Ugh. This is why the left can't get anything done--we're always getting divided over irrelevant details. Do you see how maybe that isn't a disagreement with what I said? You just jumping in to "correct" me without making any effort to understand what I'm saying is extremely counterproductive.
I've been speaking French at an intermediate level for a couple of decades, but thanks. I'm happy to expand my critique to how your arguments all individualize responsibility for a systemic issue that requires targeted collective action and social transformation. This is not leftist strategy.
> I've been speaking French at an intermediate level for a couple of decades, but thanks.
I didn't ask you to speak French, I asked you to put in any effort at all to understand what I said. Unsurprisingly, speaking has not conferred any understanding of what I said--you might try reading instead of speaking.
> I'm happy to expand my critique to how your arguments all individualize responsibility for a systemic issue that requires targeted collective action and social transformation.
Case in point: I'm puzzled where in my post you think I mentioned who I hold responsible for consumerism. It's certainly not individuals. But again, to know what I think you'd have to try to understand what I say.
> This is not leftist strategy.
Speaking as if you know what I think was bold, speaking for the entire left was bolder.
There is zero advocacy for systemic change here, just lecturing individuals to adopt solutions that only present themselves as choices to the privileged, to say nothing about the gobbledygook about 'guarding your psyche' by 'abstaining' from viewing ads. None of this sounds like leftism, just liberal idealism. Not especially bold to know what one is talking about, but thx.
