Karl_ wrote:Radical rhetoric is not mutually exclusive with liberal rhetoric. Successful social movements typically have both. As simple examples---obviously there is nuance here but the thrust is correct---look at the liberal suffragists vs. the radical suffragettes, the nonviolent Martin Luther King Jr. vs. Malcolm X, or liberal pride parades vs. the radical queer riots.
Not to give too much importance to Twitter, but the "not happening five years late on GRcade" version of this discussion already happened in c.2014 and was a moment of real radicalisation for women on that platform. Funnily enough, the reactionary #NotAllMen countertendency resulted in further radicalisation of women under the #YesAllWomen tag, which was a direct precursor to e.g. #MeToo, which resulted in real life change via radical direct action (a form of "outing" oppressors, which was already used in a different form as a direct action tactic in radical queer communities).
Radicalising the oppressed is well worth annoying the oppressors in the calculus of revolution. Change does not come from above. An angry oppressed class who knows their enemy and is motivated to fight for their rights is a precondition for any genuine, radical change.
This is a really interesting/useful post
In general how do you direct (I want to say "lense") radical rhetoric towards the oppressed class, and the liberal rhetoric towards the wider public, while minimising the exposure otherwise of potentially counterproductive radical rhetoric seen out of context?
That seems to me to be where the problems arise, and where that radical rhetoric (our "men are trash" of the discussion) gets communicated to an unreceptive audience. If you're crunching the numbers, presumably you want to minimise that crossover.
The political right appear more effective in doing that, when you look at how different their messaging is through different bubbles and when targeted at different demographics, and in "hiding" their equivalent extreme rhetoric. In contrast they draw attention to the radical rhetoric of the left to make it look absurd.