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

[chilango]

But hand signals are just really for the facilitator so they know where to lob them in the stack.

Like is someone has a direct point to what the current speaker is gabbling on about. Or a technical point. Or whatever. For the record I'm really not a massive fan but if you're trying to move towards consensus then I'm yet to see another technique working appropriately.

I'm not trying to move towards consensus though...

 

[Balbi]

The best thing to do would be to find some middle/upper class minority group people, and working class white people - get them to be stacked, and then pull the big reveal on the facilitator and nodding dogs.

 

[Casually Red]

The best thing to do would be to find some middle/upper class minority group people, and working class white people - get them to be stacked, and then pull the big reveal on the facilitator and nodding dogs.

you need to check yourself for suggesting such people even exist

 

[Balbi]

You need to check yourself for suggesting they don't!

 

[cesare]

What workshops?

Meeting/workshop, whatever you want to call it. The Privilege Theory one on the timetable: http://anarchistbookfair.org.uk/whatson.html

 

[frogwoman]

thing is i've experienced sexism in left wing organisations, probably the same amount at least than i have in the "real world". i've experienced "anti-zionist" racism as well. there's also a danger that if somebody is doing all this jazz hand shit (the guy going on about privileged was pretty white and male himself in that video) there's a danger that they'll just be blind to their own prejudice and just think right that's that I dont need to do any more and examine my own actions, I'll "check my privilege" by having a go at somebody else. Or at worst use this shit as a cover. Certainly some people on the left seem to think that just because that's their politics they don't need to examine their behaviour any further. "Oh yeah well i let the blacks go first isnt that nice of me".

 

[sihhi]

privilege theory types

Attacking feminist socialists who criticise Beyonce [for being a millionaire employer or promoting fairly crude antifeminist ideas (see Nasty Girl etc) or Pepsi or Revlon or Unilever any other number of anti-feminist firms] is fighting capitalism:

When people attempt to undermine Beyonce’s empowerment and autonomy by defining her merit by what she does or wears, they’re actually reinforcing the oppressive society that dictates that everything including women and their rights are commodities and for sale and alienated from their person. This…

white feminists, PLEASE REMEMBER: just because you are for women’s empowerment does not necessarily mean you have completely shed your own racial prejudices so please curb your compulsion to police the feminist expressions of WoC because the policing often comes from a slightly less benevolent (read: patriarchal and a little racist) place. so, have a seat.

White feminists are more patriarchal than non-white ones. Yep, some have passed this stop too.

 

[DrRingDing]

Take a vote. Problem solved. As an added bonus some hippies may sulk.

I see your channeling a 3rd rate ern on this sunny afternoon.

 

[DrRingDing]

My main problem with it is that the stack is stacked according to appearance, which can be very misleading.

Not any stack I've seen.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Not any stack I've seen.

How else can they possibly judge?

 

[cesare]

Not any stack I've seen.

How else would they do it? How can they tell class from appearance, for example?

 

[DrRingDing]

I'm not trying to move towards consensus though...

No?

Majority rule?

 

[butchersapron]

Self-certification.

 

[DrRingDing]

How else would they do it? How can they tell class from appearance, for example?

I've never been at a meeting using this technique where appearance has been used to decide in what order you speak. The only preference I've seen and given is when someone has said very little and all hte other mouths have been chuntering away all night.

 

[butchersapron]

I've never been at a meeting using this technique where appearance has been used to decide in what order you speak. The only preference I've seen and given is when someone has said very little and all hte other mouths have been chuntering away all night.

So what basis were the stacks stacked on? Come on, you need to answer this.

 

[chilango]

No?

Majority rule?

Nope.

Not that either.

Depends on the purpose of the meeting/gathering doesn't it?

There's no need to fetishise "consensus".

 

[DrRingDing]

So what basis were the stacks stacked on? Come on, you need to answer this.

The order of the raised mitts. As well you know.

 

[cesare]

I've never been at a meeting using this technique where appearance has been used to decide in what order you speak. The only preference I've seen and given is when someone has said very little and all hte other mouths have been chuntering away all night.

Ok, just a way to try and make sure it's not just the loudest voices vying for attention?

 

[frogwoman]

Attacking feminist socialists who criticise Beyonce [for being a millionaire employer or promoting fairly crude antifeminist ideas (see Nasty Girl etc) or Pepsi or Revlon or Unilever any other number of anti-feminist firms] is fighting capitalism:




White feminists are more patriarchal than non-white ones. Yep, some have passed this stop too.

wtf?? beyonce says all sorts of anti-feminist and homophobic shit
"if you like it then you shoulda put a ring on it" etc

 

[Delroy Booth]

Does anyone else think this kind of propaganda is insulting and patronising, regardless of your opinions on intersectionality or whatever.

The sentence "intersectionality is the belief that oppressions are linked and can not be solved alone" is so much of an obvious truism that it's more or less a platitude.

 

[sihhi]

I've never been at a meeting using this technique where appearance has been used to decide in what order you speak. The only preference I've seen and given is when someone has said very little and all hte other mouths have been chuntering away all night.

No one has suggested it is being used in Britain now - but it was extensively used in America a year back.

That much - let people who haven't spoken, speak - is sort of a truism. Organising an order then encouraging a speak just once 'step up step back' policy is another thing.

 

[Balbi]

They lack class

 

[cesare]

So what basis were the stacks stacked on? Come on, you need to answer this.

How to prioritise the quiet ones once the loudest ones have had their say, sort of thing.

 

[chilango]

The order of the raised mitts. As well you know.

So you're just talking about people sticking their hands up to speak and the chair or whoever noting em down in order?

That's no really the procedure we're discussing here is it?

 

[DrRingDing]

How else can they possibly judge?

Again, I think folk are getting confused with this style of meeting with some privilege checking.

 

[butchersapron]

The order of the raised mitts. As well you know.

Hang on, you claimed 'progressive stacks' are not stacked on the basis of appearance, you're then asked on what basis they are stacked and your answer is that it's first come first served. Are you talking about a 'progressive stack' or not? if you are then you still need to answer the question of what basis they are stacked on rather than appearance, otherwise you're not offering any defence for the practice at all.

 

[DrRingDing]

Ok, just a way to try and make sure it's not just the loudest voices vying for attention?

That's why I appreciate it.

 

[butchersapron]

Again, I think folk are getting confused with this style of meeting with some privilege checking.

Pretty clear that you're the one confusing a 'progressive stack' with something that they are specifically designed to deal with and that its practitioners have identified as a problem.

 

[chilango]

Does anyone else think this kind of propaganda is insulting and patronising, regardless of your opinions on intersectionality or whatever.

The sentence "intersectionality is the belief that oppressions are linked and can not be solved alone" is so much of an obvious truism that it's more or less a platitude.

What's interesting about that is that there is no indication at all about what "oppression" really means.

 

[cesare]

The order of the raised mitts. As well you know.

But surely the loudest ones would also be quickest to stick their mitts up? So do they let people speak in reverse order of putting mitts up then?