The rise of authoritarian neo-puritanism

[ViolentPanda]

<Re-railing thread ....>

Do people agree, though, about the rise of an ugly form of dictatorial neo-puritanism?

I don't know if "rise" is the right word, It seems to me what's happened is that the govt has (as govts almost always do) appropriated a legitimate issue to serve it's own purposes, and the fact that the proposed solutions to the issue constitute what you call "neo-puritanism" is probably coincidental to the fact that the PM is a twisted Calvinist fuck.

 

[8ball]

<Re-railing thread ....>

Do people agree, though, about the rise of an ugly form of dictatorial neo-puritanism?

Yes. And I also think it originates in a generation which I'd call the 'former left'. The generation that were mere saplings when the big battles were lost.

 

[durruti02]

<Re-railing thread ....>

Do people agree, though, about the rise of an ugly form of dictatorial neo-puritanism?

yes! and it is used to discipline / wind up / piss people off / etc etc

RCP i thought had some good ideas on it all ..

 

[nosos]

Be very wary of James *RCP* Heartfield and those taking his ideas up uncritically...That said, from a brief look there possibly interesting things in the book, i'd need to read it but...it's James heartfield...

Could you say more (by pm if you'd prefer)? I've only come across him recently and been talking to him via e-mail...

 

[brasicritique]

are we not also seeing the rise of of ideological neo-emu's

 

[nosos]

I think neo-puritanism is a shit name for it but there is something very interesting happening with the rise of ethical consumerism and the moralism that goes with it. Heartsfield's book sounds really interesting. There's a good review of it here:

http://www.frankfuredi.com/index.php/site/article/175/

 

[tbaldwin]

<Re-railing thread ....>

Do people agree, though, about the rise of an ugly form of dictatorial neo-puritanism?

I am all for a bit more authoritarianism myself... Id like to see tougher sentences for some crimes, more incentives for doing good things...More penalties for doing bad things...like blatant dives in the box....
£37,000 a year to keep someone in prison. We should be more like China, make prisoners work...

 

[nosos]

Hurrah for slave labour!

 

[tbaldwin]

Hurrah for slave labour!

Personally id like to see people/prisoners given a choice of how they serve their sentences....2 years hard work or 4 years in wandsworth? I know what id choose....

 

[bluestreak]

My thoughts, briefly.

This green neo-puritanism that poster refers to is anything he doesn't agree with environmental.

HOWEVER... 1) there is massive work that needs to be done environmentally.

2) we cannot rely on big business to do anything apart from greenwash.

3) if politicians can use green issues as an excuse to increase taxes and social control they will.

4) knowing what's best for people is what people are good at.

5) puritanism has always been an expression used to attack anyone who takes a principaled stance on anything that someone else doesn't agree with, so is a loaded bullshit term. if you have a case, argue it, don't dismiss something as puritanism and hope that by labelling it as such others will think it's bad.

6) so, if the problems of environmental damage will not be solved by taxation and guilt-tripping the lower classes, and won't be solved by big business cleaning up after itself, what will it be solved by?

7) however, when the aims of the environmental left are met (for the wrong reasons) by the greenwash and social control brigade, should be oppose them (as anti-capitalists / libertarians / socialists) or support them (as environmentalists) - for example lowering emissions, car free zones etc etc, banning smoking in the workplace to protect non-smokers are all issues that have divided urbanites.

8) i'm going home, i'm tired and i need a kip. i think some of that might have made sense.

 

[tbaldwin]

5) puritanism has always been an expression used to attack anyone who takes a principaled stance on anything that someone else doesn't agree with, so is a loaded bullshit term. if you have a case, argue it, don't dismiss something as puritanism and hope that by labelling it as such others will think it's bad.


oh yeah prince charles.....

 

[nosos]

Granted, again I disagree with the term, to be fair though I think its strength lies in indicating the shift away from traditional liberal principles: personal consumption choices and the lifestyle of individual are becoming open to moral criticism again in spite of no apparant harm being done to other individuals.

 

[tbaldwin]

Granted, again I disagree with the term, to be fair though I think its strength lies in indicating the shift away from traditional liberal principles: personal consumption choices and the lifestyle of individual are becoming open to moral criticism again in spite of no apparant harm being done to other individuals.

Dunno so much. I think if your behaviour has an effect on others...Others are bound to comment on it....And im hardly a radical green but the way that some people fuck up the environment for the majority of other people should surely be challenged in my egotistical opinion.. is that IMEO in young persons speak?

 

[8ball]

4) knowing what's best for people is what people are good at.

Oh shitting fuck.

 

[tbaldwin]

Oh shitting fuck.

Do you really have to resort to such bad language? Your ruining this thread for the rest of us.

 

[8ball]

Shove it up yer arse you tedious badger's cunt.

 

[DotCommunist]

Do you really have to resort to such bad language? Your ruining this thread for the rest of us.

do you really have to resort to such bad grammar? You're ruining this thread

 

[tbaldwin]

do you really have to resort to such bad grammar? You're ruining this thread

Listen Son....Im the bloody authoritarian round here. And i say that anybody who shows a liking for proper grammar is a piece of oily puked up capitalist fish.
Bad language is quite another thing though.

