PDA

View Full Version : Nick Land and Neocameralism



Pages : [1] 2

swears
23-11-2013, 03:39 AM
http://bam-pow-oof.tumblr.com/post/37857338807/the-dark-enlightenment-the-complete-series-by-nick

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.co.uk/2007/12/neocameralism-and-escalator-of.html

http://i.imgur.com/rUfEO0Q.jpg

I initially dismissed some of these ideas as fedora-wearing, tech-nerd fantasy. But now Nick Land seems all excited about them (I know, small beer these days). Gotta be at least worth a bit of hand wringing. If we're going to have a new aristocracy of Silicon Valley/roundabout neckbeards, then why not go full hog?

Lord Javascript of Haggerston arise!

swears
23-11-2013, 03:42 AM
http://www.salon.com/2011/08/30/lind_libertariansim/

A counter-view or something, I suppose.

Sectionfive
24-11-2013, 06:36 PM
Entirely religious based me arse

Sectionfive
24-11-2013, 06:48 PM
The .jpg is from these dickheads btw http://radishmag.wordpress.com/

craner
25-11-2013, 10:57 AM
Why is Nick Land "small beer" these days?

Mr. Tea
25-11-2013, 12:37 PM
Entirely religious based me arse

Sure, "almost entirely religious based" is still an overstatement even with the "almost" you omitted, but at the same time, you'd be hard-pressed to argue that sectarian hatred had nothing to do with European conflicts in the early modern period. Even if you choose to interpret them more as a symptom than a cause.

But I don't think we even need to go that far to explode the central argument these guys are presenting. Is he seriously saying that absolute or near-absolute monarchies are inherently less violent than democracies? Or "representative governments", if that means the same thing? Saying WWII and the Holocaust were caused by "representative governments" is ludicrous - the Nazis rose within the Reichstag by winning votes but seized absolute power in a coup and then banned all other political parties. Mussolini likewise isn't a name you readily associate with democracy, while Marxism-Leninism has always been explicitly anti-democratic.

And if wars in the 20th century have been particularly bloody in terms of absolute death toll, there are two pretty fucking obvious points here: the huge explosion of populations in Europe following the agricultural and industrial revolutions, which meant there were simply far more people available to kill and be killed than in (say) the 17th century; and the vast leaps forward in military technology. I don't think the huge death tolls attributable to the tyrannies of the 20th century can be put down to people's hatred for racial Untermenschen or class enemies being necessarily any more ferocious or unchecked than people's hatred for heretics or infidels in previous centuries.

Sectionfive
25-11-2013, 07:27 PM
follow the money

Alfons
26-11-2013, 10:37 PM
Lots of info and links in this article: http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/22/geeks-for-monarchy/

The points on "The Cathedral" are interesting, adds a bit of conspiracy nut angle to the whole thing.

Also, what Mr. Tea said on the wars and atrocities of the 20th century.

swears
27-11-2013, 12:49 AM
Lots of info and links in this article: http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/22/geeks-for-monarchy/



Yeah, this is probably the best article on it. The actual guys themselves aren't really worth reading. I sort of suspect Moldbug is doing it for the lulz, anyway.

luka
27-11-2013, 04:02 PM
feel grubby after that.

luka
27-11-2013, 04:03 PM
smells like nocturnal emissions.

craner
28-11-2013, 09:08 AM
Pitching extreme right and lining up alongside monarchists and racists is an ignominious turn in Nick Land's career. I suspect he is looking for another flock, as well as taking his ultra-libertarianism to its logical conclusion. Not only that, but he has been eclipsed by one former pupil on the Marxist left, which must be annoying.

Mr. Tea
28-11-2013, 09:26 AM
Lots of info and links in this article: http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/22/geeks-for-monarchy/



“Demotist systems, that is, systems ruled by the ‘People,' such as Democracy and Communism, are predictably less financially stable than aristocratic systems,”

Right, because Lenin, Stalin and Krushchev became leaders of the USSR because of the popular will of the people. Kim Jong-un is leader of North Korea because he was chosen by the populace. Got it.

nomos
28-11-2013, 07:51 PM
Would someone mind outlining the trajectory of Land's political thinking since CCRU for me? And how does the above square with his celebration by the SR/OOO scene?

Bonus question: What is the deal with Collapse Journal v. Jason Wakefield/Avello Publishing/Funky Bubblers Entertainment (cf. Collapse's Facebook page)? I can't tell if it's real or if Wakefield is some sort of hyperstitional punching bag.

craner
29-11-2013, 09:36 AM
He left Warwick at the end of the century and moved to Shanghai. There was a period of radio silence(I think, maybe not) and then he reappeared with other ex-Ccru members on the blog Hyperstition, which had some relation to the more estoteric late-Ccru scribblings. Around this time he was in touch with Reza Negarestani, of Cyclonopedia fame, who was built into the Hyperstition axis, as was K-punk. This was also the era of Cold Rationalism, but in the life-time of the Hyperstition blog, K-punk took a Leninist-Bolshevik turn, inspired by Zizek and Badiou, and Nick Land started reading National Review and Spengler and quoting (with approval) the neoconservative World War 4 thesis but (typically) in even harsher, more extreme, 'hyperstitional' terms. He since seems to have ditched the neoconservatism and absorbed libertarian writers like Hayek and Hans-Hermann Hoppe into his Deleuze & Guattari-derived pro-capitalism, and (typically) taken this in an even harsher, more extreme direction, attacking democracy with some ferocity and delving into biological determinism. He has found a theoretical space on the extreme libertarian right, building a platform alongside racists and anti-semites. There is always a danger of this when you are locked in a world of ideas.

comelately
29-11-2013, 10:06 AM
On a less intellectual note, I was in the same form class at school as Douglas Murray for 3 years, before he got a Choral scholarship to Eton. Hasn't changed much really.

nomos
30-11-2013, 06:18 PM
He left Warwick at the end of the century and moved to Shanghai. There was a period of radio silence(I think, maybe not) and then he reappeared with other ex-Ccru members on the blog Hyperstition, which had some relation to the more estoteric late-Ccru scribblings. Around this time he was in touch with Reza Negarestani, of Cyclonopedia fame, who was built into the Hyperstition axis, as was K-punk. This was also the era of Cold Rationalism, but in the life-time of the Hyperstition blog, K-punk took a Leninist-Bolshevik turn, inspired by Zizek and Badiou, and Nick Land started reading National Review and Spengler and quoting (with approval) the neoconservative World War 4 thesis but (typically) in even harsher, more extreme, 'hyperstitional' terms. He since seems to have ditched the neoconservatism and absorbed libertarian writers like Hayek and Hans-Hermann Hoppe into his Deleuze & Guattari-derived pro-capitalism, and (typically) taken this in an even harsher, more extreme direction, attacking democracy with some ferocity and delving into biological determinism. He has found a theoretical space on the extreme libertarian right, building a platform alongside racists and anti-semites. There is always a danger of this when you are locked in a world of ideas.

Thanks, craner :cool: That fills some plot holes.

craner
07-02-2017, 03:47 PM
Bannon and Moldbug:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/steve-bannon-books-reading-list-214745

vimothy
07-02-2017, 04:01 PM
Moldbug... has opened up a line to the White House, communicating with Bannon and his aides through an intermediary, according to a source.

Whaaaaaat?

craner
07-02-2017, 04:04 PM
It gets more deranged by the day.

vimothy
07-02-2017, 04:08 PM
Not sure how believable it sounds, but like you say ...

vimothy
07-02-2017, 04:35 PM
Maybe the "intermediary" is Thiel? Apparently he invested in Moldbug's startup.

Leo
07-02-2017, 04:37 PM
Bannon and Moldbug:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/steve-bannon-books-reading-list-214745

a comment on that article:


Banal, shallow bullshit, by and large, laced with juvenile blow it all up rhetoric and vile moral equivalency and a heaping helping of xenophobic cant and a Goebbels sensibility.

Mr. Tea
07-02-2017, 05:38 PM
Is Land mates with Aleksandr Dugin? Sounds like those two would get on like a civilization on fire.

vimothy
07-02-2017, 05:50 PM
Land thinks Dugin is a Eurasian ethno-socialist (aka "the enemy"). I doubt Dugin has ever heard of Land.

Mr. Tea
07-02-2017, 08:37 PM
Huh, shows what I know. I guess weirdos don't necessarily think alike.

vimothy
07-02-2017, 10:44 PM
On a closer inspection, that article is largely journalistic silliness and substanceless nudges and winks (reaching its apex in the section about Moldbug).

craner
07-02-2017, 11:19 PM
I agree, it is full of holes and spurious nonsense.

vimothy
13-02-2017, 01:13 PM
The Atlantic have picked this non-story up and produced something even more ridiculous:


“Think you should speak directly to my WH cutout / cell leader,” Yarvin said in an email. “I've never met him and don't know his identity, we just DM on Twitter. He's said to be ‘very close’ to Bannon. There are several levels, but most people just start out with his public persona.” @BronzeAgePerv’s avatar is of a muscular, shirtless man and his account’s biography reads: “Steppe barbarian. Nationalist, Fascist, Nudist Bodybuilder! Purification of world. Revolt of the damned. Destruction of the cities!”

“I know nothing about BAP personally, except that he lifts. DM him. He may not give you any info but he always responds,” Yarvin said. “Apparently there's a big underground movement of right-wing bodybuilders -- thousands. Their plan is to surface spectacularly this April, in a choreographed flash demo on the Mall. They'll be totally nude, but wearing MAGA hats. Goal is to intimidate Congress with pure masculine show of youth, energy. Trump is said to know, will coordinate with powerful EOs…”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/behind-the-internets-dark-anti-democracy-movement/516243/

josef k.
13-02-2017, 05:28 PM
Is there a merit/means in combining the NRx, Right & Alt-Right threads into a single thread?

Even also the Trump, Breitbart threads?

All of these matters are extremely entangled now...

vimothy
14-02-2017, 11:05 AM
Tyler Cowen reviews Dugin: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/02/eurasian-mission-alexander-dugin.html

Mr. Tea
14-02-2017, 12:38 PM
Personally, unlike Mencius — that neoreactionary arriviste with his trendy but unsound Bronze Age new ideas — I don’t waste my time communicating with minions like Bannon.

I prefer to go right to the top.

So I issue my orders directly to President Trump through our agreed-upon go-between, new West Wing staffer Hakan Rotmwrt.

Hakan (a.k.a. Hakon) is an Ainu-American paleoreactionary dedicated to returning the planet to the time-tested verities of the New Stone Age.

Please note that he’s a moderate, not one of those Old Stone Age extremists. He’s not like the dozen OSA Brotherhood members who have secretly infiltrated Puzder’s staff (which is why you’re starting to hear so much about the need for a special sub-minimum wage for flintknappers).


Wow there's like an entire internet subculture of Tyler Durdens, isn't there?

josef k.
14-02-2017, 09:57 PM
Here - https://t.co/Yi40c6w46f

Here - https://stopfascistinstitutions.tumblr.com/

Here - https://www.facebook.com/urbanomicdotcom/posts/125534071298752

luka
14-02-2017, 10:52 PM
Lol wtf!

josef k.
14-02-2017, 11:23 PM
There's a kind of realignment happening, and a coagulation of new fronts.

vimothy
14-02-2017, 11:44 PM
Interesting rabbit-hole.

vimothy
15-02-2017, 01:07 PM
His later writings compiled by the fascist publisher Urbanomic struck me as vapid and downright offensive to people of color.

When do we get to punch some of these guys in the face?

josef k.
15-02-2017, 01:54 PM
The anxious appeal to institutions "to do something" is very characteristic of this style of politics.

Still, I am compelled to agree that there is a definite racism in Land's current work.

vimothy
15-02-2017, 02:23 PM
I don't remember his CCRU-era writings (collected in Fanged Noumena) touching on anything that could reasonably be construed as racist. It is a different matter today, though.

luka
15-02-2017, 02:23 PM
hes been openly gleefully racist for years. his brand of racism is easily understood by nerds becasue it is taken from RPGs and fantasy literature. Elves are lightly built, fast on their feet and good at magic. orcs are heavily muscled, brutish and unintelligent etc etc its the first race realist decision you make on character build. incidentely you two (josef/vim) have been thinking along very similar lines. you should put out a pamphlet together.

Mr. Tea
15-02-2017, 02:25 PM
Oh I dunno, I think he looks like a pretty fun sort of guy.

https://campingselection-528047.c.cdn77.org/mediavlg/photo/orgineel/d-46282_1_019.jpg?w=460&h=307&mode=crop&scale=both

vimothy
15-02-2017, 02:28 PM
Traditionally, university policies regulating student behavior have been closely associated with in loco parentis, or “in the place of a parent.” The doctrine holds that having taken students away from the home—the natural locucs of moral development—the university inherits the ethical responsibilities of the parent....

With this historical perspective in mind, Yale’s campus turmoil reveals two sets of awkward allies across the last half century of university politics. In articulating a skeptical critique of university power and in denouncing administrators’ right to uphold norms of conduct, the radicals of the ’60s... find themselves the intellectual bedfellows of contemporary campus conservatives. And in demanding that administrators do more to promote a holistic account of student welfare and in calling for clearer moral guidance from the university about how students should responsibly interact with their peers and with society at large, today’s student activists use language that would have been intensely familiar to mid-twentieth century conservative defenders of in loco parentis.

Having all but abandoned their radical skepticism toward the controlling power of mass social judgment and the implicit power of entrenched hierarchical elites, today’s campus activists are quite explicit in their appeal not to demolish the power of administrators, but to expand it.... Each of the remedies called for at Yale and elsewhere is symptomatic of a new-found faith in university administrators as responsible guardians of social justice and as legitimate moral authorities.

