heya,
> sajolida (2019-11-26):
> > I originally wrote "freedom fighter" instead of "human-rights defender"
> > because I thought that some people in our community would prefer it or
> > otherwise have problems with the term "human-rights defender". But I
> > don't think that we've ever really discussed it.
> >
> > I personally prefer "human-rights defender" because it's more common,
> > less ambiguous, and solves Ulrike's concern.
> >
> > Does anybody would have a problem with us replacing "freedom fighters"
> > by "human-rights defenders" in this text?
>
> Thank you for asking.
>
> I personally have significant political issues with the concept of
> "rights", which leads me to feel misrepresented by "human-rights
> defender".
ditto. the human-rights defender is a very liberal notion that i
associate with a type of activism devoid of any critique of capitalism.
i'd prefer freedom-fighter, even with vague connotations of proto
fascism (the idea of fascists fighting for freedom is absurd enough to
dismiss the connotation, imho), for the sake of including more radical
forms of political struggle.
x,
l.
ps. the sliders still confuse me, are they meant to convey that tails is
very much for experts and pretty impartial and not very political?
that's how i 'read' them, but that's not how i imagine tails...