 

[8ball]

Aaaanyways . . the reason behind my (initial) bout of mild sweariness was that I've generally seen bluestreak as politically not too far away from me, a lover of freedom and justice and those better things in life that aren't necessarily piled high in TKMaxx.

However the point 4) that I quoted seems to suggest we're poles apart in terms of the value placed on individual freedom, which saddens me.

A more articulate way of saying this could probably have been achieved in three words.

 

[bluestreak]

4) knowing what's best for people is what people are good at.

.

SORRY! that should, of course, have read:

4) thinking they know what's best for people is what people are good at.


with the addendum:

Especially the sort of people who are interested in politics.



Bluestreak: environmental puritan, political anarchist, social libertarian. Believes that it's all good as long as it does as little harm as possible.

 

[8ball]

Cool.

I'm not sure how you square the libertarian and anarchist elements with environmental puritanism but at least you've not gone narc on us

 

[blueplume]

Bluestreak: environmental puritan, political anarchist, social libertarian. Believes that it's all good as long as it does as little harm as possible.

Good job!

 

[Dhimmi]

<Re-railing thread ....>

Do people agree, though, about the rise of an ugly form of dictatorial neo-puritanism?

As a trend being set by government no, but as a trend being set by the public and exploited by government yes.

Add this to the fiction of near mystical "progressives" and there's a very powerful way for governments to deliver tons of manufactured satisfaction.

Reminds me of how orgs like the Gestapo and Stasi used to operate, driven mainly by the willingness of the people to spy and report on people...

Not sure how clear I've made my points there...

 

[Steve Booth]

Thinking about the last bout of so-called 'neo-Puritanism' as a fashion thing during the 1980s Aids panic, would contemporary neo-Puritanism be a reaction to a period of hedonistic excess? (for example the credit card binge) If the economy goes into recession, might it be a sort of posture of reigning in, a tightening up of the belt, more driven by necessity than any sincere belief in its benefits or any real wish to do this?

 

[bluestreak]

Cool.

I'm not sure how you square the libertarian and anarchist elements with environmental puritanism but at least you've not gone narc on us

Quite easily really. For example, it may give me great pleasure to kick a whale to death, however that would make the whale sad. And if we all kicked whales to death, there'd be no whales left, and the plankton would get out of hand and drink the seas dry and then we'd be in shit and NO-ONE would be able to kick ANYTHING to death.

 

[8ball]

If your definition of environmental puritanism is not kicking whales to death then I guess I'm down with that.

I'm not touching that organic muesli shit, though.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

[I think it gets it (mostly) spot-on, imo, although I do think global warming is real - just that the ruling class is taking the piss with it as an excuse to get away with all sorts of shit by painting the measures with a green-gloss.

As a Green Party activist I dont go along with all the sentiments in the OP. I think the "authoritarianism" of greens is largely a reactionary fiction. In fact, there is no other formal party with so many members as close to anarchism in our thinking.

Nonetheless I totally agree that "green" issues are being used as a front by the establishment. A few instances:

- "green" taxes (not ringfenced for real environmental purposes)

- Phoney do-gooder bullshit in advertising / corporate mindprogramming.

- GM food (gonna save the world innit?)

- Nuclear power (otherwise the "lights will go out" wont they?)

- Satellite tracking your car movements for more taxes and database state control freakery

Who benefits: The phoney lying establishment. Plus ca change and all that.

Who gets the blame if its all unpopular? environmentalists.

Caution: Genius mindfuckery at work

 

[smokedout]

from the Green Party manifesto for a sustainable society

“Unauthorised production, importation and marketing of all drugs controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act (1971) would remain criminal offences. Fines, confiscation of assets and prison sentences would continue to be imposed for serious drugs trafficking offences.”

Meanwhile the Greens authoritarian streak extends to banning smoking in all public places, banning all alcohol advertising

schools shall be “prohibited from delivering religious instruction in any form or encouraging adherence to any particular religious belief.”

(except the Greens support Steiner schools, hippy-dippy pseudo-quackery being acceptable in the greens eyes)

“Parents are important educators of their children, but we need to recognise that they do not own their children, and may not always act in their children’s best interests. Like schools, parents may act as inhibitors of learning.”

“some behavioural problems may require temporary segregation to respect the wishes of the child involved and to protect other children. “Special” schools will be opened up to enable any child to benefit from staff and facilities.”

they also plan to re-introduce dog licences, license all animal breeders and ban all blood sports including shooting.

pigeon fanciers, expect to be visited and registered with your ‘Local Animal Rights Officer.’

“prohibit the use and private ownership of firearms and lethal weapons, such as air rifles, crossbows, etc., except on registered premises” seems to be going a little too far, as does the proposed legislation that children’s toy guns should only be permitted if made out of see through plastic …

they will set up yet another legislative body “with responsibility for natural medicines, including nutritional supplements, medicinal plants and herbal remedies, essential oils and homeopathic remedies.”

They also wish to recruit yet more community and part-time police

What’s wrong With the Green Party