Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Alex Callinicos/SWP vs Laurie Penny/New Statesman Facebook handbags

Status
Not open for further replies.
Greebo said:
Once upon another lifetime did you know an urbanite called J? To clarify, I'm not saying that you're him, but Brixton's a small place and there are only so many competent chess players.
Click to expand...

You sound cool Greebo I've read mosts of your post but I don't know J I'm new to Brixton....but come down to the museum and say hello one day.
 
ska invita said:
posting style has same hallmarks i think, like posts in the bandwasting thread. wont post more here as its just a big derail
Click to expand...
Nah, you're barking up the wrong tree.
1hb isn't banned and BJ registered before he stopped posting and has a totally different MO
 
Greebo said:
Once upon another lifetime did you know an urbanite called J? To clarify, I'm not saying that you're him, but Brixton's a small place and there are only so many competent chess players.
Click to expand...
j isn't in brixton and i don't believe has anything to do with a chocolate museum.
 
SLK said:
Oh nothing.
Click to expand...

It was an accurate summary of this thread.

Laura Barnett AKA Laurie Penny,

I hope for 2013 you stop telling lies, manipulating what people said, grow up and wake up, but also thanks for being so egotistical that you could not resit to bite and get covered in shit.
 
discokermit said:
there are three, all by the same person, describing two different openings. so, not an opening that's really recognised by anyone else but the feller who did the vid seems nice enough.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. The BlackJamaican is easily countered by the Transverse Latvian Defence or the Bolivian Shuffle. No serious player has opened with the BlackJamaican since Rodriguez tried it on Schevchenkov back in 92.
 
discokermit said:
you're not good enough for chess jokes.
Click to expand...

No, you're probably right...then again, it wasn't really a chess joke; more of a riff on made-up bullshit terminology. There again, chess is notorious for its rank misogyny. How many women are in the top 100 ranked players?...exactly. Pure fuckin discrimination.
In fact, even mentioning chess in a public forum is akin to announcing membership of the patriarchy's inner circle.

So check your privilege mate....see what I did there?...what was that you were saying?...something about, erm...can't do chess jokes?

How'd ya feel now?
 
Ronnie Rubashov said:
No, you're probably right...then again, it wasn't really a chess joke; more of a riff on made-up bullshit terminology. There again, chess is notorious for its rank misogyny. How many women are in the top 100 ranked players?...exactly. Pure fuckin discrimination.
In fact, even mentioning chess in a public forum is akin to announcing membership of the patriarchy's inner circle.

So check your privilege mate....see what I did there?...what was that you were saying?...something about, erm...can't do chess jokes?

How'd ya feel now?
Click to expand...
yeh, that's a little bit better, as you've turned it into a politics joke, which you're a bit more conversant with. moral of the story: stick to what you know.
 
discokermit said:
yeh, that's a little bit better, as you've turned it into a politics joke, which you're a bit more conversant with. moral of the story: stick to what you know.
Click to expand...

Not sure about that tbh. What would the Internet look like if everyone stuck to what they knew? It'd be a lot less entertaining...and who'd have even heard of Laurie Penny? She'd be writing an obscure little blog about kittens, cupcakes and tie-died headbands.
 
Update from Dave (our dave, not their dave)

No surprise that she retreats when confronted with some substance

UPDATE

In case any of you are wondering why the debate on here appears to have ground to a halt, here's why... After Laurie Penny posted her response (see above), she then blocked herself from using this site. She informed me of this in reply to an e-mail I sent saying I'd responded in some length to her points. She said that if I wanted her to read my response, it would have to be sent by e-mail – this was duly done. Her reply to my response was patchy and completely avoided the core issues I'd raised with her regarding my experience in the IWCA and how that informed the writing of the article on multiculturalism. On that basis, I concluded that there was no point in banging my head against a brick wall by continuing the 'dialogue' with her. For the record, this is the last e-mail I sent her:

-----------------------------------------------------

I don't have a problem with racism and sexism being called out – I do have a major problem when I'm called out for it and when I try and defend what I wrote, I get accused of using my white male privilege. As I stated quite clearly in a previous e-mail to you, I do understand the argument about male privilege and I do recognise that yes, compared to a lot of people at the bottom of the heap, I am privileged. What there is a problem with is that the left / radical / anarchist end of the political spectrum has yet to develop the kind of political language to express that concept in everyday language, completely free from political jargon, that people in my neck of the woods can relate to.