Nowhere is the call for a restoration of in loco parentis more clearly seen than in debates over the proper purpose of the residential college. Student activists have rejected the charge that they are hostile to intellectual freedom and free speech by pointing to the language Yale herself uses in describing the residential college system—language that is itself a relic of an older campus commitment to students’ moral development.... [T]he colleges’ central purpose is to nurture and support students as they grow and develop.

http://dhalikias.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/belated-reflections-on-yales-campus.html?m=1

craner
15-02-2017, 02:30 PM
Well, it's overt, isn't it? A sizable stretch of that Dark Enlightenment piece was spent constructing a sophisticated defense of John Derbyshire's 'The Talk: Non-black Version'.

josef k.
15-02-2017, 03:19 PM
http://dhalikias.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/belated-reflections-on-yales-campus.html?m=1

Camille Paglia makes this argument with characteristic aplomb. Starts at the 2 min mark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udWNkPhffUQ

This is Stockholm syndrome in action

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2013-12-06-Collegecosts.png

Where has this money gone?


Interestingly, increased spending has not been going into the pockets of the typical professor. Salaries of full-time faculty members are, on average, barely higher than they were in 1970. Moreover, while 45 years ago 78 percent of college and university professors were full time, today half of postsecondary faculty members are lower-paid part-time employees, meaning that the average salaries of the people who do the teaching in American higher education are actually quite a bit lower than they were in 1970.

By contrast, a major factor driving increasing costs is the constant expansion of university administration. According to the Department of Education data, administrative positions at colleges and universities grew by 60 percent between 1993 and 2009, which Bloomberg reported was 10 times the rate of growth of tenured faculty positions.

Even more strikingly, an analysis by a professor at California Polytechnic University, Pomona, found that, while the total number of full-time faculty members in the C.S.U. system grew from 11,614 to 12,019 between 1975 and 2008, the total number of administrators grew from 3,800 to 12,183 — a 221 percent increase.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/opinion/sunday/the-real-reason-college-tuition-costs-so-much.html

Leftist radical students are demanding increased powers for an administrative class whose salaries are driving them into poverty.

Leo
15-02-2017, 03:38 PM
what on earth are all these additional administrators doing?

josef k.
15-02-2017, 03:48 PM
http://gomerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Doctors-and-administrators.jpg

vimothy
15-02-2017, 04:07 PM
Slate Star Codex published an interesting article on this recently: http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/09/considerations-on-cost-disease/


So, to summarize: in the past fifty years, education costs have doubled, college costs have dectupled, health insurance costs have dectupled, subway costs have at least dectupled, and housing costs have increased by about fifty percent. US health care costs about four times as much as equivalent health care in other First World countries; US subways cost about eight times as much as equivalent subways in other First World countries.

I worry that people don’t appreciate how weird this is. I didn’t appreciate it for a long time. I guess I just figured that Grandpa used to talk about how back in his day movie tickets only cost a nickel; that was just the way of the world. But all of the numbers above are inflation-adjusted. These things have dectupled in cost even after you adjust for movies costing a nickel in Grandpa’s day....

And this is especially strange because we expect that improving technology and globalization ought to cut costs....

But things like college and health care have still had their prices dectuple. Patients can now schedule their appointments online; doctors can send prescriptions through the fax, pharmacies can keep track of medication histories on centralized computer systems that interface with the cloud, nurses get automatic reminders when they’re giving two drugs with a potential interaction, insurance companies accept payment through credit cards....

It’s actually even worse than this, because we take so many opportunities to save money that were unavailable in past generations. Underpaid foreign nurses immigrate to America and work for a song. Doctors’ notes are sent to India overnight where they’re transcribed by sweatshop-style labor for pennies an hour. Medical equipment gets manufactured in goodness-only-knows which obscure Third World country....

And it’s actually even worse than this. A lot of these services have decreased in quality, presumably as an attempt to cut costs even further....

Mr. Tea
15-02-2017, 04:18 PM
what on earth are all these additional administrators doing?

Sounds like it's time for vimothy to bust out Whatsisface's Iron Law Of Bureaucracy.

Leo
15-02-2017, 05:24 PM
Slate Star Codex published an interesting article on this recently: http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/09/considerations-on-cost-disease/

good thing salaries have kept pace with all these increases!

oh, wait a minute...

josef k.
15-02-2017, 06:08 PM
Sounds like it's time for vimothy to bust out Whatsisface's Iron Law Of Bureaucracy.

Robert Michels - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

On similar themes - http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-01/triumph-technocrats

firefinga
15-02-2017, 06:12 PM
what on earth are all these additional administrators doing?

Possibly got something to do with all the diversity/inclusion/safe space/anti-discrimination/micro aggression guidance etc thing.

luka
15-02-2017, 06:13 PM
Possibly got something to do with all the diversity/inclusion/safe space/anti-discrimination/micro aggression guidance etc thing.

fuck me this hobby horse needs to be smashed into splinters

josef k.
15-02-2017, 06:14 PM
And the antinomy of Leftist reason -


...But Gerry already had a living wage-- he spent it on the University of Chicago, 41 years of food stamps in 4 years. If everybody knew in advance the outcome was going to be unemployment and living wages, then why doesn't Frase challenge the capitalist assumption that college is money well spent-- could have been used differently? He can't. This thought cannot occur to him, not because he is dumb, he clearly isn't, or because he is paid by a college-- money is irrelevant to him. He can't because his entire identity is built on college, academia. He is college. Take that away, he disintegrates. So in the utopia he imagines, college still exists AND people get living wages. Call me a Marxist, that's what we have now.

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/11/hipsters_on_food_stamps_part_2.html

luka
15-02-2017, 06:14 PM
i mean jesus christ, im tolerant with stupid peple loads of my best mates are really stupid but this is going to far

faustus
15-02-2017, 06:42 PM
Possibly got something to do with all the diversity/inclusion/safe space/anti-discrimination/micro aggression guidance etc thing.

You are a million miles away. Why say that?

It is mostly to do with a huge increase in marketing and legal (people whose role is to stop the university being liable for things), HR, and executive assistants for senior management (as well as masses of international travel for these)

firefinga
15-02-2017, 06:47 PM
Why say that?


It's hardly a coincidence the costs go up in accordance with the implimentation of all those programmes - I mean this all needs infrastructure and people to get it implemented. But then, it's been considered important by many so I don't see a problem with it.

luka
15-02-2017, 06:58 PM
Why say that I assume is a rhetorical question. Firefinga is opposed to all attempts to counteract or even acknowledge racism because he says the blacks have got uppity and need to learn their place

josef k.
15-02-2017, 10:04 PM
I question how anti-racist these programs/politics are really, though - seems to me racism has more to do with the fact, for example, that in the US there is an industrialized police-prison complex - rather then symbolic identity politics.

... You notice these activists talks about safe spaces but they do not really create them. In fact, every space somehow becomes very dangerous, potential triggers are everywhere, everywhere, until there is no escape from them...

luka
15-02-2017, 10:34 PM
Dunno mate, when we had a discussion on safe spaces we all confessed we'd never been invited to one just read about them on snowflake twitter

luka
15-02-2017, 10:36 PM
Although the point was that it's patently absurd to ascribe the rise of an administrator/management class to anti discrimination initiatives regardless of how effective they may or may not be

droid
15-02-2017, 10:44 PM
It's hardly a coincidence the costs go up in accordance with the implimentation of all those programmes - I mean this all needs infrastructure and people to get it implemented. But then, it's been considered important by many so I don't see a problem with it.

Yeah... i work in a University and I can say with no doubt whatsoever that this is total bullshit. These 'programs' in general are no different from any other society activity, all they need is an empty room and a few students - not that they are anywhere near as widespread or pervasive as the right wing press would have you believe. All in all I would say inclusion/diversity programs amount to less than 1% of the budget - if even that.

Mr. Tea
15-02-2017, 10:45 PM
You are a million miles away. Why say that?

It is mostly to do with a huge increase in marketing and legal (people whose role is to stop the university being liable for things), HR, and executive assistants for senior management (as well as masses of international travel for these)

I can't speak for the USA, but in this country I think it's strongly tied to the tendency, enshrined by Blair but probably begun under Thatcher, for public bodies to be run as if they were businesses, with pupils, students, patients and so on regarded as 'customers' and a concomitant obsession with 'giving value for money' and quantifying, assessing, analyzing and reporting on everything to the Nth degree. So not only do you now have a whole cadre of professional assessor-reporters, but of course the quality of the assessment and reporting has to be assessed and reported on. And each new czar, nabob and mugwump naturally requires his or her own secretary, PA and so on.

It's true that there are now positions such as diversity officer in some big organizations that didn't exist a generation ago, but that's just one person for an organization of hundreds or maybe thousands of people, and in universities (which is what people are usually talking about when they talk about this kind of thing) they're more likely to be student volunteers or sabbatical officers than paid staff.

Edit: what droid said, basically.

josef k.
15-02-2017, 10:47 PM
Although the point was that it's patently absurd to ascribe the rise of an administrator/management class to anti discrimination initiatives regardless of how effective they may or may not be

I'm not so sure that it's absurd.


The bourgeoisie is not interested in the mad, but it is interested in power over the mad; the bourgeoisie is not interested in the sexuality of children, but it is interested in the system of power that controls the sexuality of children. The bourgeoisie does not give a damn about delinquents, or about how they are punished or rehabilitated, as that is of no great economic interest. On the other hand, the set of mechanisms whereby delinquents are controlled, kept track of, punished, and reformed does generate a bourgeois interest that functions within the economicopolitical system as a whole."

droid
15-02-2017, 10:53 PM
Over 6000 people working in my place. The recently launched diversity office accounts for 5. The accessibility office accounts for about another 20.

The corporatisation of education resulted in the supremacy of a managerial class at third level, and as we all know, managers spread like fungus, reproducing themselves at every opportunity.

droid
15-02-2017, 10:54 PM
Once again, the death spiral of right wing economics is blamed on the left.

Mr. Tea
15-02-2017, 10:54 PM
The corporatisation of education resulted in the supremacy of a managerial class at third level, and as we all know, managers spread like fungus, reproducing themselves at every opportunity.

As a mycophile, I find that highly offensive.

luka
15-02-2017, 10:56 PM
Yeah I mean, what am I supposed to do with that Josef?

What is it you want to say? Don't swish a velvet cloak and flourish a wand. Make a statement and stand behind it or you're just vimothy with a different set of books on your bookcase.

vimothy
15-02-2017, 11:18 PM
Is the managerial state fundamentally right or left wing? I don't know, it certainly proceeds from some sort of ideology.

luka
15-02-2017, 11:27 PM
There's right, there's left and there's illuminati nwo who play both sides against each other. Divide and rule innit.

vimothy
15-02-2017, 11:45 PM
The Illuminati tries to work out what's best without going through politics (politics is a mess).

luka
15-02-2017, 11:57 PM
Yeah good point.

josef k.
16-02-2017, 12:19 AM
Yeah I mean, what am I supposed to do with that Josef?

Obviously the Adminotaurocracy isn't primarily composed of diversity officers. But they are part of the same system of administrative power...


"As hysterics, you demand a new master. You will get it!"


Political conflicts are merely surfaced manifestations. If conflicts arise you may certain powers intend to keep this conflict under operation since they hope to profit from the situation. To concern yourself with surface political conflicts is to make the mistake of the bull in the ring, you are charging the cloth. That is what politics is for, to teach you the cloth. Just as the bullfighter teaches the bull, teaches him to follow, obey the cloth.

luka
16-02-2017, 08:21 AM
That's all well and good but on a less rarefied plane you might find that identifying anti discrimination initiatives with The Enemy wins you a set of admirers and allies who haven't been reading Lacan.

luka
16-02-2017, 08:36 AM
Like, if you find yourself in a historical moment where a load of racists are winning big victories backed by racist supporters it's worth asking is this the correct moment for me to be shaking my fist at the anti discrimination officer at goldsmiths university?

josef k.
16-02-2017, 12:24 PM
That's all well and good but on a less rarefied plane you might find that identifying anti discrimination initiatives with The Enemy wins you a set of admirers and allies who haven't been reading Lacan.


Cernovich said. “Look, I read postmodernist theory in college. If everything is a narrative, then we need alternatives to the dominant narrative.” He smiled. “I don’t seem like a guy who reads Lacan, do I?”

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/31/trolls-for-trump


Like, if you find yourself in a historical moment where a load of racists are winning big victories backed by racist supporters it's worth asking is this the correct moment for me to be shaking my fist at the anti discrimination officer at goldsmiths university?

So what if they're attacking you?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-nvNAcvUPE

The question that interests me is how the mobilized racists and the anti-discrimination officer appear to imply each other.

luka
16-02-2017, 12:34 PM
freaky shit man i reading the nyt article on cernovich right now :confused:

luka
16-02-2017, 12:36 PM
but youre on the wrong track. as craner says earlier in the thread its the danger of living exclusively in a world of ideas. i do think you and vimothy should be talking more though becuase youre both part of this new modern thought movement.

Mr. Tea
16-02-2017, 12:47 PM
I don't think there's much point in denying that hard-left activists and demagogues can be just as obnoxious, hysterical and unencumbered by concerns with factuality and evidence than their hard-right counterparts.

I also don't think there's much point in pretending they're the biggest thing the rest of us have to worry about right now, or that they're primarily responsible for the mess we find ourselves in. They're a piece of the picture, sure, but let's not exaggerate their importance in the scheme of things.

vimothy
16-02-2017, 01:09 PM
You could say the same about right-wing Twitter trolls. But they're both still interesting as expressions of some sort of structural crisis point.

