8 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
8 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
|
# It's not that simple
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
It's not that simple. It's easy to divide politics and though into left/right, but I find that under any pressure, both sides crumble almost immediately. At once, people who might traditionally find themselves on one or the other "side" can agree with on surprising aspects.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
An example I found over the pandemic was the similar root motivation of trans* fold and antivaxxers, in a moment of eloquence from someone I'd generally associated with the right and considered selfish. They made the point that the reason they didn't want to be vaccinated was a desire for bodily autonomy, for desiring control over their own corpus. Public health argumentation aside, this is the same reason trans* people demand recognition. Both groups fundamentally reject the authority of government within their corporeal borders. For this pairing, I think this is usually where the similarity ends, but whenever there's a chance i think it's important to recognise similarities and build a mutual recognition, rather than exacerbating differences.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
does^ intersectionality means including groups like antivaxxers? no I don't think it does because being against vaccines is a choice. I am not sure I would agree with anyone that being trans* is a choice any more than going bald, though there are obviously a lot of choice that come with being trans*.
|