>>684727
t. reddit.

>>684733
I'm not white, my uygha. People of my race use the word with impunity.

>>684728
>Using fag and uygha as suffixes and replacements for the word "friend", would unironically rob these words of their power. Fight racism, sexism, and homophobia by calling your friends fag and uygha.
>>684738
Are you black or are you a latino uygha sayer or something?

Tradition can be sublated and is not necessarily bad. "Faggot"'s connotation, like many other words, transforms over time. And in context it can be used as both an insult and badge of pride? It didn't originally use to be a slur against homosexual persons after all, unlike other slurs, for example racial ones?

>>684742
I am not black, but I am not white, and nobody thinks it's weird when I say it. I have gotten my white friends to say it. I also like to say the word "cunt". My rich whitey friend did not say that word because he thought it sounded "gross," and his mom is a huge feminist. I did call his ex a bitch-ass cunt, and he laughed, so we're making progress. Now say it. Are you my uygha or not?

>>684727
my apologies sir, i meant to write people of chocolate (poc)

>>684778
But what about white chocolate?

as a nonbinary bisexual amab, i have the right to both the trдппy word, and the faggot word. arguably, i can also say uyghur because i'm a slav
kys fag op

>>684445
yes.

>Imageboards have a very long history of sticking "-fag" as a suffix on something to refer to certain kinds of people: drawfag, samefag, stormfag, gayfag, etc. It's very much a part of our tradition, but sometimes traditions change. Is this a convention that we should follow as an imageboard?

-transhumanist is already slowly replacing -fag though.

OP is a cracker faggot.

>What is the function of using -fag or other similar terms?
Keeps people like you away.

>>684659
-> >>684665
This.
The early '10s was drying up, by 2014 the originality of Pepe/Wojaks was ramping up and the normalization of the site hurt it's creativity and isolated incubation (it was entering the mainstream, to a degree) and by 2016 normalfag Facebook highschoolers were all talking about Pepes and Wojaks.

>>684881
>>684659
>>684665
wish i was there to see the golden era tbdesu

>>684454
>i find a lot of shit i used to do on 4chan/w4ch in the early 2000s fucking embarrassing today
No, complete opposite.
I stumble across some ancient piece of internet culture, and realize that yeah it was fucking funny.
Everything new sucks and isn't funny (because of the homogenized corporate environment in which it arrises)

>>684454
>only found out about it via kym or maybe ED
What's kym and ED?

>>684914
Know Your Meme
Encyclopedia Dramatica

>>684914
Know your meme and Encyclopedia dramatica.

KYM are the coprophagias of the very bottom of the internet food-chain. They consume pure waste.
And yet … and yet … they are sick of wojak.

>>684411
It’s quite simple. “-fag”, not “fag” or “faggot”.

TL;DR

OP is a faggot

>>684411
I don't see it much anywhere anymore honestly, even on the less-/pol/ parts of 4chan. It's probably just a case of an older archaic word of the chan and chan-adjacent sites falling out of use without the same cultural inputs that used to make them popular, like how flamewar fell out of use, how glowie came to replace party van, ect. sometimes I see "frien" or some variation used in the same way, but normally its just absent (ie "artfag" to just "artist"). The only place it really persists is in purposefully derogatory language a la "newfag" or just generally calling people faggots, which is probably a symptom of the rightwards turn chans experienced some years ago.

personally I don't use it anymore, not consciously but just because it feels out-of-place and archaic anymore. like if I called someone that was trolling "flamebait" or something.

>>684468
>I really, really like it that a leftist board becomes literally reactionary (in both senses of the word) whenever "chan culture" is brought up.
this.

>>684411
It's a good thing.

>>684411
by using the "-fag" suffix for "person", we're killing the meaning as a slur.
that's how you create inclusive language.

>>684579
>We are intersectional
That word is taken by neoliberal corporate shills, it means support for war and austerity while parading meaningless token minorities in the media, and we certainly do not support that. We are not intersectional.