Mr. Tea
16-02-2017, 01:13 PM
You could say the same about right-wing Twitter trolls.

Well yeah, maybe, but there isn't currently a hyper-PC SJW installed in the White House, is there? The hard right and hard left may in some ways mirror each other, but in terms of the balance of power, one side is quite definitely at an advantage over the other.

I think you're right that they're both symptoms of the widespread failure of the political centre, but at this point that's such an obvious conclusion as to be virtually a truism.

sadmanbarty
16-02-2017, 01:22 PM
Can we all agree with the following?:

SJW's/ political correctness/ anti-discriminatory bodies have achieved, and work to achieve, many things that are helpful and morally justified.

There's a contingent within these groups that go against enlightenment and democratic principles when trying to limit free speech or shut down debate. Possibly this phenomenon is not as widespread as elements of the right would have you believe, possibly it is.

There is a resurgence of white nationalism. Some suggest that the white house, or elements within the cabinet, are sympathetic to this ideology.

The president has used authoritarian rhetoric and federal agents have recently defied court orders in favour of the president.

Though all threats posed to democratic and enlightenment values are unacceptable, the threat that is emanating from the Trump presidency is far more immediate and concrete, and deserves far more of our time and energy, than the questionable tactics of some politically correct university students. Moreover political correctness shouldn't be rejected as a whole due to some questionable elements of it.

Mr. Tea
16-02-2017, 01:26 PM
Yeah, that all sounds pretty reasonable. Although I'd replace "Some suggest" with "It is abundantly clear" - but perhaps you were going for ironic understatement here...

sadmanbarty
16-02-2017, 01:31 PM
Although I'd replace "Some suggest" with "It is abundantly clear" - but perhaps you were going for ironic understatement here...

I'm trying to get Vim on board

luka
16-02-2017, 02:27 PM
glad youve had a turn around from your far right moment you were going through a few weeks ago barty. things change quickly when youre young though, i appreciate that. seems a fairly decent summation. i cant remember where josef is on the spectrum? probably changed since he was last here. goldsmiths accelerationism? post alt-right contrarianism? spectral realism?

sadmanbarty
16-02-2017, 02:50 PM
glad youve had a turn around from your far right moment you were going through a few weeks ago barty.

?

luka
16-02-2017, 03:41 PM
Political correctness is anti-intellectual and anti-democratic

Trade unions were too powerful in the 70’s

Nuclear weapons are good

Capitalism is good

Globalisation is good

To the Victor belong the spoils

Western military intervention is a force for good

Railways shouldn’t be renationalised

etc

Mr. Tea
16-02-2017, 03:48 PM
If memory serves, SMB wasn't actually positing any of those things as positions that he (necessarily) holds himself.

luka
16-02-2017, 03:52 PM
he said he was fully intellectually and morally wedded to those positions. tbf theyre all defensible.

sadmanbarty
16-02-2017, 04:17 PM
Given that it's not logical to hold all Mexican rapists and that Trump also said that among them are 'good people', a more charitable transcription of ðeə ˈreɪpɪsts may well have been 'their rapists' rather than 'they're rapists'.

.

josef k.
16-02-2017, 05:33 PM
i cant remember where josef is on the spectrum? probably changed since he was last here. goldsmiths accelerationism? post alt-right contrarianism? spectral realism?

I'll go for the moment with Liberal-Conservative-Socialist.

http://www.mrbauld.com/conlibsoc.html

josef k.
16-02-2017, 05:48 PM
Not a bad essay here -

https://pmacdougald.wordpress.com/2016/04/14/accelerationism-left-and-right/

Some highlights


Most of us, especially if we go to elite colleges, and especially if we take classes in the humanities, are exposed to the left-wing variety. Marx, Freud, Foucault, Fanon, Adorno, Benjamin, Gramsci, Lacan, Derrida, Deleuze-Guattari, Judith Butler, and Zizek (who else?) form a sort of quasi-radical cultural theory canon that achieves a limited but significant penetration in the mind of many American students.... As for right-wing anti-liberalism, however, many people’s intuitive understanding is that it is some sort of bizarre atavism; a product of racism, religious indoctrination, and/or ignorance, with no possible substantive content. No doubt, some of it is – ressentiment is a powerful thing. But calling someone a racist – even if they are a racist – can only get you so far in dismissing an argument, especially if they don’t actually care about the social consequences that usually give a term like that its power. And it would be foolish to simply assume that the fact of their racism (or whatever else) is in itself evidence of their stupidity. Carl Schmitt was a Nazi, and also a brilliant political theorist. These things are not mutually exclusive.



Nick Land’s neoreactionary, right-wing accelerationism is racist in any conventional sense of that term. Yet Land is also a quite interesting thinker of capitalism, and because capitalism, broadly defined, is the reality that structures and will continue to structure human existence throughout the foreseeable future, he is perhaps worth paying attention to. His overriding political and ethical ‘goal,’ from which his racism, his eugenicism, and technological fetishism spring, is optimize for intelligence, which for him is both the Darwinian law of the universe (‘Gnon’), as well as a functional description of what really-exisiting capitalism actually does...The thesis I proposed, however – and its one I know that Twitter (in)famous communist Jehu shares – is that for all the good intentions of the Left-Accels, Land’s “right” version of Accelerationism is the only authentic and logically consistent form of Accelerationism, as well as the only one that helps us understand anything about the dynamics of capitalism.


[W]ithin the orthodox Marxist schema, the labor theory of value (LTV) provided a built-in theoretical escape hatch from capitalism in the form of the revolutionary proletarian subject. Both Landian Accelerationism and orthodox Marxism acknowledge that the technological drive of the capitalism leads towards the increasing superfluousness of human labor to economic production. Within the LTV frame, however, as living human labor is the ultimate source of all value, the abolition of human labor from the productive process is ultimately the abolition of the law of value itself: a work free, high-tech Eden, the end of mankind’s prehistory, communism. Yet absent the LTV – which has grown increasingly difficult to maintain in the 20th and 21st centuries, and which Left Accelerationism makes no serious attempt to defend – the entire schema falls apart...

More strikingly, absent LTV, the problem posed to humanity by the technological drive of capital is not how to reach the New Jerusalem that the elimination of human labor from the production process will allow, but that this elimination will simply result in humans becoming superfluous to an increasingly autonomic system of machine production. What we will do with a warming planet of 10 billion people when progressively fewer of them can be productively integrated into the global economy, the marginal cost of their labor sinks below the cost of their own social reproduction, and states are obliged to provide for larger and larger numbers of unproductive workers at the expense of smaller and smaller numbers of high-skill workers who can still be plugged in to economically-productive roles? This is an entirely different economic, political, and ethical problematic. In this landscape, Land’s killer AI, speciation, and Galt’s Gulch-style ‘exit’ all begin to look like provisional speculative (if malevolent) answers to the question of: what do you do with all these (economically) useless people?

josef k.
16-02-2017, 09:12 PM
That's all well and good but on a less rarefied plane you might find that identifying anti discrimination initiatives with The Enemy wins you a set of admirers and allies who haven't been reading Lacan.

To be clear, I don't find myself personally triggered by SJWs, but I don't meet them too often.


but youre on the wrong track. as craner says earlier in the thread its the danger of living exclusively in a world of ideas.

To be fair, we are talking about a philosophical movement on the internet.

Also the interesting element isn't ideas, but desires - and especially, the desire for identity constructed against a certain image of the other, upon whom it depends.


I don't think there's much point in denying that hard-left activists and demagogues can be just as obnoxious, hysterical and unencumbered by concerns with factuality and evidence than their hard-right counterparts.

My claim is that they structurally imply each other, like a policeman and a criminal. The police require criminals, otherwise, there wouldn't be a need for the police. Accordingly, it acts to criminalize.

Similarly, if your identity (= your imaginary compensation for your useless education) is based on anti-racism, or anti-fascism you are going to need racists and fascists. Perhaps you will need to create them...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_c7sbaihHE

This video will have been reposted on every right-wing website in North America as a perfect demonstration of the racist, crazy, violent, terroristic (Muslim!) Left.

Joe White clicks and watches, and what does he think?

"Hmm, maybe white supremacy's not such a bad idea."


Well yeah, maybe, but there isn't currently a hyper-PC SJW installed in the White House, is there?

But how did he get there? Nick Land suggests "Breitbart, and then Bannon, made the punt that the leftist-tears flavored popcorn market was the largest untapped opportunity out there." (https://twitter.com/Outsideness/status/831743000191574016)

Mr. Tea
16-02-2017, 09:41 PM
My claim is that they structurally imply each other, like a policeman and a criminal. The police require criminals, otherwise, there wouldn't be a need for the police. Accordingly, it acts to criminalize.

Similarly, if your identity (= your imaginary compensation for your useless education) is based on anti-racism, or anti-fascism you are going to need racists and fascists. Perhaps you will need to create them...


Well you might have hoped there was no need to create racists in a world that contains Bannon, Spencer, Yiannopoulos and all the rest. I think it's a grave error on the part of some of the more out-there hyper-left activists to use 'racist' and 'fascist' as slurs against anyone who thinks or speaks differently from themselves, because it de-fangs those words and makes their wider cause into a laughing stock by extension (as you point out, of course).

This was gone over fairly thoroughly here a few months back, shame you missed it I think.

luka
16-02-2017, 10:09 PM
The whole thing is just a product of people winding each other up on twitter.

Mr. Tea
16-02-2017, 10:17 PM
I think it's fair to say it's got a little out of hand.

baboon2004
16-02-2017, 10:42 PM
Also the interesting element isn't ideas, but desires - and especially, the desire for identity constructed against a certain image of the other, upon whom it depends.

My claim is that they structurally imply each other, like a policeman and a criminal. The police require criminals, otherwise, there wouldn't be a need for the police. Accordingly, it acts to criminalize.

Similarly, if your identity (= your imaginary compensation for your useless education) is based on anti-racism, or anti-fascism you are going to need racists and fascists. Perhaps you will need to create them...


The analogy doesn't really work; more importantly, it's strange that you are focusing on the identity needs of those who oppose racism, whereas the obvious thing to focus upon in the current world are the identity needs/desires of those who employ racism. (If I'm not wrong, you yourself quoted James Baldwin on the very issue of the destructiveness of white identity politics not long ago. And following from that quote/sentiment, when a lot of white people mention 'identity politics', they seem to forget that white people even have an identity, in rather the same way as people from the south of England forget they have an accent, because they're so focused on using the Other to define their own identity.etcetc)

Even more obviously, a lot of people are anti-racist and anti-fascist as part of their identity, because, well, y'know, racism and fascism threaten them directly. In fact, I might suggest that such people form the vast majority of anti-racists and anti-fascists, even were they not to desire to identify themselves as such.

But I think the focus on identity and the desire for identity is spot on in trying to understand so many things about the world.

josef k.
18-02-2017, 01:03 PM
"[O]nce we have made practically certain that the LD50 gallery is closed permanently and that the people who live in its vicinity know exactly what it was doing – once this has been achieved, how do we reconceive our own art to ensure that it never again serves as a conveniently indeterminate incubator for those who would gladly destroy us, our friends and neighbours and comrades, along with any latent possibility of a genuinely open and revolutionary culture or emancipated society?"


http://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/it-ok-to-punch-nazi-art-gallery

sufi
19-02-2017, 08:05 PM
4chan: The Skeleton Key to the Rise of Trump

Trump’s younger supporters know he’s an incompetent joke; in fact, that’s why they support him.

https://medium.com/@DaleBeran/4chan-the-skeleton-key-to-the-rise-of-trump-624e7cb798cb#.85549j1qe

Interesting on the nihilist/victim-complex end of the sub-dom pivot in the alt-right/trumpite current, and it's incompatibility with snowflakeist safespaceisms and whatnot

(via @sarahkendzior <- if you didn't yet, then shut up til you have btw)

baboon2004
19-02-2017, 08:42 PM
http://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/it-ok-to-punch-nazi-art-gallery

That's fucked up. My g/f knows one of the academics on that list, and that person certainly isn't a fascist, but is/was presumably unaware of who some of the other speakers were going to be.

Just noted the before and after Brexit split on their roster.

Mr. Tea
19-02-2017, 09:24 PM
Interesting on the nihilist/victim-complex end of the sub-dom pivot in the alt-right/trumpite current, and it's incompatibility with snowflakeist safespaceisms and whatnot

(via @sarahkendzior <- if you didn't yet, then shut up til you have btw)


Trump the loser, the outsider, the hot mess, the pathetic joke, embodies this duality. Trump represents both the alpha and the beta. He is a successful person who, as the left often notes, is also the exact opposite — a grotesque loser, sensitive and prideful about his outsider status, ready at the drop of a hat to go on the attack, self-obsessed, selfish, abrogating, unquestioning of his own mansplaining and spreading, so insecure he must assault women.

