Alex Callinicos/SWP vs Laurie Penny/New Statesman Facebook handbags
- Thread starter Prince Rhyus
- Start date
- Status
ska invita
back on the other side
It makes sense really, because this is all about the professional commentariat vs the public commentariat (who can now reply). All these years journalists have been publishing articles and feeling very clever, now each word is ripped apart infront of their eyes from all sides. All journalists are smarting from that regular sting.
and if this all really isnt about laurie but commentariat in general, then this response all fits in with that.
No stone has been left unturned, you can be certain of that. One thing you can say about this thread is its very thorough - frighteningly so at times
and at 26 too (ageist!)...BUT this seems part of the job of being a professional commentator/journalist/speaker, particularly in this day of social media.
The bad side of this is that you have to become very thick skinned to deal with it, which just entrenches self-righteousness and encourages you to draw warmth from other commentators. Thats what i love about urban and forums in general, is that its truly democratic. No post is in itself more valuable than another, even an OP. Not that posters on forums aren't incapable of self-righteousness of course, but at least its played out on a level playing field.
What did he actually do wrong (I thought ed was going to show some clemency then)?
Search for his member name and look through his previous posts.
trolling a disability thread iirc. i think the post in question have been deleted and i never saw them, so dunno the exact details...What did he actually do wrong (I thought ed was going to show some clemency then
Fez909
toilet expert
Too many people menshn (
) him. The task is therefore too difficult. I think I remembering it being nonce-related...that'll have to do.edit: apparently not. fair dos, trolling. Perma-ban seems harsh for that....
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
Yes, it certainly is.
What's interesting about it isn't its, rather dreary and superficial, content, but (a) that it appeared in the New Statesman, (b) that they published a "check your privilege" reply and (c) that Twitter was immediately full of English people (not Yanks) calling for the ritual execution of the apostate. It just shows how quickly an entire language and set of political assumptions can be adopted by quite a large milieu.
It wasn't very long ago that we had a bunch of people on here, back when the Anarchist Federation started dabbling with this shit, saying that they hadn't come across this stuff in Britain and, even, that it wouldn't make the jump from Yanko-liberal discourse.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
he basically said he didn't know if peoples experiences were true or not. Not pleasant, and he never backs out- so.
Buckaroo
Donkey piss and tractors
I need to know what happened to M, the person with disabilities who was contemplating suicide because of cuts and wanted to know if Dave would write about their death. Dave was sympathetic and consoling because Dave is a carer. Dave signed off 'Your Friend'. I hope Dave sorted M out with a few quid and followed up with some support because if Dave didn't and just used M's predicament as a means of self promotion, that would be criminal. It's six days since the article in NS which got RT'd a thousand times.
Dear M-,
A few days ago you wrote to me and told me you were planning to take your own life. You told me that your reasons for this are: because you are frightened about what will happen to you when you lose the disability living allowance you rely on to live independently, and because you want to take a stand against the government’s assault on welfare.
Since receiving your letter I’ve agonised over what sort of reply to send to you. I hope you found the strength to call one of the helplines I forwarded - Samaritans in particular are a life-saving service - but I felt that something longer was needed, is still needed. I’m writing to you now not as a journalist, but as a human being, a former carer and a person who has experienced depression to say: please, please don’t do this.
I’m writing like this, in public, in part because you spoke about taking your own life as a political statement. You asked if I, as a journalist you respected, would report on your suicide after the fact. I’ve been told by fellow campaigners in the disability rights movement that you’re not alone in thinking that harming yourself in that awful, final way is the only way you have left to make a difference. But that’s not the case. Not yet, not ever.
We’ve never shared a cup of tea together, or laughed together, or hugged each other. I don’t even know what you look like. But I feel like I know you, because I know you feel the same way I feel about what’s going on in this country right now. What I want you to try to understand, if you can just hold on to one thing, is this: you are not a burden.
When society tells you that you are worth less because you are unwell, that’s society’s fault, not yours. They may be pursuing a doctrine of shame, but that doesn’t mean you have to feel ashamed. You have no reason whatsoever to feel ashamed. You are not a burden, and you are not a scrounger - you are just unwell.
You are not a burden. You are not a scrounger. You are valuable and important because you are human and alive. Believe it. Believe it because that belief is a torch in the darkness of an austerity winter. With love,
Your friend,
Dave
Dave, Please be that torch in the darkness of an austerity winter....for all of us. And tell us M is ok. We need to know.
Dear M-,
A few days ago you wrote to me and told me you were planning to take your own life. You told me that your reasons for this are: because you are frightened about what will happen to you when you lose the disability living allowance you rely on to live independently, and because you want to take a stand against the government’s assault on welfare.
