There’s this hypothesis in social justice psychology that in an oppressive relationship the oppressed cannot find liberation alone. The oppressor is also trapped and both have to find liberation together (iirc that’s the logic behind “none of us is free until all of us are free”)
-
Show this thread
-
When I first heard the idea (there’s probably a canonical reference) it seemed wrong. The oppressor is clearly free in ways the oppressed is not. Then I grokked the logic. Now I’ve kinda flipped. I don’t think the oppressor can ever be free, but the oppressed have a shot at it.
3 replies 1 retweet 11 likesShow this thread -
The tldr of my reverse argument is: if you’re on the top of a hill, you’re likely to die trapped there, because it is hard, often impossible, to see the point of getting off. If you’re at the bottom, there’s a reason to try. Both can move, only one has a default reason to.
3 replies 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
There’s some intriguing arguments and a pretty elegant power calculus theory underneath modern social justice politics, if you have the stomach to look past the warrioring and end-times clusterfuck. I don’t entirely buy the psychological axioms, but there’s a there there.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
This Tweet is unavailable.
Can’t recall. There’s bits in Fredrick Douglass that get at it, but the theory is more recent. I plan to dig in more peaceful times.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.