Huh, that's actually pretty perceptive. Good piece, cheers.

vimothy
20-02-2017, 10:40 AM
Concise description of (right) accelerationism from Mark Fisher:


In the words of the late Mark Fisher one of the thinkers of Left Accelerationism who conceived of Right Accelerationism as, “Deleuze and Guattari’s machinic desire remorselessly stripped of all Bergsonian vitalism, and made backwards-compatible with Freud’s death drive and Schopenhauer’s Will. The Hegelian-Marxist motor of history is then transplanted into this pulsional nihilism: the idiotic autonomic Will no longer circulating idiotically on the spot, but upgraded into a drive, and guided by a quasi-teleological artificial intelligence attractor that draws terrestrial history over a series of intensive thresholds that have no eschatological point of consummation, and that reach empirical termination only contingently if and when its material substrate burns out. This is Hegelian-Marxist historical materialism inverted: Capital will not be ultimately unmasked as exploited labour power; rather, humans are the meat puppet of Capital, their identities and self-understandings are simulations that can and will ultimately be sloughed off.”

http://tripleampersand.org/nick-land-accelerationism/

josef k.
20-02-2017, 04:11 PM
"Contrary to this eulogy, Left Accelerationism never really grasped Nick Land's critique of capitalism."

https://twitter.com/Damn_Jehu/status/831943031590903808

https://medium.com/@syffr/requiem-for-left-accelerationism-4048d8bec72e#.pjjd5bab0

vimothy
20-02-2017, 05:02 PM
I wonder how many neoreactionaries grasp Nick Land's critique of capitalism.

luka
20-02-2017, 06:02 PM
Woops! Just told me hes mate works for that nazi art gallery in Dalston lol so typical.

josef k.
20-02-2017, 07:53 PM
I wonder how many neoreactionaries grasp Nick Land's critique of capitalism.

I think the main thing they grasp is the critique of the Left.

Mr. Tea
20-02-2017, 07:59 PM
Woops! Just told me hes mate works for that nazi art gallery in Dalston lol so typical.

Is it Alex Sebley? I bet it's Alex.

josef k.
20-02-2017, 10:58 PM
Here's another good one


The rise in education costs is runaway rule by priests. Most education is useless, and gets more useless at the higher levels. If you ask why we are giving more stupid people more useless education even though it costs much more than it used to, then you also have the answer to why it costs more. If you have priests in charge, they will make everyone go to church all the time. Our education system is the state church making everyone go to church and attend religious festivals. It is time for the Dissolution of the Monasteries. We need degree deflation.

http://blog.jim.com/economics/the-cost-disease/

luka
20-02-2017, 11:06 PM
leon DC Miller • a day ago

Daniel, sorry but you're not a sensitive thinker, you're just a trust fund loser who trolls chatrooms, mute articles, panel discussions (from the audience) and trump subreddits while wandering around europe on airbnb residencies avoiding your failure. get a life.

ant_knee DC Miller • 12 hours ago

DC Miller, seems Leon already has you down. In relation to your slurs on Mute, try reading this http://www.metamute.org/editor...
and reconsidering your idiotic opinions about class composition in Egypt and the Arab Spring. Did your 'Egyptian pilot' have their feet on the ground or were they expressing the same racist class fears you share from a distance, fear of that the poor and exploited will step out from the material and mental cage of religion and state and do something for themselves? Also, think twice before claiming anonymity=cowardice, those who mock it often have nothing to fear from repressive states, violent racists or misogynists. None of which you have really thought hard enough about. still confused, read on: http://www.metamute.org/editor...

luka
20-02-2017, 11:07 PM
London is small and we're all just a couple of degrees of seperation away

luka
20-02-2017, 11:08 PM
i can reach out and touch anyone here and vice versa

craner
20-02-2017, 11:27 PM
Only 2 hours away from Barry Wetherspoons

josef k.
21-02-2017, 12:21 AM
It's a dirty job but someone has to do it.

Luka, is there a good reason for reposting anonymous people insulting me?

josef k.
21-02-2017, 10:59 PM
Also, everyone in London - strongly recommend "Join us to leaflet against the gallery on the corner of Tottenham Road and Kingsland Road next Saturday (25 February) at 11am." - it's going to be AMAZING!

john eden
26-02-2017, 12:31 PM
Also, everyone in London - strongly recommend "Join us to leaflet against the gallery on the corner of Tottenham Road and Kingsland Road next Saturday (25 February) at 11am." - it's going to be AMAZING!

How was it for you, Josef?

john eden
28-03-2017, 06:49 PM
Oh well Josef seems to have gone quiet on us.

This just in:

No Platform for Land: On Nick Land’s Racist Capitalism and a More General Problem

https://shutdownld50.tumblr.com/post/158928600961/no-platform-for-land-on-nick-lands-racist

vimothy
16-04-2017, 08:19 PM
Recent update: https://medium.com/@dctvbot/no-platform-for-aristotle-867a04c5da50

vimothy
16-04-2017, 10:38 PM
Some video highlights of the SDLD50 march: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2I9B4UZEO4

luka
16-04-2017, 11:35 PM
Some video highlights of the SDLD50 march: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2I9B4UZEO4

lol that skinny lad in the beanie is one of ours! defending fascism!

luka
16-04-2017, 11:37 PM
josepf k lool lool lol

bruno
16-04-2017, 11:59 PM
sadly this type of political interaction is becoming the norm, very unhinged. we need a return to civility.

bruno
17-04-2017, 12:00 AM
or destroy the antifa left like the rabid dogs they are.

bruno
17-04-2017, 12:29 AM
a better video of the event:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsiFLt5GorU

dctvbot: i believe in open discussion..
antifa: i don't care what you believe!

droid
17-04-2017, 12:47 AM
Astounding in this day and age that people still believe you can debate Nazis and fascists. Destructive, thick headed liberalism at its worst.

bruno
17-04-2017, 12:54 AM
the far left has never believed in debate, hence the nazi/fascist tags to shut down the possibility. in any case you need not worry as there was no attempt to debate.

droid
17-04-2017, 01:04 AM
Laughably wrong. Antifa are anarchists, and the achilles heel of anarchism is the willingness to debate and the emphasis on consensus.

But you dont debate with fascism. It's a poisonous anti-human ideology that deserves only to be crushed.

sadmanbarty
17-04-2017, 01:24 AM
But you dont debate with fascism. It's a poisonous anti-human ideology that deserves only to be crushed.

You sound like when anakin goes evil in the prequels.

bruno
17-04-2017, 01:25 AM
Laughably wrong. Antifa are anarchists, and the achilles heel of anarchism is the willingness to debate and the emphasis on consensus.

But you dont debate with fascism. It's a poisonous anti-human ideology that deserves only to be crushed.

whatever, they are indistinguishable from the revolutionary left in language and action. the fascism card is old as the hills and used to lethal effect in places where the state has been dismantled/overtaken. it's quite simply an unwillingness to engage ideas outside a very narrow ideologically pure spectrum. i have nothing but contempt for this.

droid
17-04-2017, 02:18 AM
Sure, but you also think Trump cant be racist because he's friends with Kanye.

bruno
17-04-2017, 05:41 AM
it is called dissensus. presumably in the spirit of dissent. but you can keep deflecting or address the above.

john eden
17-04-2017, 07:54 AM
or destroy the antifa left like the rabid dogs they are.

Maybe you should debate us rather than calling for our eradication and comparing us to rabid dogs? :x:

vimothy
17-04-2017, 08:55 AM
Maybe you should debate us rather than calling for our eradication and comparing us to rabid dogs? :x:

"You don't debate with antifa, it's a poisonous ideology that deserves to be eradicated" is obviously isomorphic to the equivalent claim about fascism. Such claims have a tactical utility that strictly dominate any kind of principled position. As long as you can paint your ideological opponents as fascists / antifa / the evil other, then doing the hard work of debating their ideas becomes superfluous and you can instead enjoy exercising arbitrary power over them.

luka
17-04-2017, 11:23 AM
the whole thing is embarassing from start to finish

https://medium.com/@dctvbot/no-platform-for-aristotle-867a04c5da50

our josefs account

luka
17-04-2017, 11:26 AM
i mean leaving aside the rights and wrongs of it theyre all a bunch of fucking sadcases.

bruno
17-04-2017, 06:12 PM
Maybe you should debate us rather than calling for our eradication and comparing us to rabid dogs? :x:

i apologise, it was said in jest to contrast with my call to civility. i do hate violence, especially as i was on the receiving end last year (assaulted and stabbed).

john eden
17-04-2017, 06:31 PM
i apologise, it was said in jest to contrast with my call to civility. i do hate violence, especially as i was on the receiving end last year (assaulted and stabbed).

Well I am sorry to hear that.

Presumably you would also agree that standing outside a gallery and being on the receiving end of some harsh words and having a cardboard placard taken off you isn't really a comparable level of violence to getting stabbed though?

bruno
17-04-2017, 07:34 PM
Presumably you would also agree that standing outside a gallery and being on the receiving end of some harsh words and having a cardboard placard taken off you isn't really a comparable level of violence to getting stabbed though?
no, but dehumanising your opponent is tacit permission to excercise violence. in a way it's the desired end as in the video – to push the other once too often so as to generate a response. luckily mr josef k was cool and steadfast.

john eden
17-04-2017, 08:59 PM
no, but dehumanising your opponent is tacit permission to excercise violence. in a way it's the desired end as in the video – to push the other once too often so as to generate a response. luckily mr josef k was cool and steadfast.

Well it was certainly a heated environment, which I think is both predictable and understandable.

226

Mr. Tea
17-04-2017, 09:20 PM
If it's true that Lucia Diego had rocks thrown through her windows, as Josef K reports, I expect she was probably left wondering whether some fairly serious violence was about to be visited upon her person. And threats of murder or other personal violence (e.g. rape) over social media have become absolutely standard tactics for the more unhinged sorts of activists, whatever their professed ideology.


They came as a group, some with usernames, to the event page, informing the owners of the bookshop that the man giving the talk, your correspondent, was a fascist sympathizer who had defended the Nazi gallery in London. A guy called Justin Katko wrote: “Fascists should have their tongues cut out before they are allowed to speak.”

It's hard to avoid the irony when professed anti-fascists talk about how they'd prefer to deal with their enemies in precisely the sort of terms that fascists have historically dealt with theirs. That's not to say "they're as bad as each other" - of course it isn't - but does suggest some fairly similar emotional processes on each side.

And as following on from luka's comments on the previous page, reading about this stuff does nothing to dispel the notion that the art world is packed to the rafters with self-important bellends, regardless of their politics.

luka
17-04-2017, 10:16 PM
I am fond of Anders Breivik for reasons other than what they surmised. Most Right-wingers who turn to violence and are aware of the white genocide issue tend to go out and shoot some of the Other; I praised Breivik because instead, he shot the members of Us who had turned to Leftism, and so raised the cost of being a Leftist and drove people away from participating in that pathological cultlike gang of civilization-wreckers. Breivik (read his manifesto including one of my writings) showed us humane anti-internationalist terrorism: he shot the people responsible — white liberals — rather than the symptoms and tools of their perfidy, the non-whites brought in by the white Leftists.
This is part of a pattern on Amerika. It will never make me friends, but I attack the tendency of some on the Right to scapegoat when the actual enemy is within: we did this to ourselves, through an individualism which became collectivized, creating a solipsistic society, which has then engendered a number of symptoms of its failure, including Leftism, consumerism, mob rule, diversity and a rather disgusting attention whoring egoism. Black people, The Jew,™ African-Americans, Muslims, The Rich,™ and Freemasons did not “do this to us.” We did it to us. We have met the enemy, and he is us. We have to change ourselves, and stop being individualistic so that we can (instead) focus on eternal and transcendental truths, and use those to understand how to restore the fallen Western Civilization.

droid
17-04-2017, 10:22 PM
Dear god. Who is responsible for that?

luka
17-04-2017, 10:29 PM
Some sad attention seeking cunt.

luka
17-04-2017, 10:32 PM
Josef is making some strange allies. (his name is brett Stevens and was part of the ld50 conference)

droid
17-04-2017, 10:41 PM
The sophomoric 'who are the real fascists?" response, the calling card for well meaning liberals who rush to defend the free speech of fascists is as illuminating as it is tiresome.

Perhaps the most salient response is simply to point out the historical myopia. Antifa do not simply attack or confront anyone who they 'ideologically oppose', if that were true then every Tory constituency office and GOP town hall would be mobbed. Antifa target fascists and nazis. how do we know they are fascists and nazis? Because they explicitly espouse fascist and nazis ideas and politics.

From cable street to the street fights of the 70's, 80's and 90's, Antifa have fought against Mosley, the BNP, the EDL, the KKK, the Aryan front, white power movements, and extreme right wing ideology throughout Europe and the US, and up until relatively have been mainly successful in preventing these groups from obtaining platforms and mainstream popularity as well as defending the local people and communities they target.

I cant say I agree with every target, I certainly dont agree on a strategic level with certain black bloc tactics, but we should all be thankful they are there. They have saved lives, of that there is no question. The idea that they simply brand anyone who disagrees with them as fascists so they can physically attack them is pretty much entirely unsupported by evidence and in a wider sense the idea that fascism is something you can have a reasonable conversation with is so staggeringly naive and dangerous that it is amazing its even articulated.

vimothy
17-04-2017, 10:59 PM
There's probably some truth in that, but it's also mixed in with self-important PR on the part of the "antifa" (here, a bunch of post-grads from Goldsmiths). The people targeted in this campaign were not fascists or neo-Nazis, but an art gallery in London, a Jewish bookshop in Berlin, and (at present) various people and institutions associated with Nick Land (such Urbanomic, who published a collection of his writings).

sadmanbarty
17-04-2017, 11:21 PM
This is seemingly a more novel opinion on dissensus than I thought it would be, but for the record I'm against unaccountable mobs intimidating people into political conformity.

Mr. Tea
17-04-2017, 11:30 PM
The sophomoric 'who are the real fascists?" response, the calling card for well meaning liberals who rush to defend the free speech of fascists is as illuminating as it is tiresome.

OK, well I went out of my way to point out that that's not what I was saying, but I should have known it would be wasted.


Perhaps the most salient response is simply to point out the historical myopia. Antifa do not simply attack or confront anyone who they 'ideologically oppose', if that were true then every Tory constituency office and GOP town hall would be mobbed. Antifa target fascists and nazis. how do we know they are fascists and nazis? Because they explicitly espouse fascist and nazis ideas and politics.

.........

I cant say I agree with every target...