>>685035 (me)
also, lets question the etymological use of the suffix -fag anymore. and not in an abstract "it gets rid of le normies" way but actually what it stood for as a term in its heyday.

at the time, 4chan was a haven for a variety of social outcasts that by their very nature, refused to adhere to the unfair social norms society tried to set upon them. while "political incorrectness" likes to harken back to this time period, the political reality of early 4chan was far more grillpilled, with a fairly large contingent of posters saying that politics was a sideshow or to some degree that both parties would enact the same policies. there wasn't much political affiliation to early chans, and where there was it was usually to some degree obscure but progressive (pro-FOSS, anti-corporate hacktivism, pro-inclusive of LGBT and minorities under the banner of anonymous, ect). likewise, the left of its time was at its infancy and had very little sway over 4chan, so the idea of neutering the power of slurs through their re-appropriation (ironically, an idea itself popularized by the "SJW" camp of gamergate) is also unlikely. ergo, any political bent is at best a minority of the contributing factors which made it popular.

so, lets instead look at the long-mythologized "board culture", or as it were back in the day, the site culture. 4chan, as an offshoot of SomethingAwful and a den of the socially outcast, had a lot of people of different origins and persuasions within it, mostly congealing around the common hobbies of socializing and laughing at memes. the average poster saw 4chan as a way to escape from their day-to-day lives, and as such an escape from a lot of the identities which tended to quantify what they were meant to be in society. this is where you saw the main reason why anonymity was such a treasured feature of the site - in an era where your competing websites were largely blogs and extensions of irl socializing such as myspace, it was very common to appear on the internet by your name, or at the very least continue to identify your screen name with your real life identity's qualities. even if you removed yourself from your real name, you still identified as "who you are" with what you wrote and viewed. while this may seem similar to the modern day 4chan, when you look at /pol/ you can see even as they identify as anonymous they very often relate themselves by their irl qualities - their race, their social standing, ect - showing how they betray the founding ideals they claim to uphold. but I digress, the main point of this is that anonymity was largely a reaction to the trend of the real beginning to encroach on the internet.

so, you have this writhing mass of unknowable anons, interacting with memes and banter, creating OC and whatnot. that you have no solid identity does not mean there is no sense of identity to the place, so instead you have this collective identity of anonymous. increasingly, you have people who understand their interactions with each other to be filtered through this kind of wider conception - at the first threshold, the wider idea of anonymous, at another threshold, the thread they are in and how you perceive it, at another, maybe identify them via the images they post, what memes they use, ect. from this wider quantification, you also begin to see memes emerge, like OP never delivering on what he made the thread around, (x) communities being associated with (y) memes, so on. and the most pertinent, the idea that every anon is a fag. why? because if we're honest, most people remember their negate interactions, and chans are rife with them. without the inhibition of your name getting associated with those conflicts, people are free to go and start them wherever they please. so of course, you start calling them "faggot". why faggot? probably just that it was the slur of the day which had popularity - mind a lot of this was in a pre-gay marriage legal era, the big push of the reactionaries was keeping it that way, so anti-gay slurs became the incendiary word of choice for edgy teenagers. of course for the chans of their time, "ironic use" of incendiary language for the purposes of breaking social norms was pretty common, so it became popularized. pretty soon the connotation of anon = faggot was made, and as such any kind of anon of any note, from OP to OC makers, got -fag appended to them. there was never really any greater sense of "oh this will keep the normies out" - the reputation of 4chan was always believed to be something that would keep normies out back in the day, so this kind of sentiment is a modern fabrication. rather it was just an emergent linguistic trend that came out of its mass-popularity for deriding anons, in the same way that the trollface and the idea of "trolling" overtook flamebait and flamewars.

so, do these same trends really apply today? faggot is far from the most oft used incendiary language, now-a-days as you see with /pol/ their minds are utterly transfixed on the trans. but of course because of the self-seriousness of /pol/ and the use of their insults, they would never go to the leap of associating all anons as trans in the same way old 4chan did with fag. what about on /leftypol/? using the post search function, and excluding today for hopefully obvious reasons, we can see that it has maybe 5-20 uses per day in various forms, which is by far an ultra-minority of posts going by PPH. so I can firmly feel vindicated in my belief of it being a receding trend to call people "fag", regardless of intent. of course in all boards, across all chans, you will still have some people using it as a "legacy word" of sorts, but without the same conditions to reproduce its popularity, it will always be a dwindling trend.

so, is there any kind of modern replacement which can be made to take the same place as -fag while reflecting the modern condition of chans? I cannot think of any off the top of my head, but I'd be interested in hearing the response of you anons.

