I mean we see a lot of conspiratory accusations from the far-left, right? Mostly from media. The idea that the world is secretly far-right and full of enemy agents who are conspiring against them. The idea that Tulsi Gabbard would be in Assad's pockets and spent 10 years pretending to be leftist and voting for leftist things but is secretly an undercover nazi agent from Hawaii. That Tim Pool, Jordan Peterson, Sargon of Akkad, and Pewdiepie would be far-right or white supremacists. That any time they make a slip-up it's showing their true nazi nature, despite them all publicly saying no to racism and such. The idea that Assange has been colluding with Russians to meddle with the election that got Trump to win, even though that's not why they're looking for him. That anyone wearing a MAGA hat is secretly a racist and not just showing support for the American president. That the Dissenter plug-in must be a place for far-rightists to communicate behind your backs even though it's free to use for everyone. That a difference in payment between genders must be because of sexism on the workfloor, or better yet, the evil patriarchy lurking around every corner. That you cannot have male teachers talk to students with the door closed because that isn't safe as men are toxic and predatory. That the backlash to BFV was all about there being women in a video game even though the top 100 best selling videogames will mostly feature women. That the lack of black people in a game set in medieval Bohemia which has a 100% white population even today, means it must be purposefully racist. The idea that someone saying something you don't like or that's hurtful means it's hate speech and an attempt at trolling, instead of someone offering an interesting idea, or perhaps being right about something you're wrong about. Etc. Etc. Etc.
I guess to be fair it's more like a prejudice in most cases than a straight up conspiracy. A prejudice that is often based on gender or skin color or a personality they target. But you could argue that a prejudice is based on the idea that there is something off with that particular grouping of people. That that group of people is somehow working against a fair world. I think some people on the left can be quite racist and sexist and anti-thought in that sense, while living in this sort of la-la world where they think they aren't, and I heavily denounce that sort of method of mass accusations or unfairly targeting people not on who they really are but on what you choose to portray them as (or worse, based on their skin color or gender). But luckily that's just small groupings. Sadly it's small groupings that do have control over forums, policies, or write for media.
I saw some people in my country call a dark skinned person 'colonized' because he was not anti-racist. So because he had a dark skin color and didn't agree with them he was seen as not right in his mind, incapable of forming his own opinion, only able to form a 'white' opinion because of his presumed ancestry reigning over him. That was literally what they told me. So according to them not only was his skin too dark for him to be able to form his own opinion, but white people were also considered typically racist because 'white' opinions are racist. I got real angry about that, because imo that's a lot of presumptions made based on the color of someone's skin, in an attempt to basically nullify his voice. And I live in a country where racism has been pretty much dead in the past 50 years (sadly never completely) and where you don't just discredit anyone's voice unless you're looking for trouble. And that was maybe the most racist thing I ever heard in real-life, so that really pissed me off. And when I told them, they did not see it. They don't see their racism because in their mind it's all about them being the hero, the anti-racist, here to cure him of his brainwashing by his ancestry. Like some kind of modern age inquisition. They were only capable of presuming that any criticism I gave them was based on my 'bad faith'. In their minds I was just trying to turn the truth upside down and they were not buying that nonsense, not going to give that any thought. Yeah. It was like their assumption that they were doing the right thing was enough for them to discount any rhetoric. Sometimes that scares me. Because it's zealous, right? It's like they were incapable of thinking about their actions, living in that la-la world where everybody is clearly predefined by someone as the enemy or the friend. I want people to always keep thinking and looking at what they're really doing so that they catch themselves doing bad things like that.
That is why, even though I am very leftist (and also vote as such) I am very hesitant to just agree with these points of view that have little to no factual basis. At best they seem unlikely or emotionally motivated, and yet it's treated like gospel in some places. It literally becomes the rules of discourse on some private sites, that you cannot even debate these things. And I just don't believe that it's the way to convince for instance people in the political center, who can be influential on who is going to win in an election. And I don't understand why this is happening because I think honestly that the left can 'win' a rational debate. If only you let it happen. We don't need to cheat or lie or attack people or control a conversation to make a good point and leave a good impression. Harassment and authoritarianism will only push people away from the cause. I have not always seen this, myself, but that's how I think about it these days.
Log in to comment