They attacked Daniel Miller/Josef K. Do you think he's either a "fascist" or a "Nazi", though? Is he even an "ally" of fascism because he questioned the shutting down of a gallery by a load of furious people who didn't really know anything about the exhibition it had hosted? It's a shame he's buggered off again because I'd be interested to hear his response to being labelled a Nazi - but perhaps his stay was so short because he knew that was exactly the response he'd get from some quarters.

And if you want to talk about history, you must surely be aware of some of the things that been done in the name of anti-fascism, such as the atrocities committed by the Soviets in eastern Europe during and after WWII - many of them committed against civilians who'd already been brutalized by the Nazis themselves. Today a similar position is being taken by Assad and his Russian and Iranian backers in their war against "ISIS". (I'll save you the bother of pointing out that the USA has an extensive record of doing much the same in the name of "anti-communism", of course.)

An insistence on seeing the world in absolute bipolar monochrome, "you're either with us or against is", is common to extremists of all stripes. You're doing it yourself, right now.

luka
17-04-2017, 11:37 PM
Josef, like vimothy, is coy about his politics, but I think you can read between the lines to some extent. I've never considered vimothy to be a dickhead though. Josef is clearly a dickhead and so are many of his opponents.

My guess would be neither are remotely Fascist but harbour opinions yer everyday liberal humanist would baulk at.

In principle I agree with Barty but equally am unable to get terribly upset when dickheads get a slap, whether literally or figuratively, all the more so when they've been asking for it.

vimothy
17-04-2017, 11:47 PM
Might be the nicest thing you've ever said about me, Luka.

Mr. Tea
17-04-2017, 11:59 PM
To put it even more bluntly: do you agree with ripping people's tongues out because you disagree with what they have to say, even if what they have to say is unequivocally fascist? (Which, I hope we can agree, josef k is not.)

vimothy
18-04-2017, 12:01 AM
On some level, this is a spat between a bunch of art students and possibly not the most pressing issue facing humanity today. That said, it's still interesting how, within one culturally influential community, discussions about fascism -- especially the populist nationalism which is a major driving force in global politics at present -- are extremely difficult, if not impossible.

luka
18-04-2017, 12:02 AM
Yes, well, I'll double down on that then. despite hoping you'll grow out of some of your sillier/willfully provocative positions, I can't help thinking you are an actual human being, intelligent in some respects,self aware, often witty and with a sense of proportion and decency that stops you from taking your professed politics too seriously.

Or, to use a more traditional formulation
I'd go for a pint with you. I wouldnt go for a pint with josef.

vimothy
18-04-2017, 12:17 AM
Wow, it gets better/worse. No idea how to respond to kindness other than to slink off in shame. You win this time!

droid
18-04-2017, 12:33 AM
OK, well I went out of my way to point out that that's not what I was saying, but I should have known it would be wasted.

Tea, has it occurred to you that this wasn't aimed at you at all?



They attacked Daniel Miller/Josef K. Do you think he's either a "fascist" or a "Nazi", though? Is he even an "ally" of fascism because he questioned the shutting down of a gallery by a load of furious people who didn't really know anything about the exhibition it had hosted? It's a shame he's buggered off again because I'd be interested to hear his response to being labelled a Nazi - but perhaps his stay was so short because he knew that was exactly the response he'd get from some quarters.

No, I think he is deeply misguided, and I even have some perverse admiration of his willingness to defend his ideas, but on the other hand, from what I know of the gallery it was dodgy as fuck and I can understand why hed be met with hostility (and the reactions in those videos are fairly mild TBH) by anti fascists.


And if you want to talk about history, you must surely be aware of some of the things that been done in the name of anti-fascism, such as the atrocities committed by the Soviets in eastern Europe during and after WWII - many of them committed against civilians who'd already been brutalized by the Nazis themselves. Today a similar position is being taken by Assad and his Russian and Iranian backers in their war against "ISIS". (I'll save you the bother of pointing out that the USA has an extensive record of doing much the same in the name of "anti-communism", of course.)

Wow. What a bizarre conflation of tenuously related events. Not even going to bother dissembling them TBH.


An insistence on seeing the world in absolute bipolar monochrome, "you're either with us or against is", is common to extremists of all stripes. You're doing it yourself, right now.

Er no, no Im not, but Id welcome any quotes you can provide to suggest otherwise.

droid
18-04-2017, 12:52 AM
To put it even more bluntly: do you agree with ripping people's tongues out because you disagree with what they have to say, even if what they have to say is unequivocally fascist? (Which, I hope we can agree, josef k is not.)

There are arseholes everywhere, and clearly that is extreme and unfair.

However to use your example of the unequivocal fascist - how should the Caribbean immigrant react to a neo-nazi actively agitating for their extermination? How should the Jew react to entreaties to 'get in the oven' from white supremacists? Hitler was right about one thing. Fascism must be strangled in its cradle for the sake of us all because, in political terms it is a unique evil in that it's political program is based explicitly and unapologetically on genocide.

droid
18-04-2017, 10:52 AM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9f92aeXgAAynJC.jpg:large

john eden
18-04-2017, 11:25 AM
I'm confused about why some random on the internet who said that fascists should have their tongues cut out is being condemned by Mr Tea but not Brett Stevens, who inspired Breivik and then went on to praise him after he had killed 77 people.

Stevens was an invited guest speaker at LD50. Understandably some people were not happy about that.

The idea that some words on the internet and a bit of pushing and shoving outside a gallery is somehow symmetrical to the rise in alt-right lone wolf terrorism is liberalism at its most bleakly comical.

Mr. Tea
18-04-2017, 12:49 PM
Tea, has it occurred to you that this wasn't aimed at you at all?

Well hang on, you didn't really go out of your way to make it clear that it wasn't aimed at me, it's just the kind of thing you say to me all the time and the only other person who'd replied between my post and yours was luka, and it clearly wasn't aimed at him - but if it genuinely wasn't aimed at me either then fair enough.


No, I think he is deeply misguided, and I even have some perverse admiration of his willingness to defend his ideas, but on the other hand, from what I know of the gallery it was dodgy as fuck and I can understand why hed be met with hostility (and the reactions in those videos are fairly mild TBH) by anti fascists.

Wow. What a bizarre conflation of tenuously related events. Not even going to bother dissembling them TBH.

My point was that it's possible to go from an entirely justified position: "Fascists are the scum of the earth and it's the duty of all good people to oppose them" - to a not-so-justified position: "Arbitrarily severe violence is always justified against arbitrarily minor instances of fascism" (an exhibition in an obscure gallery most people have never heard of, as unpleasant as the exhibits may be, does not equal invading Poland) or "The target of anyone who claims to be fighting fascism is by definition a fascist" (hence the example of Soviet brutality against German and other civilians in WWII, or Russian and Syrian state violence against Syrian civilians happening right now).


Er no, no Im not, but Id welcome any quotes you can provide to suggest otherwise.

I was talking about a rather extreme and graphic threat made specifically against josef k on the grounds that he is allegedly a "fascist" or a "Nazi". You said:


Antifa do not simply attack or confront anyone who they 'ideologically oppose' ... Antifa target fascists and nazis

They certainly confronted josef k, which means you've convicted him in absentia of being a fascist, haven't you? That's what I mean by bipolar morality.

To be honest I have a hard time believing you're actually naive enough to think that no self-proclaimed anti-fascist has ever threatened or insulted anyone who is not, when all's said and done, a fascist (any more than you'd believe that no-one who isn't a dyed-in-the-wool Jew-hater has ever been accused of anti-Semitism). You even backtracked a bit on this with your concession that "there are arseholes everywhere", but wouldn't it be more realistic and humane to go a bit further and admit that a culture in which an accusation of being a "racist", "fascist" or "Nazi" is considered as good as a conviction, and therefore justification for any level of abuse and intimidation, might be problematic and perhaps very often counter-productive?

luka
18-04-2017, 12:56 PM
Well you've hit on the problem with all team sports, like ice hockey, volleyball and politics, you have to work with people you personally despise if you want to win anything.

droid
18-04-2017, 01:05 PM
Fucks sake Tea, is it possible for you to imagine that a conversation of which you happen to be part of isnt actually all about you? Is it possible I was reacting to Vimothy and the guy from this very board who actually stood outside a right wing art gallery with a placard?

You get personally invested in these things, smear your ignorance all over the board and then massively overreach, leaving yourself open to all kinds of justifiable attacks and then, rather than take your medicine you screech around for a bit until everyone gets too sick of it to continue. This is followed by the nursing of imaginary wounds to your pride only for them to be ripped open again the next time you see an opportunity for revenge via pedantic nitpicking, furious misreading and logical fallacy. This is not a productive or healthy pattern.

*Dammit, I see you've edited the bit about me seeing myself as being one of 'the good people', which I have to say was fantastically hilarious.

Mr. Tea
18-04-2017, 01:08 PM
I'm confused about why some random on the internet who said that fascists should have their tongues cut out is being condemned by Mr Tea but not Brett Stevens, who inspired Breivik and then went on to praise him after he had killed 77 people.


Someone on the internet said that a particular person, who is or used to be a contributor to this forum, should have his tongue cut out, as punishment for questioning the use of mob tactics to shut down a gallery.

And please, do I really have to point out that an obvious neo-Nazi is a bad person in order to avoid implications that I'm somehow sympathetic? Bit of a dick move there John, no? For the record, NAZIS ARE BAD. Thanks for listening.

john eden
18-04-2017, 01:27 PM
Someone on the internet said that a particular person, who is or used to be a contributor to this forum, should have his tongue cut out, as punishment for questioning the use of mob tactics to shut down a gallery.

And please, do I really have to point out that an obvious neo-Nazi is a bad person in order to avoid implications that I'm somehow sympathetic? Bit of a dick move there John, no? For the record, NAZIS ARE BAD. Thanks for listening.

My point is that he still has his tongue, whereas the victims of Breivik are still very much dead.

You may have noticed that there is a toxic internet culture in which threats are tossed about willy nilly every second. I am not especially happy about it, not least because it seems overwhelmingly biased against the traditional victims of fascism - women, gay people, and non-whites.

Once again you have leapt on and fixated on this one unrepresentative thing (as you did with the Morning Star in the "what do the right get right" thread) to the exclusion of everything else. Antifa and any attempts to oppose fascism is bad because one anonymous person (who for all we know isn't even an anti-fascist) said something bad on the internet.

In other news, I am still alive despite being threatened by some actual Nazis some years ago. Some of the people I know in that video are still around despite being involved with proper physical confrontations with Nazis.

LD50 is gone, and most people apart from you think that Josef K is a dick. At the end of the day he has lost a bit of a cardboard with some writing on it and not been able to give a talk about Evola. Call me Stalin, but I think that is a price worth paying for not having Nazis congregating in my community.

Mr. Tea
18-04-2017, 03:33 PM
My point is that he still has his tongue, whereas the victims of Breivik are still very much dead.

Yes, clearly that's true - but no-one here is supporting Breivik, or supporting this other guy who supports Breivik, or saying "anti-fascists are just as bad as fascists".


You may have noticed that there is a toxic internet culture in which threats are tossed about willy nilly every second. I am not especially happy about it, not least because it seems overwhelmingly biased against the traditional victims of fascism - women, gay people, and non-whites.

Again, yes, this is obviously true. Equally obviously, people who live for the thrill of making kneejerk accusations of racism and fascism are making the problem worse.


Antifa and any attempts to oppose fascism is bad...

Oh come on, who's generalizing now? Where did I ever say opposing fascism is bad? Again, if I have to state the bleeding fucking obvious, any action that's likely to reduce the sum total of fascism in the world is a good thing and to be applauded. And I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about actions that, however good they may feel to the person making them at the time, may be having an effect opposite to the one intended.


...because one anonymous person (who for all we know isn't even an anti-fascist) said something bad on the internet.

If you're advocating cutting tongues out of a certain sort of person, I think it's fair to say you are "anti" that sort of person.


.In other news, I am still alive despite being threatened by some actual Nazis some years ago. Some of the people I know in that video are still around despite being involved with proper physical confrontations with Nazis.

LD50 is gone, and most people apart from you think that Josef K is a dick. At the end of the day he has lost a bit of a cardboard with some writing on it and not been able to give a talk about Evola. Call me Stalin, but I think that is a price worth paying for not having Nazis congregating in my community.

Physical confrontations with actual Nazis are totally fine by me, and I never said otherwise. It was fine in 1939 and it's fine now.

I have no personal friendship with josef k, and it may well be the case that he is a dick. I would like to think not, because I had some interesting conversations with him on here years ago, but then it's possible to have interesting things to say and still personally be a dick, just as it's possible to be dull and pleasant. I'm glad no-one got stabbed or had their tongue cut out, and I'm sure he'll recover from the trauma of being de-placarded and called some nasty things. It may even be the case that the stuff on show in LD50 was so unequivocally fascistic (I haven't seen any of it myself, of course - in common with everyone else here, I think?) that the only possible response from a decent person would've been to call for it to be cancelled. Maybe that was the whole point right from the start. Does that make josef k a "fascist" for disagreeing with the way this was done and objecting to the way he was subsequently treated? The possible negative consequences of this kind of behaviour are not that placards get nicked or talks cancelled, but that people who are not actually fascists may end up being forced into a default position that looks like apology or sympathy for real fascists by activists whose tactics of first resort are to clamour for events to be shut down and then enforce those demands by making threats.

john eden
18-04-2017, 03:55 PM
If you're advocating cutting tongues out of a certain sort of person, I think it's fair to say you are "anti" that sort of person.