>>685075
This.

>>685079
>pro-inclusive of LGBT and minorities under the banner of anonymous
The Banner of anonymous was about hacktivism, basically an anonymous collective of hackers poking powerful corporations by defacing their websites or doing other stuff that would cause them embarrassment.

It had nothing to do with sex politics. Why the fuck are you doing cringe historical revisionism.

>>685092
hacktivism emerged after 4chan did anon, like several years after the fact lmao
"Anonymous" the hacking collective was a co-optation of the already-existing idea of the anonymous collection of 4chan, which it was outlived by even!

It always has been quite depraved, though, 4chan. It's time to admit it so that this romantic illusion can be dispelled and people can mature a little. The infantile, kiddy rebellion of the petty bourgeois teenager of libertarian persuasion transforms into the vicious cruelty of the chinlet chinletd.

>>685121
>The infantile, kiddy rebellion of the petty bourgeois teenager of libertarian persuasion transforms into the vicious cruelty of the chinlet chinletd.
Very, very true.

>>685121
I tend to agree, and find the fetishization of "chan culture" kinda weird. /leftypol/ was always pretty divergent from the idea of chan culture overall, both denouncing its rightwards turn and its grillpilled-to-liberal origins.

>>684919
>internet food-chain
Haha someone should make an attempt at this food-chain. It's easy to determine the absolute bottom, but who would be the higher ups and where would /leftypol/ fall under?

>>684411
it's a convention which should generally be eschewed as part of a conscious distancing from other imageboards. on arriving on /leftypol/ the 4chan user should be made aware that they're not in kansas anymore. any argument about whether the term is offensive or not is irrelevant when compared to asking directly: what's the social signal we're sending here? 4chan-derived or independently-developed imageboard culture.

(but really it's not used enough here to be relevant. so the main practical suggestion is: when you see a bad post which also uses the -fag suffix, take note that you can probably have fun by insulting the poster for using it in addition to dismantling their argument.)

>>684444
>Firstly it filters out the sensitive crybabies who care more about political correctness than political power (this is a whole topic unto itself frankly).
the same is true for much of the instinct towards keeping it - to appeal to oversensitive imageboard crybabies.
as /leftypol/ is irrelevant, the idea we're reclaiming it is laughable. (especially when contrasted with people who call themselves fags - they're used in a different kind of way.)
the third case is the best argument, but doesn't come up that often, and when it does will also often be accompanied by bad arguments. anyone who goes "um, fag is a slur??" is going to be told to kill themselves for being a newfag about 20 times before someone comes along and possibly makes the "so you see, it's actually socially constructed" argument.

>>684713
the real debate is whether to conceptualize /leftypol/, as you do, as just one part of an overarching community based only on their sharing of a common user interface.
put another way: it's not a matter of trying to make 4chan not say -fag because saying -fag is wrong so much as a matter of not saying -fag to make clear that this isn't 4chan. (which is the justification typically used by other imageboards that discourage saying -fag)

>>685075
biggest faggot ITT

>>685079
>so, is there any kind of modern replacement which can be made to take the same place as -fag while reflecting the modern condition of chans?
the unsatisfying drop-in replacement would be "friend", which has the fun combination of annoying kids who wish they were on /b/ before it was just porn while also being a reference to decade+ old wordfilters.

which, for such a long post, is a rather rude short answer. but that's the nature of the internet today, that's why it makes a good replacement - it's not well thought out, rooted in deep conditions, etc, it's trivial content slotted in because it'll provoke a response. it would be excessive to offer much development beyond that.

>>685338
the top would be an abyssal puke pool of twitter-reddit-discord interaction with disconcertingly frequent chunks of ex-somethingawful users floating in the broth

>>685403
>the top would be an abyssal puke pool of twitter-reddit-discord interaction with disconcertingly frequent chunks of ex-somethingawful users floating in the broth
This is the best what the internet has to offer? Really?

>>685435
it's not the best, but it eats everyone else. the humans of the food chain.

>>685403
i think calling someone fren instead of fag as a way to piss off image board retards is like the best and only answer as to why you should do it. So much so that I will start doing it fren.

