Base and Superstructure

Thoughts on production, alienation, and ideology

Month: September 2022 (Page 1 of 2)

A Third Limit of ‘Impact Over Intent’

September 29, 2022 /

Earlier this week, I wrote a post laying out two limits to the phrase ‘impact over intent.’ In short, people tend to use the phrase ironically to subvert the very reasons activists invented it in the first place. To that list, I’d like to briefly add a third limit.

What’s the third limit? In short, people simply discard the phrase when they find it inconvenient.

When a person an activist doesn’t like deflects from the impact of something they’ve said or done by appealing to their intentions, the activist will point this out and use it against them. But when someone they do like pulls the same move, they’ll join with them and defend the behavior.

And so, hardly anyone applies ‘impact over intent’ consistently.

impact over intent

The Limits of ‘Impact Over Intent’

September 26, 2022 /

The phrase ‘impact over intent‘ gets lots of play in social justice circles. And for good reason. It helps us direct our attention away from the psychology of individuals and toward problems of sexism or racism out in the world. And since social justice groups – at least good social justice groups – want to fight sexism, racism, et al. in the world and not just in the head, they use ‘impact over intent’ as a part of their mission.

However, the phrase really only purports to do this. In something of an irony, the impact of ‘impact over intent’ often fails to live up to its lofty intentions.

And that’s the topic of this post. In the past, I’ve written about the limits of everything from universal design to lived experience to mobilizing. Let’s shift our attention to ‘impact over intent.’

Continue reading

Universal Design and IT Security

September 22, 2022 /

Last month, I wrote a post on the limits of universal design. Among other things, I pointed out that people often use the ‘universal design’ label for things a few people need, but most people find inconvenient. I used the examples of the adjustable standing desk and activist Zoom meetings to illustrate the people. Both increase accessibility, but they do so in a way that most people don’t really like.

In the area of IT security, I can add one more example of this usage: multi-factor authentication (MFA). In a paradigm case of MFA, a person tries to log in to their work account or email account, puts in their user name and password, and then isn’t able to immediately log in using those credentials. Instead, the system sends them a text message and they have to enter a code to complete the login*.

Why do we need MFA? It provides some protection from scammers and other ne’er-do-wells. But often it’s a safety measure for people who fail to take very basic, 101-level IT security steps. Like not handing out their password and not clicking links from strangers.

In short, it’s designed for a small number of people who need extra services. But businesses push it on everyone, even those who don’t need it. For those who don’t need it, which is most people, it’s yet another inconvenience and hassle.

*Note: I realize there are less intrusive and annoying forms of MFA. In some cases, those are good, non-invasive designs.

means-testing left

Means-Testing and the Left

September 19, 2022 /

Leftists hate means-testing. If we’ve learned nothing else from listening to leftists talk about policy in the last 5 or 6 years, it’s that. They heap scorn upon it. They claim to avoid it when they work on their own advocacy and mutual aid projects. And they criticize politicians who put it into programs, especially liberal Democrats.

But I think the term ‘means-testing’ carries a lot of ambiguity. Leftists, in particular, tend to use the term interchangeably with ‘paperwork.’ That is to say, they seem to think applying a means test amounts to requiring people to submit (often extensive) paperwork proving they have a low income and thereby ‘deserve’ support.

Let’s talk about that.

Continue reading

« Older posts

© 2024 Base and Superstructure

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