Well no, because it's an established tactic of the alt-right (and the state, if you want to get into it) to discredit the left with wildly over the top provocations. Hence:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/inside-the-alt-rights-campaign-to-smear-trump-protesters-as?utm_term=.yy0bYxvGg#.cx12YB0nd

In addition to that, there are a lot of very bored alienated people sitting around on the net who like to make threats which never come to fruition.


Physical confrontations with actual Nazis are totally fine by me, and I never said otherwise. It was fine in 1939 and it's fine now.

OK good, but you do accept that it is not possible to do this without there being some mess sometimes?


I have no personal friendship with josef k, and it may well be the case that he is a dick. I would like to think not, because I had some interesting conversations with him on here years ago, but then it's possible to have interesting things to say and still personally be a dick, just as it's possible to be dull and pleasant. I'm glad no-one got stabbed or had their tongue cut out, and I'm sure he'll recover from the trauma of being de-placarded and called some nasty things. It may even be the case that the stuff on show in LD50 was so unequivocally fascistic (I haven't seen any of it myself, of course - in common with everyone else here, I think?) that the only possible response from a decent person would've been to call for it to be cancelled. Maybe that was the whole point right from the start. Does that make josef k a "fascist" for disagreeing with the way this was done and objecting to the way he was subsequently treated? The possible negative consequences of this kind of behaviour are not that placards get nicked or talks cancelled, but that people who are not actually fascists may end up being forced into a default position that looks like apology or sympathy for real fascists by activists whose tactics of first resort are to clamour for events to be shut down and then enforce those demands by making threats.

1. Nobody was ever going to get "stabbed or have their tongue cut out". FFS.

2. I have posted one of the LD50 exhibits upthread which is a Hitler quote next to Taylor Swift alongside the "3 7s" swastika variant that was used by the AWB in South Africa and by the explicitly neo-nazi Blood & Honour group in the UK. Luka has posted a quote from an LD50 speaker who inspired Breivik and who praised him after his crime. Maybe that isn't "unequivocally fascist" to you?

3. I don't know whether Josef K is a fascist or not. (The person behind the camera is a rising star of the alt-right and is a friend of Tommy Robinson of the EDL, but I understand they don't know each other). If he chooses to defend fascists then I'm afraid he can't expect that to be a neutral, intellectual, emotion free experience. The same is true (more so) for people who publicly oppose fascism. All of this mock horror raised eyebrow stuff is duplicitous bullshit. If you go to an anti-fascist protest to defend fascists there will be a reaction. Usually it will be proportionate, as it was in this case.

droid
18-04-2017, 04:30 PM
And this isnt just some abstract arty bullshit. LD50 hosted what was effectively a secret fascist conference.


Guests at LD50’s Neoreaction conference last summer included Brett Stevens, the white supremacist whose writing was an inspiration to Oslo far-right terrorist Anders Breivik, who murdered 77 people in 2011.

After Breivik’s attack, Stevens wrote: “I am honored to be so mentioned by someone who is clearly far braver than I, no comment on his methods, but he chose to act where many of us write, think and dream.”

Others on the conference programme included anti-immigration activist Peter Brimelow, who runs Vdare, described by the Southern Poverty Law Centre as “an anti-immigration hate website” that “regularly publishes articles by prominent white nationalists, race scientists and antisemites”.

Brimelow’s talk at LD50 was orientated around the threat imposed on “native white Americans” by a “great influx of third world immigration”. He said that while it was socially acceptable for Hispanic and Asian ethnic activists to call for more immigration, the only people who get criticised are whites; described the Black Lives Matter movement as a Democratic party racket purely designed to increase turmoil; and referred to the Jewish faction of the Democratic party vote as problematic.

Gallery owner Lucia Diego said in a statement published on the LD50 website that the programme was intended to create “a dialogue between two different and contrasting ideologies” and that the audience for the conference was “very liberal”.

However, a recording of Brimelow’s talk reveals that members of the audience who contributed to the discussion were predominately sympathetic to his views, agreeing with his statement about the need to remove the “corrupt treacherous elite” in government and one professing support for David Duke, the former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan and Holocaust denier.

Shut Down LD50 has accused the gallery, which has previously exhibited works by Turner Prize nominees Jake and Dinos Chapman, of curating “one of the most extensive programmes of racist hate speech to take place in London over the past 10 years”. They said the fact that the list of names of the conference speakers had been made public only after the event was finished was telling. “At first in secret, LD50 has acted as a platform for a cross-section of the most virulent advocates of contemporary extreme-right ideology.”

firefinga
18-04-2017, 05:09 PM
You may have noticed that there is a toxic internet culture in which threats are tossed about willy nilly every second.

There have been some cases in Austria where those kind of threats led to convictions last year. It helped, that the people threatened were politicians (by the Green party mostly) but still.

john eden
18-04-2017, 05:15 PM
There have been some cases in Austria where those kind of threats led to convictions last year. It helped, that the people threatened were politicians (by the Green party mostly) but still.

Yeah the saddo who was the original organiser of the last fascist march through Hackney* was eventually banged up for anti-semitic threats towards MPs online...

* in 2015: https://pasttenseblog.wordpress.com/2017/04/18/today-in-london-anti-fascist-history-anti-semitic-nazi-march-opposed-clapton-2015/

Mr. Tea
18-04-2017, 06:23 PM
Well no, because it's an established tactic of the alt-right (and the state, if you want to get into it) to discredit the left with wildly over the top provocations. Hence:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/inside-the-alt-rights-campaign-to-smear-trump-protesters-as?utm_term=.yy0bYxvGg#.cx12YB0nd

That may be so, but I don't think it means genuine instances should just be brushed off as if they mean nothing.

And on the other side, there have been various cases of social justice activists caught faking hate crimes against themselves. Am I therefore going to claim that real hate crimes don't happen, or as inconsequential? Of course not, that would be ridiculous.


In addition to that, there are a lot of very bored alienated people sitting around on the net who like to make threats which never come to fruition.

1. Nobody was ever going to get "stabbed or have their tongue cut out". FFS.

As far as I know, none of the many people who've threatened to beat up, rape or murder Anita Sarkeesian have so far made good on their threats - so she should probably just chill out, yeah?



2. I have posted one of the LD50 exhibits upthread which is a Hitler quote next to Taylor Swift alongside the "3 7s" swastika variant that was used by the AWB in South Africa and by the explicitly neo-nazi Blood & Honour group in the UK.

TBH that image was so utterly ludicrous I took it to be a supposedly humorous comment on the furor over the exhibition, particularly with the photo of the swastika daubed on the door. But I didn't post in this thread to defend the exhibition - which, by the sound of it, was without any merit whatsoever - but to question whether it's wholly fair for the label of "fascist" or "Nazi" to spread like a mould from the exhibition itself to any person or group with any relation to it other than absolute, unqualified condemnation.

But perhaps you're right - I mean, if the content really was as obviously offensive, reactionary and worthless as that image indicates, then there's probably justification in saying that any stance other than outright condemnation constitutes at least tacit support, whether the person saying it intends that or not, in the same way that someone saying "Weeell, maybe the Holocaust happened, maybe it didn't" is clearly not being 'neutral' about the Holocaust.

All that said, I stand by my position that some of the loudest and most unhinged hard-left activists not infrequently harm their own causes by doing and saying things that just appear blatantly idiotic to the majority of people who are neither Postcolonial Studies PhDs nor insane Kek-worshipping alt-right monsters.

luka
18-04-2017, 06:41 PM
i think constantly harping on about the excesses of some self-identified radical leftists might be starting to grate on some people though tea, and, in addition, viewed with a degree of suspicion. as in, what are this lads actual motives here?

yyaldrin
18-04-2017, 07:19 PM
Couldn't finish that video, thought all the people in there were kinda moronic.

luka
18-04-2017, 07:23 PM
yeah if you dont cringe watching it theres something wrong with you. so embaressing.

baboon2004
18-04-2017, 07:46 PM
All that said, I stand by my position that some of the loudest and most unhinged hard-left activists not infrequently harm their own causes by doing and saying things that just appear blatantly idiotic to the majority of people who are neither Postcolonial Studies PhDs nor insane Kek-worshipping alt-right monsters.

But whatever things you're referring to only 'harm their own causes' if you can't separate the individual from the cause. The substance of left wing politics isn't harmed by individuals associated with it doing stupid things. That remains the same, regardless.

Mr. Tea
18-04-2017, 09:04 PM
i think constantly harping on about the excesses of some self-identified radical leftists might be starting to grate on some people though tea, and, in addition, viewed with a degree of suspicion. as in, what are this lads actual motives here?

I think what it is, is this: considering the vast amounts of emotional energy that a lot of people all over the world pour into progressive and radical causes, how come, almost wherever you look, mainstream politics is taking a turn for the reactionary and authoritarian? You could maybe argue that without those people's efforts things would be even worse, but I don't find that convincing at all. I'm unhappy that the Tories are in charge, I'm unhappy about the prospect of them being returned with a huge majority in the summer while Labour gets annihilated, I'm unhappy about Brexit and I'm unhappy about Trump (and le Pen, and Wilders, and Putin...). I presume you're not thrilled about any of these things yourself. And I see all these people putting so much effort into being so loudly and visibly right, but what is it actually achieving?

I foolishly allowed myself to get dragged into conversation with a real Corbynite true believer on Facebook the other day. He seemed absolutely certain Labour were going to romp to victory and usher in a new era of justice and fairness. I pointed out that Labour are trailing the Tories by nearly 20% in recent opinion polls, and that while these polls are often wrong by a few percent, they generally aren't wrong by 20%. His response was "fuck opinion polls"- which may have been followed by a smiley face, I can't recall. Because Corbyn is right and the Tories (and non-Corbyn Labour) are wrong, and right people always triumph over wrong people.

I dunno. I don't claim to have any answers, I just see the world regressing in many important ways and a lot of people treating twitter and tumblr and Goldsmiths art department like they're the battlegrounds where the struggle for the future is being waged.

craner
18-04-2017, 09:08 PM
I think you're right.

craner
18-04-2017, 09:09 PM
But I am hardcore non-Corbyn Labour.

Mr. Tea
18-04-2017, 09:11 PM
BTW I fully own up the fact that my engagement in politics is limited to voting every couple of years, and talking about it, and occasionally signing one of those petitions, so a response of "Well what are you doing to make things any better?" is to an extent justified. Then again a lot of people don't even do those things.

luka
18-04-2017, 09:23 PM
Silly people do silly things. Always have always will. I suppose I'm more concerned with evil cunts doing evil things myself.

luka
18-04-2017, 09:25 PM
So while you could argue that sjw twitter begets frog twitter I don't think you can blame it for Le Pen, for example

luka
18-04-2017, 09:30 PM
And it's hard not to be suspicious of people who seem to be more indignant about people's reactions to injustice than the injustice itself.

luka
18-04-2017, 09:45 PM
To give an example when I see someone respond to some unarmed black geezer getting shot dead by police by saying well if they didn't commit crimes they wouldn't come into contact with the police would they? My first thought isn't to blame the tactics of BLM or to examine the actions of individual members of BLM. Not that those things can't be discussed or criticised, it's just not the first thing I'd think about

luka
18-04-2017, 09:55 PM
My assumption is that there are deep seated historical, emotional, psychological and possibly even genetic factors behind the appeal of tribalism, authoritarianism, sadism etc and that the left has to go against the grain to some extent. I think it's maybe a harder sell.

baboon2004
18-04-2017, 10:03 PM
I think what it is, is this: considering the vast amounts of emotional energy that a lot of people all over the world pour into progressive and radical causes, how come, almost wherever you look, mainstream politics is taking a turn for the reactionary and authoritarian?

Because reactionary points of view are backed by enormous amounts of corporate money and media coverage. That one is simple. People aren't stupid, but they are enormously susceptible to being convinced to believe things that are antithetical to their own interests.

Corbyn is 20 points behind, but his policies are enormously popular, admit even right wing media outlets. You can't attribute that gap solely to Corbyn's ineptitude, which is real but in no way more important than the ineptitude of the Tory changeover last summer, for example, or the all-round ridiculousness of Theresa May's blatant lying and U-turns.

baboon2004
18-04-2017, 10:09 PM
My assumption is that there are deep seated historical, emotional, psychological and possibly even genetic factors behind the appeal of tribalism, authoritarianism, sadism etc and that the left has to go against the grain to some extent. I think it's maybe a harder sell.

I think this is true, but that the critical factor is how the way society is now set up encourages these latent tendencies to manifest. People are trained to feel comfortable with (and largely accept) forms of authoritarianism, while growing up, at school and then at (usually pretty precarious) work.

luka
18-04-2017, 10:10 PM
Bit chicken and egg that possibly

baboon2004
18-04-2017, 10:12 PM
which part

luka
18-04-2017, 10:17 PM
What do you think?... But let's not get sidetracked. The important thing is to tell Oliver (either one) he's wrong, and to make insinuating remarks about his real political allegiances

firefinga
18-04-2017, 10:17 PM
The left should be about solidarity. The neoliberal bullshit way of things which is dominating the western world for 30+ years is about unhinged egoism. That egoism has been working fine for a lot of people and that's why it has been prolonged for so long. We - may - witness an end to this these days, what will follow after that might even be shittier though.

baboon2004
18-04-2017, 10:19 PM
What do you think?... But let's not get sidetracked. The important thing is to tell Oliver (either one) he's wrong, and to make insinuating remarks about his real political allegiances

not sure, that's why I asked

vimothy
18-04-2017, 10:39 PM
So while you could argue that sjw twitter begets frog twitter I don't think you can blame it for Le Pen, for example

I agree with that. But is "SJW Twitter" (figuratively speaking) preventing discussion of Le Pen, and of the whole phenomenon of right wing populism?

luka
18-04-2017, 10:43 PM
There has been a reluctance to talk about a range of topics, immigration primarily, that have become enormously important politically. There are, imo, good reasons for that reluctance, but perhaps it backfired. If that's an argument you want to make I'll listen to you make it.

john eden
18-04-2017, 10:44 PM
I agree with that. But is "SJW Twitter" (figuratively speaking) preventing discussion of Le Pen, and of the whole phenomenon of right wing populism?