>>684606
/thread

>>684430
This.

>>684532
>Also /siberia/ isn't a leftist /b/, it's just a generic /b/
The (underage) posters there - and in all the sideboards, not just /siberia/ - are very insistent on the boards not being about leftism if you bring this up.

I mean what's the point then? Sometimes I wonder if posters and the staff see leftypol as a place for lefty wankery or rather they see it as their online club house.

>>685403
>any argument about whether the term is offensive or not is irrelevant when compared to asking directly: what's the social signal we're sending here? 4chan-derived or independently-developed imageboard culture.
Several posts have made this same argument ITT but everyone who is for it ignores it and keeps pretending it's about the former point.

>>685079
>so, is there any kind of modern replacement which can be made to take the same place as -fag while reflecting the modern condition of chans?
There doesn't need to be one. Not fag, not anon, not comrade. I do not care about board culture anymore.

>Is this a convention that we should follow as an imageboard?
Im pretty sure most people here already dont do this anymore
I dont care about what language people use, the board is pretty insular and lefties already have an internal drive to change their language and bahaviour if its obviously damaging in wider normal society. See the wordfilter filtering uyghur to uyghur.
Be the change you want to see. People have been saying "drawfriend" for years at this point on here.

>>685972
ive been had by the eternal wisdom of the wordfilter

I don't think "fag" has generally referred to a gay person in like… 20 years. It's used in that fashion sometimes, but those instances are pretty few and far between. On imageboards it's usually used to describe a person in a specific context (ex: drawfag being an artist) or someone's that's whiny and annoying.

also this >>684430

>>685403
>the same is true for much of the instinct towards keeping it - to appeal to oversensitive imageboard crybabies.
This is a false equivalence. Crybabies are the people who complain about others' speech. This is not the same as simply speaking, and the instinct "towards keeping it", i.e. to speak as you're used to, is simply not comparable to changing your ways to appease the aforementioned crybabies.

In a sane word, some posters will use the "-fag" suffix, some will use "-friend" (just like some may use "-man", and others "-person") and neither will derail away from meaningful topics into 133-reply-long discussions (134 now, I guess) bitching about the other.

And the benefit of filtering the wreckers who would start those discussions should be obvious, the only consideration should be whether it's practical. (It ultimately is, but obviously not because it acts as some kind of warding spell keeping them away. Chans are open to everyone, and particularly sensitive to spamming, the only thing stopping anyone from flooding you with complaints is their free time. It's practical because giving up isn't. The game of language policing is iterated. Yielding only shows the tactic is effective and encourages further attempts. What discourages them is not any particular term, but rather never ever budging when they swarm to complain and "correct" you.)

>>684411
Shut the fuck up glowie faggot

>>686523
> i.e. to speak as you're used to, is simply not comparable to changing your ways to appease the aforementioned crybabies.
except of course that it is, that when you're told that you speak in a way that reveals you don't fit in, that you're tumblr or twitter or reddit or whatever, you're being chastised for speaking as you're used to.

your conception of the entire situation is wrongheaded. like many others you're mentally trapped by imagining that the problem people have with "-fag" is that "fag" is offensive, and that an outside group of people are trying to move words around because they're offended. a position that's wrong, but worse is embarrassingly dated (so very, very, pre-2015. remember SRS?) in its conception of swarms of people being out there to "get" you and your in-group signals. nobody is afraid of the word fag. you aren't "filtering wreckers", you're signalling. it's all signalling. you'll get up on the pulpit in defence of speaking naturally for the fagfags, but will you do it for a casual "problematic"? i have my doubts - that's an outgroup signal.

>>685132
>/leftypol/ was always pretty divergent from the idea of chan culture overall, both denouncing its rightwards turn and its grillpilled-to-liberal origins.
lol what? people here will die on the hill for their right to say uyghur and fag. just look at the replies in this thread, full of people desperately wanting to look cool on the internet. god forbid those evil /pol/yps think we're SJWs! they'll make fun of us and memes about us! :(

>>686523
>the instinct "towards keeping it", i.e. to speak as you're used to
<going to the supermarket
>"thanks cashierfag!"
<someone cuts you off in traffic
>"watch where you're going uyghur!"
<playing a new game with friends
>"haha, I'm such a newfag at this! you'll have to teach me the rules."
nobody talks in real life like they do on the internet. in fact, when I see anons write uyghuruyghuruyghur over and over, or fagfagfag, that just makes me think they're a repressed bitch in real life, and once they get on the internet they can "feel free" and be the I-don't-give-a-fuck badass that they wished they were.

