So the rule of law and democratic process is a “platitude” in your mind? A functional democratic government does nothing more to maintain order and safety than anarchy?
I dunno, I think maybe you’re taking a lot for granted here. Society is not held together by violence, it’s held together by people agreeing to believe in some basic uniting principles. When you erode people’s faith in that agreement (the goal of the far right) is when it stops being effective, but that doesn’t mean it’s a platitude.
Black Americans didn’t secure their rights by getting into gun fights. They did it by strategically getting their case before the courts, using things like freedom riders to create a case that had to be heard. It would not have mattered if they showed up at the voting booth weilding a gun, that would not have secured their right to vote, in fact it would’ve been used as an excuse to further hinder their rights.
Likewise, the fundemental right to safety is not secured when you have to walk around with a gun to be safe. Straight cis people do not need to do that, neither should anyone else.
The rule of law is largely a fucking joke that serves the powerful and protects the status quo. There may be times when it serves a purpose that’s actually positive, but it’s not going to protect you in the face of a dangerous reality.
If you think the law can bodily protect you, go wander into traffic in a crosswalk without looking. The law should prevent any vehicles from hitting you, no?
The fact that murdering trans women is generally illegal isn’t sufficient to protect us when someone tries to kill us. We have to be ready for that ourselves.
The fact that murdering trans women is generally illegal isn’t sufficient to protect us when someone tries to kill us.
I never said protections were sufficient, I’m saying it’s not some fundemental given of the universe that trans people have to live in a society where they carry a gun everywhere they go. We know this is true because there are places where trans people are more safe than others, where they have more rights than other places. It’s an ideological problem, not one of violence. Trans people cannot ultimately win the battle of violence based on the simple reality of numbers. Every single trans person could own a gun, it wouldn’t make society safer for them.
But, I think we have fundamentally irreconcilable perspectives in this regard, I can’t convince you that libertarianism doesn’t work, it’s something you’ll have to experience for yourself. To watch fail in real time.
The philosophy you’re espousing has the exact same underpinnings; democratic rule of law is a waste of time, the individual is responsible for their rights, you can’t change people or society, only way to be safe is to buy a gun and hope you can outshoot everyone who wants to harm you.
Never works, and in fact pushes counter to trans people eventually truly securing their rights. But, like I say, there’s no real convincing you of that until a few decades down the road when nothing has changed because everyone thinks a gun is a solution to a systemic societal and cultural problem and trans people still have no safety.
It’s not putting words in your mouth, you just haven’t really considered the premises underpinning what you’re advocating or where they come from.
You’re reinforcing a right-wing belief that places violence at the center of politics, whether you understand it as that or not – the fetishization of firearms in the US has sustained so many problems we have in this country, it’s crutch and a political dead end. To tell trans people “Get a gun, that’s the way you will be safe” is simply bullshit, and a way of offloading society’s responsibility to safeguard everyone’s basic rights onto individuals.
It’s the same way that it should not be the responsibility of black Americans to arm themselves to enforce the change that needs to happen among the white majority.
We know this is true because there are places where trans people are more safe than others, where they have more rights than other places.
I’m genuinely curious where you are referring to, that you believe trans people are actually legitimately free of the threat of violence against them. If you’re in California, you’re mostly free from governmental violence by the California state government itself (unless you happen to run into a transphobic cop), but that doesn’t insulate you from federal laws that target you. And you’re certainly not safe from individual bigots any moreso than in other states.
I can’t convince you that libertarianism doesn’t work
You keep talking about Libertarianism, but I don’t know where you are getting the impression that any of us here are Libertarian. Are you just using that as a catch-all term to mean “skeptical of governments and systems of authority”? Libertarianism doesn’t work because of its focus on Individualism, and everyone’s supposed ‘right’ to exist apart and separate from each other (except when Libertarians want others to be forced to do something). Libertarians don’t want a society, they want to be provided-for, but also to have no responsibility to the people doing the providing.
There are many OTHER political philosophies, however, many of which reject systems of authority, but embrace community, social responsibility, interdependence, and civic engagement. And in which people can choose to participate in those societies rather than being forced to simply because of where they’re born.