Some days it feels like that's the only thing that's being discussed.

luka
18-04-2017, 10:49 PM
What would you like to talk about vimothy, or, to avoid putting you on the spot, what do you think other people, have been wanting to talk about but haven't dared to do so for fear of sjw twitter?

luka
18-04-2017, 10:54 PM
Some days it feels like that's the only thing that's being discussed.

This is also true but the two sides aren't talking to each other. There's no debate. This is partly because both labour and the tories are pro immigration but have decided, bizarrely, to pretend not to be. It's deeply, poisonously cynical

vimothy
18-04-2017, 11:04 PM
Isn't the issue really that everyone has retreated into their own self-reinforcing bubbles where dissenting view-points are squashed and so the bubbles are taken for objective reality? Every so often, a more objective measure of the state of things is taken (like an election) and everyone is shocked at how out of touch they've become. Then they quickly retreat back into their bubbles and we go round again.

luka
18-04-2017, 11:11 PM
That's one issue certainly. The laws changed in the US didn't they? To allow for openly partisan news networks?

Mr. Tea
18-04-2017, 11:12 PM
as in, what are this lads actual motives here?

I can't help but feel there's a certain insinuation here. But really, if I were a closet Tory, I'd be singing Corbyn's praises from the rooftops, wouldn't I? If I were in any way glad about Trump, I'd have only good things to say about those pure-hearted student radicals who abstained rather dirty their hands voting for Clinton after their man Sanders lost the Democratic nomination. And so on.

Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick here. What do you mean exactly?

luka
18-04-2017, 11:14 PM
The rise of Fox was a watershed moment and the trend was exacerbated by the Internet. Centralisation of the media helped create a consensus reality which no longer exists. I'm not inclined to mourn the death of that consensus or that centralisation but clearly it's collapse is causing huge problems. I hope are just teething pains as we get used to the new landscape

vimothy
18-04-2017, 11:28 PM
Some days it feels like that's the only thing that's being discussed.

But the discussion is largely confined to hysterical wailing about how the droogs have taken over and this is a nightmare but don't worry we can put them back in their boxes, everything is going to go back to normal soon, etc, etc.

luka
18-04-2017, 11:30 PM
But the discussion is largely confined to hysterical wailing about how the droogs have taken over and this is a nightmare but don't worry we can put them back in their boxes, everything is going to go back to normal soon, etc, etc.

Here you mean?

vimothy
18-04-2017, 11:31 PM
In general.

luka
18-04-2017, 11:32 PM
In the top selling newspapers in the country for instance?

luka
18-04-2017, 11:33 PM
On talkback radio?

luka
18-04-2017, 11:35 PM
In black cabs? In pubs? On Facebook?

sadmanbarty
18-04-2017, 11:37 PM
But the discussion is largely confined to hysterical wailing about how the droogs have taken over and this is a nightmare but don't worry we can put them back in their boxes, everything is going to go back to normal soon, etc, etc.

Not at all.

luka
18-04-2017, 11:38 PM
I'm sorry you feel you can't talk about the things you'd like to talk about. Why don't we try and talk about them here. I'll try not to be hysterical.

Mr. Tea
18-04-2017, 11:40 PM
Silly people do silly things. Always have always will. I suppose I'm more concerned with evil cunts doing evil things myself.

Evil cunts aren't going to disappear if only enough people call them evil cunts. We need an opposition, and right now there isn't one. America is even more of a headcase at the moment. It's a fucking disaster.

sadmanbarty
18-04-2017, 11:43 PM
Evil cunts aren't going to disappear if only enough people call them evil cunts. We need an opposition, and right now there isn't one. America is even more of a headcase at the moment. It's a fucking disaster.

Opposition to Trump's been successful.

vimothy
18-04-2017, 11:45 PM
At some point, the "fascists" (i.e., right-wing populists of various types) will be in power all over the place. (They're already pretty successful.) Then refusing to debate with them is going to be completely redundant. Ultimately, all it will achieve is preventing people from understanding the electorate.

droid
18-04-2017, 11:47 PM
The US had an opposition. A progressive, left wing populist candidate with decent policies, huge youth support and a good chance of winning the presidency. He was sabotaged and stymied by the centre right and liberals.

The problem is not solely the lack of an organised left wing, though that is a issue. Its the loose coalition of centrist liberals, the right and the extreme right, all of whom despise anyone to the left of Tony Blair and who between them, command massive financial resources and have effective control of most media.

luka
18-04-2017, 11:50 PM
At some point, the "fascists" (i.e., right-wing populists of various types) will be in power all over the place. (They're already pretty successful.) Then refusing to debate with them is going to be completely redundant. Ultimately, all it will achieve is preventing people from understanding the electorate.

Yes, you keep repeating that. Name the taboos. What do you think needs to be debated that isn't being debated? What are the things you feel unable to say?

sadmanbarty
18-04-2017, 11:52 PM
At some point, the "fascists" (i.e., right-wing populists of various types) will be in power all over the place. (They're already pretty successful.) Then refusing to debate with them is going to be completely redundant. Ultimately, all it will achieve is preventing people from understanding the electorate.

If only there were televised debates during the EU referendum, the us election and the french election.

luka
18-04-2017, 11:53 PM
I can't help interpreting this as I vimothy think things which I feel unable to openly express within the circles I move in. Is that unfair?

sadmanbarty
18-04-2017, 11:55 PM
luka, you're being hysterical

luka
19-04-2017, 12:00 AM
HES REFUSING TO DEBATE ME!

vimothy
19-04-2017, 12:00 AM
Yes, you keep repeating that. Name the taboos. What do you think needs to be debated that isn't being debated? What are the things you feel unable to say?

Haven't we just been discussing taboos here? An art gallery in London held a series of shows about the alt-right, and was shut down. A bookshop in Berlin planned a talk on Evola, and was shut down.

luka
19-04-2017, 12:01 AM
Bubble Gun with Continuous Streaming Bubbles: http://youtu.be/9cTmJkCaUI4

Mr. Tea
19-04-2017, 12:04 AM
To give an example when I see someone respond to some unarmed black geezer getting shot dead by police by saying well if they didn't commit crimes they wouldn't come into contact with the police would they? My first thought isn't to blame the tactics of BLM or to examine the actions of individual members of BLM. Not that those things can't be discussed or criticised, it's just not the first thing I'd think about

That's a very acute problem specific to the USA though, where the rights and wrongs of it are so clear-cut that I don't think there's any response you can have other than to view the police as the primary aggressors and culprits and still regard yourself as any kind of liberal, let alone progressive.

And yes, in the scheme of things, the basic fact of racialized police brutality is obviously a much bigger problem than #KillAllWhitePeople tags on twitter (and domestic violence is a bigger problem than #KillAllMen from feminists, etc.), it's not hard to see why many people who would otherwise be sympathetic are going to turned off. Plus of course the alt-right eats this stuff up for breakfast, lunch and dinner - as do the vanilla mainstream GOP/Tory right, come to that ("Look at all these crazy people Corbyn associates with, how can anyone take him seriously?").

luka
19-04-2017, 12:06 AM
It's my bedtime. I haven't done very well here tonight but tomorrow is a new day. Night night all.

Mr. Tea
19-04-2017, 12:31 AM
My assumption is that there are deep seated historical, emotional, psychological and possibly even genetic factors behind the appeal of tribalism, authoritarianism, sadism etc and that the left has to go against the grain to some extent. I think it's maybe a harder sell.

You're probably right there, but it seems to be having a noticeably harder time of it at present than at some periods in the relatively recent past. Some of this can no doubt be explained by things like the automation or offshoring of heavy industry, the collapse of well-paid blue-collar jobs and the concomitant decline in the power of trade unions, which are either a nefarious capitalist plot to destroy the working class or an unavoidable fact of life, depending on your POV. But this has been compounded by many on the left, particularly in academia, having come to accept neoliberalism and globalization as inevitable and concentrating on identity politics instead, leaving a gap that Trump and the Brexiteers, charlatans as they may be, have filled simply by pretending to give a shit.

Mr. Tea
19-04-2017, 12:32 AM
It's my bedtime. I haven't done very well here tonight but tomorrow is a new day. Night night all.

Mine too. Nuh-night.

firefinga
19-04-2017, 12:47 AM
You're probably right there, but it seems to be having a noticeably harder time of it at present than at some periods in the relatively recent past. Some of this can no doubt be explained by things like the automation or offshoring of heavy industry, the collapse of well-paid blue-collar jobs and the concomitant decline in the power of trade unions, which are either a nefarious capitalist plot to destroy the working class or an unavoidable fact of life, depending on your POV. But this has been compounded by many on the left, particularly in academia, having come to accept neoliberalism and globalization as inevitable and concentrating on identity politics instead, leaving a gap that Trump and the Brexiteers, charlatans as they may be, have filled simply by pretending to give a shit.

That crashing of the unions was indeed a capitalist plot, that was one of the main aims of Thatcher and her admirers. That identity politics were well played by Trump and the Brexiteers (and other right wing populists) should be public knowledge by now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-identity-liberalism.html

baboon2004
19-04-2017, 12:55 AM
And yes, in the scheme of things, the basic fact of racialized police brutality is obviously a much bigger problem than #KillAllWhitePeople tags on twitter (and domestic violence is a bigger problem than #KillAllMen from feminists, etc.), it's not hard to see why many people who would otherwise be sympathetic are going to turned off. Plus of course the alt-right eats this stuff up for breakfast, lunch and dinner - as do the vanilla mainstream GOP/Tory right, come to that ("Look at all these crazy people Corbyn associates with, how can anyone take him seriously?").

The point is of course that those people wouldn't otherwise be sympathetic - that's complete fantasy, in the direct service of doing nothing to combat the actual problem and feeling (erroneously) morally justified in doing nothing. Cos guilt is so annoying... If only oppressed people would conduct themselves with a little bit more decorum, then everyone would listen to them... The truth is that oppressed people resort to 'extreme' tactics and violence precisely because it's the only thing that will get a response. Asking nicely doesn't work, and never has. (Who are these delicate souls who get scared and end up altering their entire moral compass due to #KillAllWhitePeople and #KillAllMen hashtags anyways?)

The Corbyn situation is obviously different in many ways, but the principle of silencing debate is similar. If only Corbyn had never been in the same room as anyone we could call a terrorist, then we'd give him a fair chance!
Corbyn's mistakes are many, but extending courtesies towards people with blood on their hands is part of the Prime Minister's job description. Makes him better qualified, not less.

luka
19-04-2017, 08:15 AM
Haven't we just been discussing taboos here? An art gallery in London held a series of shows about the alt-right, and was shut down. A bookshop in Berlin planned a talk on Evola, and was shut down.

Yeah I guess so. We learned that openly avowed racism and killing kids ("raising the cost of being liberal to include death") is taboo. Do you want to have a debate about that? The Evola talk would have garnered no attention or condemnation were it not for josefs grandstanding in Dalston. Are any taboos ever justified?

As a sidenote I did find it funny when Ed Luker got shut down, refusing to answer when asked if his PhD was on Ezra Pound.

luka
19-04-2017, 08:17 AM
Some arguments, like for example tea's attempt to revive respectability politics, are dead. They've been had, they've been won
Time to move on.

luka
19-04-2017, 08:19 AM
"if the suffragettes hadn't irritated the ordinary working man by interrupting his day out at the races women would have the vote by now"
And so on and so forth.

luka
19-04-2017, 11:28 AM
The Right is in the ascendant because the Left refused to debate the legitimacy of mass murder as a political strategy. They're so uncivil.

luka
19-04-2017, 11:28 AM
Sorry to burst your bubble snowflake

sadmanbarty
19-04-2017, 11:46 AM
My two cents:

1) I wholeheartedly believe that freedom of speech and freedom of assembly should be guaranteed to everyone, no matter how heinous their ideology. The responsibility to safeguard these rights falls not only on political institutions and law enforcement, but also on the culture as a whole; individuals have the responsibility to safeguard these rights too.

2) Luka’s questioned why certain people emphasise the bad responses to bigotry and not the bigotry itself. Maybe I’m naïve, but I think these critics a lot of the time don’t have an ulterior motive. It’s quite disturbing to see people that you have a political kinship with on many levels so brazenly disregard the basic values of liberal democracy.

3) I think the problem of ‘illiberal liberals’ (for want of a better phrase) is by and large a problem contained within academia and student culture in general rather than one that has contaminated the left as a whole. It’s plain wrong to suggest that the grievances (perceived or otherwise) and spokespeople of right wing populism are ignored or treated unfairly within our political discourse, by the news media or by the political class. That’s of course not to suggest illiberal liberalism isn’t a problem, but there’s no need for hyperbole or caricature.

4) I spoke to quite a lot of Trump supporters online during the campaign. When I mentioned Trump condoning political violence they’d retort by talking about attacks on Trump supporters or violence by BLM. Liberal’s illiberalism is being used as a cover and an excuse by authoritarian-sympathetic elements within society. Just on a tactical level if elements of the left persist in bullying and intimidation it may well come to backfire in a very dangerous way.

droid
19-04-2017, 11:58 AM
My two cents:

1) I wholeheartedly believe that freedom of speech and freedom of assembly should be guaranteed to everyone, no matter how heinous their ideology. The responsibility to safeguard these rights falls not only on political institutions and law enforcement, but also on the culture as a whole; individuals have the responsibility to safeguard these rights too.