>>686540
I mean, yes, if some idiot makes a 138 (139 now) reply thread about whether we should be collectively speaking in a particular way, I might in fact drive by and tell him to drop that shit.

You are making the mistake of assuming I came here to argue about the "fag", when I'm actually here to argue about meta-level principles.

(And assuming that people somehow stopped pushing newer and newer "inclusive" terminology is increasingly deluded. It's not just that you must be completely detached from reality not to encounter it. It's also that if you genuinely are, it's precisely because you spend your time in places that once refused to budge and were left alone, for the price of dropping off the face of polite society.

>>686547
Guess what, uygha, we're on the internet, not on the street or supermarket. (Situational) code-switching is perfectly normal human behavior, and chans in particular always strongly warned about and discouraged exporting their shit elsewhere.

>they're a repressed bitch in real life, and once they get on the internet they can "feel free"
[serious bearded man] Yes.

>>686570
my fag you need to relax. pedantically: "should we be speaking in a particular way?" is only one of many questions posed by the OP, and by far the least interesting one.
meta level principles are always derived from an attempt to shape immediate realities.
people everywhere are always doing everything, what you've got is a preoccupation that can't help but let itself slip out, looking at the vast infinity of the internet and picking out the pieces of statistical noise that frighten you. here's a thought: what about "the phenomenon of developing uninclusive terminology, from OP is a faggot to YWNBAW." (in quotation marks because it'd make a great book title.)

>code-switching is perfectly normal human behavior, and chans in particular always strongly warned about and discouraged exporting their shit elsewhere.
then i put this to you: surely /leftypol/ as a non-chan, should help *chans maintain their policy of not exporting their shit elsewhere. if people can be expected code-switch between 4chan and real life, why not between /leftypol/ and real life, and between /leftypol/ and 4chan?
(and so the real dispute: "is /leftypol/ a chan?" pokes its head out of the water, the signal aspect starts flashing rapidly from red to green to red to green, from full to empty to full to empty, the AWS bell screaming, the driver's hands unable to hit the fast moving override button.)

4chan went down the shitter because of mods who would constantly excuse straight up garbage posts because apparently it was supposed to be "culture"
chans are the only forums where even basic moderation is seen as a fucking crime. why? who knows

what a worthless thread. if we had serious moderation it would be either purged or moved to the trash board in an instant

>>686577
>looking at the vast infinity of the internet
Ah, obviously. This may come as a surprise to you, but some people are also interacting with others in real life. (Okay, that wasn't entirely accurate, I was being facetious for the purpose of sarcasm. What I am specifically thinking of here is left-wing orgs - not the only place one can encounter the problem, to be sure, but the one closest to my heart and this site's theme - and I will readily admit it's questionable whether they currently constitute real life or some kind of long-winded LARP. What I contend is that language-policing freaks are one of the strongest forces pushing them towards being the latter.)

>what about "the phenomenon of developing uninclusive terminology
Note my scare quotes around "inclusive", though. Chan terminology is inherently inclusive, both in intention and practice. It excludes noone but the easily offended, and even for them, there's a "paradox of tolerance"-style argument to be made about how it's a good thing, actually.

>if people can be expected code-switch between 4chan and real life, why not between /leftypol/ and real life, and between /leftypol/ and 4chan?
Real life behavior has real life consequences, conformism is a way to avoid them, you don't have to agree with what people conform to to respect their right to do so, as well as encourage them to do so for their own good.
Chans? Much of their point is enabling communication that's free from reputational constraints. There's a value in that which I would encourage everyone to try to preserve.

>is /leftypol/ a chan?
I mean, I look at the site's credits and notice it's running on a software called "vichan" and "lainchan". Arguing it's "not a chan" would probably require some cultural tribalism bullshitting about uniqueness of the userbase, because functionally, it self-evidently is one.