So the rule of law and democratic process is a “platitude” in your mind? A functional democratic government does nothing more to maintain order and safety than anarchy?
I dunno, I think maybe you’re taking a lot for granted here. Society is not held together by violence, it’s held together by people agreeing to believe in some basic uniting principles. When you erode people’s faith in that agreement (the goal of the far right) is when it stops being effective, but that doesn’t mean it’s a platitude.
Black Americans didn’t secure their rights by getting into gun fights. They did it by strategically getting their case before the courts, using things like freedom riders to create a case that had to be heard. It would not have mattered if they showed up at the voting booth weilding a gun, that would not have secured their right to vote, in fact it would’ve been used as an excuse to further hinder their rights.
Likewise, the fundemental right to safety is not secured when you have to walk around with a gun to be safe. Straight cis people do not need to do that, neither should anyone else.
The rule of law is largely a fucking joke that serves the powerful and protects the status quo. There may be times when it serves a purpose that’s actually positive, but it’s not going to protect you in the face of a dangerous reality.
If you think the law can bodily protect you, go wander into traffic in a crosswalk without looking. The law should prevent any vehicles from hitting you, no?
The fact that murdering trans women is generally illegal isn’t sufficient to protect us when someone tries to kill us. We have to be ready for that ourselves.
I never said protections were sufficient, I’m saying it’s not some fundemental given of the universe that trans people have to live in a society where they carry a gun everywhere they go. We know this is true because there are places where trans people are more safe than others, where they have more rights than other places. It’s an ideological problem, not one of violence. Trans people cannot ultimately win the battle of violence based on the simple reality of numbers. Every single trans person could own a gun, it wouldn’t make society safer for them.
But, I think we have fundamentally irreconcilable perspectives in this regard, I can’t convince you that libertarianism doesn’t work, it’s something you’ll have to experience for yourself. To watch fail in real time.
Ew, who said anything about being a libertarian?
The philosophy you’re espousing has the exact same underpinnings; democratic rule of law is a waste of time, the individual is responsible for their rights, you can’t change people or society, only way to be safe is to buy a gun and hope you can outshoot everyone who wants to harm you.
Never works, and in fact pushes counter to trans people eventually truly securing their rights. But, like I say, there’s no real convincing you of that until a few decades down the road when nothing has changed because everyone thinks a gun is a solution to a systemic societal and cultural problem and trans people still have no safety.
You’re putting words in my mouth. I’d suggest reading it back over with fresh eyes and trying not to make these assumptions.
It’s not putting words in your mouth, you just haven’t really considered the premises underpinning what you’re advocating or where they come from.
You’re reinforcing a right-wing belief that places violence at the center of politics, whether you understand it as that or not – the fetishization of firearms in the US has sustained so many problems we have in this country, it’s crutch and a political dead end. To tell trans people “Get a gun, that’s the way you will be safe” is simply bullshit, and a way of offloading society’s responsibility to safeguard everyone’s basic rights onto individuals.
It’s the same way that it should not be the responsibility of black Americans to arm themselves to enforce the change that needs to happen among the white majority.
@raccoona_nongrata @millie no one in a free country should need a gun to be themselves
I’m genuinely curious where you are referring to, that you believe trans people are actually legitimately free of the threat of violence against them. If you’re in California, you’re mostly free from governmental violence by the California state government itself (unless you happen to run into a transphobic cop), but that doesn’t insulate you from federal laws that target you. And you’re certainly not safe from individual bigots any moreso than in other states.
You keep talking about Libertarianism, but I don’t know where you are getting the impression that any of us here are Libertarian. Are you just using that as a catch-all term to mean “skeptical of governments and systems of authority”? Libertarianism doesn’t work because of its focus on Individualism, and everyone’s supposed ‘right’ to exist apart and separate from each other (except when Libertarians want others to be forced to do something). Libertarians don’t want a society, they want to be provided-for, but also to have no responsibility to the people doing the providing.
There are many OTHER political philosophies, however, many of which reject systems of authority, but embrace community, social responsibility, interdependence, and civic engagement. And in which people can choose to participate in those societies rather than being forced to simply because of where they’re born.