Try looking up the correlation between the Occupy movement in '08 and the rise in race-based discussion in the media that came right afterwards ;)
What are you insinuating? I’m not following.
I think they were pointing to the media trying to shift the focus to race. “You’re problem isn’t because you’re poor, it’s because of all those nasty people who are different to you”.
Anything to prevent class consciousness and organization.
Pretty sure that was the response to Occupy rather than Occupy itself.
Occupy was too egalitarian for comfort, too the upper crust.
Riiight… it cannot possibly be the white supremacism that’s so fundamental to US society - it must be the Alphabet agencies!
The white supremacists are willing idiots. I don’t doubt they were leveraged to inflame race relations, same way Russia took advantage of the BLM movement to create division.
same way Russia took advantage of the BLM movement to create division.
You cannot divide that which has already been divided, liberal.
Tankie detected. Opinion: disregarded
Oh look… a liberal that doesn’t know what the term “tankie” means.
And like all liberals, you are desperate to hide how comfortable you are with white supremacism.
Yawn.
Nobody cares.
I guess all the people protesting the genocide in Gaza is also just a sign of “foreign agents” infiltrating the US?
Liberalism really is a gross thing.
And non-white liberals? Are they simply self hating, because they disagree with you?
Frankly, at this point, I find the concept of you being a leftist utterly laughable. You’re indistinguishable from a conservative cosplaying as a “leftist” to show how rude and insensible they are.
That kind of has a nice ring to it actually. I’ll be seeing you around, conservative.
And non-white liberals?
You got me there - but, I’m afraid, not for the reason you think.
In fact… the term “white liberal” is pretty much redundant. And I’m not even close to being the first person to figure that out.
There’s a good reason leftists say, “kill the liberal inside your own head.”
To finish the quote on her CIA relationship, since context is important:
In May 1975, Redstockings, a radical feminist group, published a report that Steinem and others put together on the Vienna Youth Festival and its attendees for the Independent Research Service.[112][113] Redstockings raised the question of whether Steinem had continuing ties with the CIA, which Steinem denied.[114] Steinem defended her relationship to the CIA, saying: “In my experience The Agency was completely different from its image; it was liberal, nonviolent and honorable.”
Honestly I figured the context would clear things up, but the rest of the quote makes her come off as an apologist for an organization known to play as dirty as the KGB, and especially during that era. However just because something is funded by an entity such as the CIA doesn’t always mean that the organization is part of, partner in, or even a willing partner with something like the CIA, same with the KGB or its descendants, espionage operates on leverage, and it all depends on what kind of hold you have over the “asset(s)”.
“In my experience The Agency was completely different from its image; it was liberal, nonviolent and honorable.”
I can hear blood-soaked Contras laughing from all the way over here.
Im not familiar with Medium, but I don’t recall the other things I’ve read there being vapid crap.
Medium is basically a public blogging platform — anyone can post whatever they want there with no editorial oversight.
I would say Medium is partially public. A few articles I’ve tried to access in the past have been behind a paywall.
Ah, that’s explains it.
Thank you. That site is horrible. Here’s another site that discusses the topic in a favorable way. Not taking sides here, was just looking for another source.
That’s not surprising at all. Mind you she failed, there’s anarcha feminism and Marxist feminism, but they’re branches of anarchism and Marxism respectively so maybe she didn’t fail.
She also was a major contributor to the satanic panic