>>686669
In all of my time offline the only noteworthy form of language policing I can say I've encountered is children being chastised for swearing. Plenty of time spent agonizing over specific choices in wording and the like, but never any "please don't say 'X'…" type thing.
The reason orgs are LARP-fests isn't because of linguistic pedants. Insofar as any exist, it's likely downstream of the fact that the party form is irrelevant to present circumstances. Given the present state of working class organisation, a party can only take two forms: "serious" but likely doomed electoralism, or LARPing. Once you set aside the possibility to make immediate change and move into the world of setting out "demands" that nobody has any reason to listen to, you're already playing an elf mage. If someone succeeds in making everyone in the org refer to the colour of the sky as Green, they'll be the most effective activist in the entire org because they'll actually have changed how people act. An org that doesn't act on the world as a canvas for the obsessive to act upon. A vulnerability that an org that acts on the world doesn't have because it's preoccupied with planning and conducting actual tasks. (But this isn't unique to "language policing" - time spent arguing over language use in an org is wasted in much the same way as time wasted arguing over theory.)
If much of this sounds vague to the point of insanity it's because i'm assuming some prior familiarity with the "Deliver the Goods!" thread, the tl;dr of which for our purposes might well be "Parties LARP, Tenants Unions don't".)

>Chan terminology is inherently inclusive, both in intention and practice
I am deeply impressed by the ability to so elegantly weave the evidence that this is not the case - that it's clearly designed to exclude somebody, and that this is a good thing - into evidence that it is in-fact the case.
But the same can be done for the flip side: constraining language choices is inherently inclusive - the only people it excludes from the in-group are those you'd want to exclude anyway.
The in-group can be defined by pronouncing "shibboleth" properly, or by pronouncing it improperly. Both have the exact same form: they draw a line, they put some people on one side of it and some people on the other side of it. My side, your side. The outgroup, the ingroup.
(And indeed, in an org arguing over theory, over language, over any petty little thing, you often find that it's really a personal dispute hiding behind words. The party splits because it contains an ingroup and an outgroup, rather than the party being the ingroup and the rest of the world being the outgroup…)

>Chans? Much of their point is enabling communication that's free from reputational constraints
they fail very badly at this, but in a way that isn't immediately obvious. you can't get rid of the basic human desire, the basic monkey desire, probably even the basic dog desire to know who's in the ingroup and who's in the outgroup. there's always going to be a reddit spacing newfag. past posts may not follow you like future posts as they would under a username, people may not know your face, but they'll still find a way to draw lines and they'll often still put two and two together to identify recurring obsessives.
(and, although reputation doesn't apply so strongly, people often act as though it does - still have to get the last word, still have to get the (you)s, still have to show i'm not mad… even if the nature of the medium itself lets people play with these tendencies.)

>I mean, I look at the site's credits and notice it's running on a software called "vichan" and "lainchan". Arguing it's "not a chan" would probably require some cultural tribalism bullshitting about uniqueness of the userbase, because functionally, it self-evidently is one.
my position: the name of the software is not particularly relevant and there's value in a distinction between imageboards (a style of website) and *chans (denoting a specific cultural and userbase crossover). now, you can argue back and forth about the terminology used, but that's the best way to do it in two words rather than going "futaba style imageboards with 4chan-derived culture" and "futaba style imageboards with culture independent of 4chan" or some other monstrosity.
and for the site to be culturally independent enough for that distinction to matter the userbase doesn't have to be unique, provided it code switches or otherwise acts differently the thing being measured there - culture - changes. even if you want to say "well, /leftypol/ isn't that different" it certainly applies to other imageboards.

>>684426
>It makes it seem like bigotry is tolerated here
It clearly is with that example alone.