This is the voice of liberal privilege.

Imagine you're a target of the fascists (and you may well be at some point in the future).

What do you do when people march by your house demanding your extermination? Hold rallies at the park at the end of the road with mock executions of members of your community? Advocate for the 'cleansing' of society by the removal of you and people like you? Articulate explicit messages of bigotry, ethnic cleansing and genocide in the national media, parliament and on the streets whilst refusing to condemn actual acts of violence committed against you and people like you?

What do you do? Do you 'safeguard their rights to free speech' or do you fight back against their propaganda, stop their rallies, confront them in the streets and do everything in your power to shut them down?

Its worth remembering that the first targets of fascists are their political opponents. We see this with Brevik, we see this with Israel and the targeting of 'leftists' and we see it with the rhetoric of the EDL. The Nazis went for the communists, socialists and the labour movement first. The leftists are the enemies within.

Dont think that white skin and a passport makes you safe.

luka
19-04-2017, 12:00 PM
sounds alright but if someone stood up on a crowded tube train for instance and started spouting the kind of racist views nick land endorses and got knocked out with a big right hook i would laugh tbh i wouldnt be concerned about the violation of his right to free speech. you might be more high minded than i am though.

luka
19-04-2017, 12:01 PM
uh, ok, think probably droid has pointed out the 'problematic' aspects of that position better than i have

john eden
19-04-2017, 12:05 PM
Liberal’s illiberalism is being used as a cover and an excuse by authoritarian-sympathetic elements within society. Just on a tactical level if elements of the left persist in bullying and intimidation it may well come to backfire in a very dangerous way.

They have always had sufficient excuses for violence.

sadmanbarty
19-04-2017, 12:08 PM
sounds alright but if someone stood up on a crowded tube train for instance and started spouting the kind of racist views nick land endorses and got knocked out with a big right hook i would laugh tbh i wouldnt be concerned about the violation of his right to free speech. you might be more high minded than i am though.

I've been in that sort of situation a few times and obviously I've confronted the racists every time (only once or twice physically though). I count that kind of behaviour more as harassment rather than free speech.

Mr. Tea
19-04-2017, 12:13 PM
The point is of course that those people wouldn't otherwise be sympathetic - that's complete fantasy, in the direct service of doing nothing to combat the actual problem and feeling (erroneously) morally justified in doing nothing. Cos guilt is so annoying... If only oppressed people would conduct themselves with a little bit more decorum, then everyone would listen to them... The truth is that oppressed people resort to 'extreme' tactics and violence precisely because it's the only thing that will get a response. Asking nicely doesn't work, and never has. (Who are these delicate souls who get scared and end up altering their entire moral compass due to #KillAllWhitePeople and #KillAllMen hashtags anyways?)


I don't think that guilt, shame and self-hatred form a particularly sound basis for progressive politics, is the thing. (Someone posted something about this here a few months ago which was quite good on this, I'll see if I can find it - Fisher wrote about it in his 'Vampire's Castle' piece, too.) You're never going to win a popularity contest by telling people they're revolting and shameful, and for better or worse, democracy is a popularity contest. At any rate, it should be no surprise if many people are more inclined to follow someone who seems to be saying something positive about their culture, which unfortunately comes along with a whitewashing of past injustices or a desire to roll back some of the progress that has been made since then. I don't think it's unreasonable that people are going to say to themselves "Why should I support people who say they want to kill me, when they quite clearly don't want my support in the first place?". If we interpret #KillAllWhites to mean simply "fuck off whitey", then it seems like a good idea for white people to do exactly that, rather than insisting on foisting their 'solidarity' on people who very clearly don't want their solidarity or anything to do with them. And the phrase can clearly be interpreted rather more literally, seeing as there have been racially motivated attacks on, and murders of, white people by black people just very recently (contra your cute comment about 'delicate souls getting scared').

In fact you sound like you're saying the cure for racism is for black people to harass, beat and shoot white people until whites simply agree not to be racist any more. Which sounds about as likely as Islamist terrorism eventually defeating Islamophobia.


"if the suffragettes hadn't irritated the ordinary working man by interrupting his day out at the races women would have the vote by now"
And so on and so forth.

The suffragettes used disruptive tactics in support of demands for a specific privilege - a privilege men already had - which they eventually achieved. Ditto the civil rights campaigners of the 1960s. They weren't just spewing random hate in all directions. I appreciate that most race and gender activists don't do that, obviously, but inevitably it's the ones who do that get the most attention.

sadmanbarty
19-04-2017, 12:13 PM
Droid you're acting as though the mechanisms liberal democracy have failed minorities. The opposite is true; freedom of speech, assembly, courts, etc. have all been employed to advance and protect the rights of ethnic and religious minorities, women, homosexuals, etc. Are you seriously suggesting that a society based on unaccountable mobs intimidating each other for political ends will yield better results for minorities than a society based on liberal democratic values? The historical precedent all over the world suggests the opposite.

luka
19-04-2017, 12:18 PM
Droid you're acting as though the mechanisms liberal democracy have failed minorities. The opposite is true; freedom of speech, assembly, courts, etc. have all been employed to advance and protect the rights of ethnic and religious minorities, women, homosexuals, etc. Are you seriously suggesting that a society based on unaccountable mobs intimidating each other for political ends will yield better results for minorities than a society based on liberal democratic values? The historical precedent all over the world suggests the opposite.

this is a very partial/selective reading of history as youre smart enough to know

droid
19-04-2017, 12:19 PM
Droid you're acting as though the mechanisms liberal democracy have failed minorities. The opposite is true; freedom of speech, assembly, courts, etc. have all been employed to advance and protect the rights of ethnic and religious minorities, women, homosexuals, etc. Are you seriously suggesting that a society based on unaccountable mobs intimidating each other for political ends will yield better results for minorities than a society based on liberal democratic values? The historical precedent all over the world suggests the opposite.

Answer the question. What do you do?

luka
19-04-2017, 12:20 PM
mr tea on the other hand is probably not smart enough and ive put a formal boycott on responding to his inanities in this thread.

sadmanbarty
19-04-2017, 12:21 PM
Answer the question. What do you do?

I may well resort to illiberal methods, violence, etc. It doesn't make it right.

droid
19-04-2017, 12:22 PM
Welcome to the real world. Sometimes you have to fight. Sometimes not fighting leads to something far worse. You dont have to like it, and peaceful, principled methods are almost always more effective, but sometimes its not enough.

luka
19-04-2017, 12:24 PM
no it doesnt make it right and its regrettable that people are put into situations in which there is no morally pure course of action. and yet, thats what happens. so you can retreat from the world entirely to preserve your moral spotlessness or you can bloody your hands. horrible world innit.

john eden
19-04-2017, 12:28 PM
Plus of course the alt-right eats this stuff up for breakfast, lunch and dinner - as do the vanilla mainstream GOP/Tory right, come to that ("Look at all these crazy people Corbyn associates with, how can anyone take him seriously?").

The alt-right, the vanilla right - and you. Let's not forget that.

john eden
19-04-2017, 12:34 PM
Droid you're acting as though the mechanisms liberal democracy have failed minorities. The opposite is true; freedom of speech, assembly, courts, etc. have all been employed to advance and protect the rights of ethnic and religious minorities, women, homosexuals, etc. Are you seriously suggesting that a society based on unaccountable mobs intimidating each other for political ends will yield better results for minorities than a society based on liberal democratic values? The historical precedent all over the world suggests the opposite.

The mechanisms of liberal democracy HAVE failed minorities.

Why are the prisons disproportionately full of black people - and disproportionately empty of rapists?

It's better than mob rule, I will grant you. But it's not like everything has been fixed and there are no more battles to fight.

Mr. Tea
19-04-2017, 12:43 PM
The Corbyn situation is obviously different in many ways, but the principle of silencing debate is similar. If only Corbyn had never been in the same room as anyone we could call a terrorist, then we'd give him a fair chance!


If only Corbyn didn't repeatedly stick up for his lunatic climate change denier/anti-Semite brother, people might not talk so much about his support for climate change deniers and anti-Semites!

firefinga
19-04-2017, 01:09 PM
My two cents:

1) I wholeheartedly believe that freedom of speech and freedom of assembly should be guaranteed to everyone, no matter how heinous their ideology. The responsibility to safeguard these rights falls not only on political institutions and law enforcement, but also on the culture as a whole; individuals have the responsibility to safeguard these rights too.


But freedom of speech was never absolutely universal (it has always been restricted by certain laws) and even liberal western democracies usually take measures to protect istself via laws targeting those trying to undermine its basic principles. Those rights you mention have never been infinite.

In other words: liberalism stops being liberal when supporting/defending illiberalism.

Mr. Tea
19-04-2017, 02:01 PM
Why are the prisons disproportionately full of black people - and disproportionately empty of rapists?


Prisons are also disproportionately full of men. To go full-on devil's advocate: if the disproportionate number of black people in prison is evidence of oppression, then the same thing can be said about men.

And the conviction rate for rape is slightly higher than the average rate for all crimes.

baboon2004
19-04-2017, 02:09 PM
It would probably be easier if you responded to what I said, instead of making up statements warping what I said, and arguing against them. The second paragraph below is phenomenal in that regard.

I don't think a conditional acceptance of other people's rights not to be oppressed, which is what you're repeatedly suggesting, is a particularly sound basis for anything. You'd have been making exactly the same arguments against the civil rights movement in the 1960s, and the Suffragette movement - your fantasies may tell you otherwise, but they're just that, fantasies of how you'd act differently in a morally more 'straightforward', mythical past.

Go read James Baldwin's 'The Fire Next Time' or something similar, and engage with what is said about systemic racism. There's something that you're fundamentally not getting/refusing to get about the experience of others. Racism will only end when 'white' people engage with reality instead of perpetual fantasy.

These are in the end very reactionary, anti-progressive arguments you've made (the remark about "fuck off whitey" is so wrong-headed - if only the people who believe they are white WOULD fuck off and leave 'non-white' people alone, then the problem would be solved!), and I'm hardly the first person in this thread to point it out. You've rolled out all the classics.


I don't think that guilt, shame and self-hatred form a particularly sound basis for progressive politics, is the thing. (Someone posted something about this here a few months ago which was quite good on this, I'll see if I can find it - Fisher wrote about it in his 'Vampire's Castle' piece, too.) You're never going to win a popularity contest by telling people they're revolting and shameful, and for better or worse, democracy is a popularity contest. At any rate, it should be no surprise if many people are more inclined to follow someone who seems to be saying something positive about their culture, which unfortunately comes along with a whitewashing of past injustices or a desire to roll back some of the progress that has been made since then. I don't think it's unreasonable that people are going to say to themselves "Why should I support people who say they want to kill me, when they quite clearly don't want my support in the first place?". If we interpret #KillAllWhites to mean simply "fuck off whitey", then it seems like a good idea for white people to do exactly that, rather than insisting on foisting their 'solidarity' on people who very clearly don't want their solidarity or anything to do with them. And the phrase can clearly be interpreted rather more literally, seeing as there have been racially motivated attacks on, and murders of, white people by black people just very recently (contra your cute comment about 'delicate souls getting scared').

In fact you sound like you're saying the cure for racism is for black people to harass, beat and shoot white people until whites simply agree not to be racist any more. Which sounds about as likely as Islamist terrorism eventually defeating Islamophobia.



The suffragettes used disruptive tactics in support of demands for a specific privilege - a privilege men already had - which they eventually achieved. Ditto the civil rights campaigners of the 1960s. They weren't just spewing random hate in all directions. I appreciate that most race and gender activists don't do that, obviously, but inevitably it's the ones who do that get the most attention.

baboon2004
19-04-2017, 02:18 PM
If only Corbyn didn't repeatedly stick up for his lunatic climate change denier/anti-Semite brother, people might not talk so much about his support for climate change deniers and anti-Semites!

By 'people', you mean that famous supporter of Jewish rights, the Daily Mail?

I'm fine with people talking about the things Corbyn's done wrong, if it wasn't coming from politicised selective moralism. This argument has been done to death. The right wing media will attempt to assassinate left wing candidates. It's not even about Corbyn in particular, it's a general principle.

john eden
19-04-2017, 03:25 PM
Prisons are also disproportionately full of men. And the conviction rate for rape is slightly higher than the average rate for all crimes.

Slightly higher than crimes where the perpetrator isn't even known to the victim? Great.

Mr. Tea
19-04-2017, 04:20 PM
Slightly higher than crimes where the perpetrator isn't even known to the victim? Great.

I'm not sure what you mean. It sounded like you were appealing to the widespread misconception that the conviction rate for rape is extremely low. It's true that the attrition rate is very low, but that's in large part because many victims don't come forward because they think there's no point, because they think the conviction rate is far lower than it is. And as with any crime, there will be cases where there isn't enough evidence to secure a conviction.

john eden
19-04-2017, 04:55 PM
I'm not sure what you mean. It sounded like you were appealing to the widespread misconception that the conviction rate for rape is extremely low. It's true that the attrition rate is very low, but that's in large part because many victims don't come forward because they think there's no point, because they think the conviction rate is far lower than it is. And as with any crime, there will be cases where there isn't enough evidence to secure a conviction.

Me: The large amount of black people and the lack of rapists in prison might be an indicator that liberal democracy is failing oppressed people

You: No actually there are plenty of rapists in prison.

(My secondary point is that if you compare the rate of conviction for rape against "all crimes" then that will include things like burglary, which has a very low conviction rate because usually the victim and perpetrator do not meet. Same as cyber crime. Or sending racist hatemail through the post or the internet. So that's not really a good metric.)