Discussion in 'theory, philosophy & history' started by danny la rouge, Sep 20, 2017.
Also, I meant 'politics' not politics.
Awkward recruitment interview question that.
fairly everday in dykey circles in late 80s - things were fairly accrimonious amonst London's lesbians back then.
This Facebook post I think is a good example, not necessarily of identity politics, but of the logic failures some people seem to be going through
Can't seem to embed the pic on my phone
It shows up the lengths people will go to challenge personal power relations (a good thing to challenge) without letting logic, facts, or the bigger picture get in their way
ETA, will try and repost it in a bit
A euphemism for "it's the latest thing from America", you mean.
(Insert GIF of Judge Judy shaking her head then facepalming here)
But seriously... good grief. Had to stop reading because of all the cringing this induced, nearly got a full house on Tumblr IDPol Bingo there, are these people for real? Anyway, moving on...
There's definitely a Poe's Law situation in place here. If it's satire it's very good satire, I would hope that 'herbalism' would be a dead give away, but sadly I wouldn't be surprised if these people really believed all this. (E2A: Having done an online search for "radical herbalism" it turns out that this is actually a thing, but a thing that's so up its own arse it's no wonder that things turned out the way they did.)
But, you see, "modern" Western medicine messes with your chakras, maan! (Except that would probably be considered a safer space violation due to sexism and cultural appropriation).
On a side note, I find this entire concept, with its indulgence in quackery and pseudoscience, and its insinuation that 21st century medicine (you know, the thing that is able to treat many a life-threatening or life-limiting disease whereas your pot pourri would make scant difference) is somehow 'oppressive' and we need to "go back to nature" in order to liberate ourselves really grating. Even those who manage to get past the Safer Spaces Stasi will undoubtedly be in a position of true privilege purely by being in a situation where they can make these attacks on modern medicine, since they have never been faced with the threats to health that come from living where healthcare and sanitation is limited. At least they aren't advocating homeopathy, that's all I can say.
As opposed to white supremacist "science"!!
True, it's all the work of Babylon...
Apparently their gathering has been cancelled because they got criticised for turning down the help of two white guys with dreads. Fucking seriously?
What's funny is that despite some long-winded inclusive types stuff, their flyer for the tragically cancelled event gives dates and venue. Fine, but someone living at the other end of town and with no connections to the University might not feel enormously confident heading off to this venue described only as Leeds University Union.
Why not give its location, mention nearby bus routes, emphasise all members of public welcome, use Bloggs St entrance and follow signs to room X on third floor, mentioning access for anyone with mobility problems etc? Am I being too nitpicking here? OK, but just blithely saying Student Union as though all residents know it is quite "in-group", I think. They do seem to be an amusing bunch.
I think it's that they felt like they didn't have the capacity to put on the gathering and also deal with the fallout and issues around them banning the people from being on the panel.
One of the people banned has apparently kicked off a bit (as have some of his friends/colleagues) which of course has enabled the gathering organizers to go on about white privilege.
I am not surprised that being white and wearing dreads was enough to warrant shunning. It just seems to be part of the course in "social justice" circles these days. I would be interested to know what this "kicking off" entailed, I found nothing from a brief search of Twitter, and there isn't anything on their Facebook page (which has just over 100 members).
More schools in America taking to kill a mocking bird off the reading lists, because it contains the n word. Probably inevitable in current climate but seems sad, to me.
That’ll be Huckleberry Finn gone too then.
They produced a schools edition with the relevant word ommitted a while back.
I'm not arsed about this at all. I well remember my granny, who voted FF her all life, explaining to me why you don't use that particular anagram of "ginger".
This was good. Shuja Haider explains himself to the poltroons who lambasted for saying that the left needs to deal with the problem of young white men getting radicalized in very wrong directions:
What makes life shitty? – Shuja Haider – Medium
Not trying to invoke Godwin’s but nevertheless I’m not particularly down with book bannings.
No one's talking about banning any books. bimble was talking about schools in America talking TKAM off reading lists. My guess is that they're doing that out of cowardice, but it's far from the same thing as banning it.
There's a v useful Walter Benn Michaels piece in the new issue of nonsite:The Political Economy of Anti-Racism I'm going to pull more quotes than normal as a) it's v important and utterly central to the discussion here and b) i think lot of people will not read it.
There is also a long Adolph Reed piece in the new issue but i'm not sure it's the one mentioned by WBM but this from the conclusion suggests they are still thinking on same lines:
That is a crucial context within which we should understand antiracists’ tendency to align with Wall Street Democrats in denouncing calls for general redistribution and their insistence that Trump’s victory most meaningfully expresses the depth of commitments to white supremacy, sexism, and homophobia particularly among “white working class” voters. The contention that working-class disaffection from Clintonite neoliberalism most of all expresses backlash against blacks and others is an argument, as Clinton’s snide dismissal of Sanders indicates, that economic inequality is not a central concern for blacks, women, immigrants, LGBT or transgender people. A year into the Trump presidency and unimpeded Republican control of Congress and of most state governments has confirmed what many on the left have known all along, that the right’s agenda is an all-out attack on working people, no matter what their racial and gender classifications and identities or sexual orientations. The alliance of Democratic neoliberalism and an identity-based notion of social justice has contributed to this nightmarish outcome precisely by diminishing the significance of a policy orientation that abets upward redistribution and intensifying economic inequality and racializing the working class as white losers.
Neo-liberalism is the dominant ideology and identity politics is the left face of it.
The Reed piece is very very strong. It's particularly interesting on something that has been under discussion on here recently - institutional racism.. He traces the material development of the concept (in the US at least) to an accommodation - or more bluntly, a sell out or buy off - by black elites to the growing divorce of black politics from class politics from the mid 60s onwards (Reed outlined how in his view this happened before this section) with the reward of a privileged position within the coming economic changes of policing the racial boundaries of neo-liberalism - in effect, acting as the guarantor of a racially representative inequality. Or as Benns would have it, in highlighting where the system is throwing up unexpected inefficiencies in its pursuit of the production of justified inequalities. Here lies the legitimating roots of liberal neo-liberalism (for example, it's why and how liberals, including CRI on here, can argue that universal health care and initiatives like free tuition are racist) - and why the choice isn't class politics vs identity politics today but the proper recognition of identity politics as a class politics.
Again, how far this maps onto the UK i'm not sure - certainly not directly - but there is surely no question as to where our home grown identarians/liberal neo-liberals/etc are taking their lead from.
From the Reed article..
Black Politics After 2016
Separate names with a comma.