Since receiving your letter I’ve agonised over what sort of reply to send to you. I hope you found the strength to call one of the helplines I forwarded - Samaritans in particular are a life-saving service - but I felt that something longer was needed, is still needed. I’m writing to you now not as a journalist, but as a human being, a former carer and a person who has experienced depression to say: please, please don’t do this.
I’m writing like this, in public, in part because you spoke about taking your own life as a political statement. You asked if I, as a journalist you respected, would report on your suicide after the fact. I’ve been told by fellow campaigners in the disability rights movement that you’re not alone in thinking that harming yourself in that awful, final way is the only way you have left to make a difference. But that’s not the case. Not yet, not ever.
We’ve never shared a cup of tea together, or laughed together, or hugged each other. I don’t even know what you look like. But I feel like I know you, because I know you feel the same way I feel about what’s going on in this country right now. What I want you to try to understand, if you can just hold on to one thing, is this: you are not a burden.
When society tells you that you are worth less because you are unwell, that’s society’s fault, not yours. They may be pursuing a doctrine of shame, but that doesn’t mean you have to feel ashamed. You have no reason whatsoever to feel ashamed. You are not a burden, and you are not a scrounger - you are just unwell.
You are not a burden. You are not a scrounger. You are valuable and important because you are human and alive. Believe it. Believe it because that belief is a torch in the darkness of an austerity winter. With love,
Your friend,
Dave
Dave, Please be that torch in the darkness of an austerity winter....for all of us. And tell us M is ok. We need to know.
key point, his opinion is based on Laurie's status updates, not what actually took place
I don't think he was trolling just being the counter-argument but it was a bit too close to bone for some people so he was banned. Bit harsh IMO, could have locked the thread and told him to piss off.
ANYWAY......
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
So it was good that he got banned for breaking the rules then?
Yeah i think there was some wishful thinking going on there, this stuff is rife, and it's going to take over anarchism in the next couple of years.
if I was M I'd have asked to borrow a couple of grand
Fez909
toilet expert
I'm confused as to why a few people on this thread have gone out of their way to say they don't dismiss privilege/identity politics completely. It stuck out to me as I really don't see what privilege politics offers. I asked on the manarchism thread this question, and the last time I checked it there was no real response. So if it gives us nothing, and it shuts down debate, why are people not denouncing it in its entirety?
el-ahrairah
forward communism, forward gerbils!
what we have to remember is that privilege exists and causes problems. having some middle class white boy speak for everyone's experience when those experiences were not universal was a major problem at occupy. thinking otherwise leads, IME, to a bunch of white men sitting around assuming the reason no women or minorities or working class people are with them is because those people aren't interested, rather than the truth which is that these white men and their nonsense alienate those who should be comrades. occupy 
but, here's the thing, class is important and everything else is a subdivision of that. descending too far into identity politics generates more light than heat and leads to people one-upping each other with their whos-the-most-oppressed. and what happens? some white oxbridge middle classer wins because they have the power to spread their version further.
so what is the fucking point? let's just not be dicks, not piss around. if your movement doesn't attract women, or black people, or whoever, then maybe you need to do some work, not develop a complicated theory of privilege that doesn't make a blind bit of difference.
but, here's the thing, class is important and everything else is a subdivision of that. descending too far into identity politics generates more light than heat and leads to people one-upping each other with their whos-the-most-oppressed. and what happens? some white oxbridge middle classer wins because they have the power to spread their version further.
so what is the fucking point? let's just not be dicks, not piss around. if your movement doesn't attract women, or black people, or whoever, then maybe you need to do some work, not develop a complicated theory of privilege that doesn't make a blind bit of difference.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
Link?
TruXta
tired
Yes, in this case it was.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
So that means loads and loads of potential customers for you then you filthy profiteering welsh jew
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
cos you didn't like him or for what he did?
TruXta
tired
Both, just like I said. I think he's a crap poster, and he signed back on using a different nick after being banned. What's your point?
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
Yes, I strongly suspect that British Anarchism is going to be much more vulnerable to it than the rest of the socialist left. The AFed's dabbling and the response over on libcom are indication enough of that, particularly when you remember that those are amongst the more politically serious bits of British anarchism. The lifestyle fruitloops will be completely defenseless. But amusing and all to watch as that will most likely be, if it gets seriously entrenched it could be problematic for everyone in the longer term.
Fez909
toilet expert
to which, the thread on manarchism or the people on here saying identity politics has its place?
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
To where you say no-one responded to you.
Fez909
toilet expert
I didn't say no one responded. In fact, you were one of the people who responded to me (I think!)
What I said is that no one could say how privilege politics helped with anything.
Fez909
toilet expert
- Status
Similar threads