However, in this instance, I reckon privilege is a bit of a relative concept... You're a young up and coming writer who's already made a name for herself and has a fulfilling career to look forward to. On the other hand, I'm the wrong side of 55, have no chance of getting back into full time employment in the trade I used to work in (reprographic artist), and find the only work I can get is trudging round the streets of Thurrock shoving leaflets through letterboxes – oh yes, I write a blog as well. Getting home from a shift where I've had to walk six miles in crap weather conditions, my feet are sore, my back aching from lugging a heavy load around to open up an e-mail and be told that I'm using my white male privilege simply because I'm trying to defend what I wrote in good faith – it's not exactly a tactful or constructive way to conduct a discussion is it?

In the last two responses I sent you, in both cases I have outlined in some detail how we operated in Thurrock for the IWCA, the conversations we had with working class people while canvassing and how this experience informed what I wrote in the piece about multiculturalism. Nowhere in your responses have you acknowledged this even though it informs my political analysis about class and other issues. For sure the points you have raised are important but you have not taken account of the core ones which are my experience on the streets with the IWCA. Not only that, blocking yourself from the Thurrock Heckler blog where reading the posts on there would give you some idea of where we stand now on a variety of issues means you appear to have no interest in or understanding of the social and political environment we operate in.

Given all of this, as far as I'm concerned, there's no point in continuing this discussion. I've had a chat with a fair few comrades I know in the London anarchist scene and they all support me. As for the damage that might have been done to my reputation, well it might be tarnished with certain sections of the left but as there's no likelihood of them ever showing up in Thurrock that's something I reckon I can live with...
Click to expand...
 
Got to admit what she's done there is pretty clever - used the whole identity politics/privilege discourse to set the agenda, individualizing everything, so that rather than discussing the actual issues Dave is reduced to having to point out why and how he is less privileged than Laurie. The arguments can't stand on their own merit - you have to be 'speaking as a'.

It means that rather than anything serious actually getting discussed we just get an 'I'm considerably more oppressed than you' discussion. I therefore propose that we set up a privilege scoring system, so that immediately upon meeting someone you can compare scores and if they're more privileged than you then you can demand that they accept your arguments since the less privileged one must by definition be correct.
 
love detective said:
Update from Dave (our dave, not their dave)

No surprise that she retreats when confronted with some substance
Click to expand...
As weepiper said earlier in the thread (think it was weepiper) - we're all clear where we stand now aren't we?

(I think we were before this thread to be honest, but to see such real life conformation is cheering)
 
SpineyNorman said:
Got to admit what she's done there is pretty clever - used the whole identity politics/privilege discourse to set the agenda, individualizing everything, so that rather than discussing the actual issues Dave is reduced to having to point out why and how he is less privileged than Laurie. The arguments can't stand on their own merit - you have to be 'speaking as a'.

It means that rather than anything serious actually getting discussed we just get an 'I'm considerably more oppressed than you' discussion. I therefore propose that we set up a privilege scoring system, so that immediately upon meeting someone you can compare scores and if they're more privileged than you then you can demand that they accept your arguments since the less privileged one must by definition be correct.
Click to expand...
I reckon we should get back to pulling her inadequate articles and activity apart. A practical critique of her understanding.

Happy xmas David Lammy.
 
Ah I just posted that to the Guardian thread. Its 'special' indeed, and it would be spiffing to see Penny Posture respond to it.

Emblazon your bras with nine A stars, fret about the men who steal from cars.
Sharpen your pen and you'll go far, I think someone spunked in my caviar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

_Russ_
Penny Mordaunt
2 3
Replies
86
Views
3K
danny la rouge
danny la rouge
Fez909
Japanese attitudes towards immigration vs UK
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
198
Views
6K
krtek a houby
krtek a houby
Kid_Eternity
Collective - new left wing party?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
153
Views
6K
redsquirrel
R
Kid_Eternity
New Labour government - legislative agenda
26 27 28 29 30
Replies
896
Views
30K
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
Bingoman
Alex Chalk time is up
Replies
3
Views
462
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
Back
Top Bottom