Draft post about political labels

1 files changed, 78 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/content/blog/xxx_labels.md b/content/blog/xxx_labels.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b79414d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/blog/xxx_labels.md
@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
+Title: Labels are language
+Category: Blog
+Date: 2015-09-17 15:30
+Tags: politics
+Status: Draft
+
+
+A phrase that I've heard way too fucking often recently (this edition
+will contain swearing and might not be suitable for children of ages
+below `NaN`) is "I don't care about labels, I want to do politics!"
+
+As one might expect, this sentiment often comes from centrists. But
+more often than not, it comes from fellow lefties. People who are
+otherwise somewhat radical in their approach of the world, people who
+think capitalism's gotta go and (sometimes) that states and borders
+are bad. And it's a stance that has confused me, and keeps confusing
+me and which is why I'm now writing a blog post about it because
+apparently that's what I do.
+
+The problem I have with "I don't care about labels" is that it's
+analogous to "I don't care about language". 
+
+Labels are a linguistic tool to talk about `$stuff` without having to
+build up an entire language from first principles in every
+sentence. Labels are very useful for general conversation about
+things, like "what is a table?", "what is a train?", "what is art?",
+etc.
+
+When we look at the definition of labels, there's usually three
+kinds. There's labels for **natural things, with natural definitions**,
+such as the definition of a prime number. Neither the definition of
+prime numbers, nor prime numbers are going to change due to cultural
+context (and farely rare).
+
+Secondly, you have labels that refer to **natural things, with
+cultural definitions**. These are things like planets, mountains or
+rain. Definitions can change and they're also subject to cultural
+differences. What you and I consider "rain" will most likely depend on
+where we grew up, if there was frequent rain at all, etc.
+
+The last category are **cultural things, with cultural definitions**,
+such as art, sub-categories of it (movies, games, etc), as well as any
+identity label. Calling myself an anarchist doesn't naturally depend
+on anarchy as a concept occuring in nature, nor can I define it just
+by pointing at other properties of natural definitions. Rather, I need
+to pre-define a whole bunch of cultural context, for you to be able to
+understand why I am an anarchist and what that means.
+
+**And that's the fucking job of labels!** We can't have the same 5
+conversations over and over again and we can't rely on the trust that
+people around us are always gonna be on our side. We shouldn't get
+distracted with pointless label bikeshedding (whether it be anarchy,
+libertarian socialist, libertarian communist), these are all kind of
+similar enough to be able to have a productive conversation without
+having to re-define first principles.
+
+That doesn't mean that I am okay with any vaguely leftie label. I
+have, over the last year or so, become more sceptical of communism,
+talking about how you want to guillotine people and similar. Being an
+anarchist means being opposed to state violence, no matter who's state
+it is. But this isn't a conversation that is easy to have if I don't
+alreay know a bunch of laels and can refer back to them. Furthermore,
+maybe I don't _want_ to have this conversation in certain situations
+so why would I have to engage with tankies when I don't want to?
+
+Most of the time the people who say "I don't care about labels, I
+wanna do poltics" then never does any politics for reasons of not
+having a platform or language to engage with similarly minded people
+about strategy.
+
+This is not to say that we should try to make the onboarding easier
+and use less jargon language when dealing with outsiders. Making
+people more sympathetic to the radical left is important, albeit not a
+job everybody might want to do.
+
+Still...I feel labels are important, especially when we deal with
+internal discourse. For the sake of the conversation, and everybody
+involved in it.