Message me and let me know what you were wanting to learn about me here and I’ll consider putting it in my bio.
My full routine:
thank you, that’s helpful ❤️
Even if they don’t have a right to know I’m trans (completely get that, it’s my private medical situation), there is a sense that I’m intentionally withholding truth relevant to the context, e.g. by going along and pretending I didn’t know him, I’m at least being some kind of dishonest - I used to work for this person and I know them well, they should remember me.
And while it’s risky and harmful to out myself in this situation, it’s also risky to not be honest, since there’s a good chance he could learn who I was before from just talking to people, since everyone here knew me pre-transition and anyone could tell him (and there are plenty of anti-trans people who know me who would be willing to do so, or even do so accidentally).
ha, thanks - good to know you think it’s OK 😅
I guess I’m worried if he finds out later from someone else at work (I worked here pre-transition and most people where I work remember me from before I transitioned). Besides fear of his anti-trans bias, I don’t want him to feel like I lied to him (but maybe I just can’t help that).
This person is like my boss’s boss, so I am basically forced into interactions with him - but otherwise I have no interest in talking or working with them. I just have to get through these meetings and navigate the work environment, but I transitioned while still working here, so most people at work remember me from pre-transition and so it’s very possible he’ll find out who I was before just from chatting with people (I work with plenty of conservative people who may even still refer to me by my deadname and old pronouns behind my back, who knows).
Still, I see why your advice is good regardless - it’s just tricky to apply it here, since normally I would not be invested in this relationship at all, but I sorta have to be given the circumstances.
to be fair, the CIA did play a large role in undermining communist / socialist-identified governments, and in turn the authoritarians exploited the resultant legitimate fears into justifying slave camps, suppression of civil rights, political purges, and so on.
maybe you’re aware, but “communist state” is an oxymoron since communism is distinguished by being stateless …
My impression of the situation is that the Russian Revolution was attempting a communist revolution, and while the Bolshevik concept of Marxism was very particular (as was the Menshevik conception, as is probably most Marxisms), it’s unclear what you mean exactly by “actually tried communism” - are you saying Lenin, Trotsky, and the Bolsheviks never had communism on the mind, that the revolution never actually intended to bring about communism?
Or are you saying the Bolsheviks never tried skipping straight to implementing the communism Marx theorized about because they focused only on the socialism Marx claimed was necessary and would bring about communism naturally, and thus they only tried socialism but never communism?
It’s probably important context to note that at the time, the Bolsheviks were already the more radical leftists willing to skip ahead and attempt the revolution without the necessary liberal revolutions as a prerequisite. The Mensheviks were more moderate and even more committed stageists, who believed the aristocracy first had to undergo liberalization as Marx theorized before it would be ripe for the seeds of the socialism which would then eventually wither away into communism.
EDIT: I should say, I don’t mean my comment in an antagonistic way, I’m just genuinely wondering what your perspective is on what is or isn’t a genuine attempt at communism; without clarification, I just assume you mean these movements, by focusing on socialism, didn’t directly implement communism and thus were never really communist. (Which as you might tell by now has its problems, but isn’t the worst starting place. I tend to think overly dogmatic readings of Marx and assuming his dialectical materialism still has relevance for predicting the future of human societies could be considered a problem with these movements.) Anyway - just wanted to say, I mean this all in friendliness and cooperation, I don’t necessarily disagree with you.
I agree with this, I don’t think Lenin for example was somehow inauthentic in their socialism / communism even if their implementation often fell short of their espoused ideals; I just think the attempts to make it work failed for various reasons.
(Maybe some of those reasons have to do with the ideology, e.g. vanguardism might pose a greater risk of the revolution being hijacked by a corrupt insider group - maybe Stalin was more inevitable given Lenin’s commitments to the vanguard; maybe commitments to viewing the revolution as a “totalitarianism of the proletariat” and insisting on centralizing power makes it easier for the state apparatus to be hijacked and used against the interests of the average person, and so on).
why is it so painful to be interrupted when focusing?
holy shit