ilestre: “There is this profoundly conservative way of integrating class in this kind of politics as just another identity to be defended, as if being exploited as a wage slave was something to be celebrated, as if making your money off the labour of others was a cultural feature to be preserved…”

Can you give a concrete example of a “radfem” engaging in “this kind of politics”?

bitchlab: “… to combat that claim, they trot out representative women of color and working class women to say, ‘We can’t be what you say we are. We can’t be speaking from the position of white, imperialist, upper-middle class women because some of our voices emanate from the working class, the third world, and working class women in the overdeveloped world.’”

Where do they say this?

Patri:

It is worth considering the future liberty you might gain. Why wouldn’t it be?

Because other people’s lives are not your bargaining chips, even if you can buy greater freedom for yourself by sacrificing them. They are not yours to give.

Now, is it wrong to reach through your crystal ball and deport George W. Bush?

Maybe not. Using force against an individual in order to defend yourself against a known, concrete threat posed by that individual is often within the bounds of justice. Using force against an innocent third party in order to “defend” yourself against the vague dangers allegedly posed by the ethno-national collective of which she is a member, however, is not. You have absolutely no right to visit the presumed sins of her compatriots on her, if you have no reason for thinking that she herself will do some damage to your rights. I can think of absolutely no libertarian principle that would justify or excuse that kind of collective punishment.

How about the good old English word “preference”? Normally we use this to refer to what people have vis-a-vis preferred objects, not what the objects have vis-a-vis the people who prefer them. But I don’t know that that’s an iron law. In any case, if you don’t like saying e.g. that an additional diamond has greater preference on the margin than an additional unit of water, you can always play with verbs: takes greater preference, commands greater preference, enjoys greater preference, etc.

Or, if you want, there are always “preferred,” and thus “preferredness” in noun form. That’s an ugly word, but it’s certainly no uglier than “wantability.”