>Now maybe you think that because the current left is swallowed by wokeness, that this is a good thing, that we should have a place where we can say whatever we want
Very sound reasoning from someone who definitely doesn't tolerate bigotry.

yes and if you're feelings are hurt so easy get off the internet

>>686774
*your

>>686791
fuck off grammar fag

>>684411
>>684411
No one forces posters to say -fag so just chill

>>686704
>Plenty of time spent agonizing over specific choices in wording and the like, but never any "please don't say 'X'…" type thing.
This is not my experience, which does in fact include plenty of literal "please don't say 'X'"'s. But more generally, it includes way too much bickering about what constitutes "inclusive" language, and way too little about what constitutes an effective message.
I mean, I agree with most of what you say, assuming your "party vs. tenants union" is a mental shortcut for "no practical goals vs. practical goals". But it doesn't counter what I'm saying unless you're specifically claiming that an org will turn inwards if and only if it lacks a practical goal. My take is that it will turn inwards because specific people are interested in it turning inwards and, if successful, force the org to drop practical goals and pursue internal purity fantasies.
(As I mentioned above, it's not just leftist orgs, they're just a specific case of a general tendency of aspiring individuals to use sectarian mobilization and purity tests as an effective way of advancing their position within hierarchies. Which often does work for individuals, but always damages the structures they advance within. In your take, a practical success would breed more practical success, in mine, it would attract careerists who proceed to undermine it for personal gain. The latter just honestly seems way more congruent with reality.)

>The in-group can be defined by pronouncing "shibboleth" properly, or by pronouncing it improperly.
That's not what the dichotomy is. The dichotomy is between adhering to shibboleths and not adhering to them. Those adopting the latter usually understand the implication of this "excluding" the people who require adherence to shibboleths, but it's just not the same kind of exclusion that's implied by the active policing of the in-group necessary to enforce said adherence.
(I mean, ostensibly-racist /pol/ having statistically more melanin than any random "inclusive" baizuo group should be enough to demonstrate the inherent practical difference between the two approaches.)

>they fail very badly at this
I think it's individual people who fail at this. Surely, those individuals' problems often accumulated into a return to shibboleth-adherence in practice. Whether it's instinctive or learned, I wouldn't know. What I do know that once you manage to unlearn it, it truly makes you freer, so I'm personally not giving it up.

>there's value in a distinction between imageboards (a style of website) and *chans (denoting a specific cultural and userbase crossover)
Okay, that's a fair distinction that just wasn't clear with your word choice.
I would still say the functional characteristics of imageboards as a method of communication are ultimately more relevant to this kind of discussion than specifics of culture (in a classic base vs. superstructure way).

>>684411
Typical liberal obsession with signifiers over content. On the other hand whole populations of eastern countries receive the most primitive vitriol on leftypol, not even affording these countries any analysis unlike the West, and any attempt at discussion is immediately derailed by said vitriol. This is not just imageboard linguistics, like your trivial issue, but /pol/ ideology as well.

>>686830
>populations of eastern countries receive the most primitive vitriol on leftypol
not true

I just use the word friend
samefriend
drawfriend

>>687099
based and friendpilled

>>687136
What's this you've said to me, my good friend? Ill have you know I graduated top of my class in conflict resolution, and Ive been involved in numerous friendly discussions, and I have over 300 confirmed friends. I am trained in polite discussions and I'm the top mediator in the entire neighborhood. You are worth more to me than just another target. I hope we will come to have a friendship never before seen on this Earth. Don't you think you might be hurting someone's feelings saying that over the internet? Think about it, my friend. As we speak I am contacting my good friends across the USA and your P.O. box is being traced right now so you better prepare for the greeting cards, friend. The greeting cards that help you with your hate. You should look forward to it, friend. I can be anywhere, anytime for you, and I can calm you in over seven hundred ways, and that's just with my chess set. Not only am I extensively trained in conflict resolution, but I have access to the entire group of my friends and I will use them to their full extent to start our new friendship. If only you could have known what kindness and love your little comment was about to bring you, maybe you would have reached out sooner. But you couldn't, you didn't, and now we get to start a new friendship, you unique person. I will give you gifts and you might have a hard time keeping up. You're finally living, friend.

>>687099
So you're a friendfag?

>>687212
friendfriend, friend

y'all fig newtons

>>687326
I didn't know Steve Crowder visited this site. Nice.

>>685338
People used to make these all the time, but they stopped because there isn't really a directional flow anymore. Shit just swills around.

The prevailing opinion is:
>The internet is five websites, each consisting of screenshots of text from the other four
And that comes from a twitter screencap which makes twitter the defacto top site.

>>684411
chans were already shit, but they took a nosedive once the tumblr raids/GG shit happened. It ruined the entire internet

>>684454
fag