Matthew Goodwin.....

[chilango]

I just want to pick up on one thing Gaia said...

Thing is, the further left you go, you're coming back round to the right.

Is it me or is the "horseshoe theory" almost always used to smear the left?

I mean nobody ever says "That Rees-Mogg, if he moves any further right he'll end up coming back round to the far-left!" do they?

 

[Proper Tidy]

I just want to pick up on one thing Gaia said...



Is it me or is the "horseshoe theory" almost always used to smear the left?

I mean nobody ever says "That Rees-Mogg, if he moves any further right he'll end up coming back round to the far-left!" do they?

Aye. I resent it being called a theory too, has fuck all substance, it's just liberals being completely unable to distinguish between very different criticisms of their shitty failed politics

 

[brogdale]

Certainly selective in his deployment of 'academic rigour', young Matty...

 

[redsquirrel]

Well, twitter is rubbish for any sort of nuanced discussion but I wouldn't describe Johnson as 'far right'. Would you?

(That said I also don't buy this stuff trying to fit him into the one nation block either).

 

[Proper Tidy]

Well, twitter is rubbish for any sort of nuanced discussion but I wouldn't describe Johnson as 'far right'. Would you?

(That said I also don't buy this stuff trying to fit him into the one nation block either).

Positioning him to left of May seems...

 

[brogdale]

Well, twitter is rubbish for any sort of nuanced discussion but I wouldn't describe Johnson as 'far right'. Would you?

(That said I also don't buy this stuff trying to fit him into the one nation block either).

Most ludicrous element of Goodwin's point would appear to the the notion that anyone claiming Johnson is "far right" would somehow equate to shutting him down.

 

[redsquirrel]

Most ludicrous element of Goodwin's point would appear to the the notion that anyone claiming Johnson is "far right" would somehow equate to shutting him down.

That I agree is twaddle - and another example of why twitter is crap.

Positioning him to left of May seems...

On some points I think he could be described so

 

[butchersapron]

He's right about the wider creep if maybe not this specific instance and the results/intention of this happening (though he may be, Johnson strikes me as far more socially liberal than may, but i wouldn't be using that as barometer of right and left - that's one of the things that has got us into this mess - progressive neo-liberalism etc we all know the argument). We had hitler/trump posted earlier today with no comment. Admittedly by a fool, but it is sort of just happening around us nowadays i feel. And that most certainly is used to try and shut people down - sometimes that's the right thing to do though. It doesn't happen towards the right though - yesterday i saw people from the left criticising the heroisation of the PKK at tollpuddle last weekend attacked and effectively shut down as being derived from daily mail reading right wing positions - that chest proddy element of the left i was talking about last week are very much still in evidence, resurgent even, and this is exactly what they do.

 

[brogdale]

He's right about the wider creep if maybe not this specific instance and the results/intention of this happening (though he may be, Johnson strikes me as far more socially liberal than may, but i wouldn't be using that as barometer of right and left - that's one of the things that has got us into this mess - progressive neo-liberalism etc we all know the argument). We had hitler/trump posted earlier today with no comment. Admittedly by a fool, but it is sort of just happening around us nowadays i feel. And that most certainly is used to try and shut people down - sometimes that's the right thing to do though. It doesn't happen towards the right though - yesterday i saw people from the left criticising the heroisation of the PKK at tollpuddle last weekend attacked and effectively shut down as being derived from daily mail reading right wing positions - that chest proddy element of the left i was talking about last week are very much still in evidence, resurgent even, and this is exactly what they do.

Good, thought provoking points butchersapron .
But...what concerns me about Goodwin as the public (social media) academic is his apparent knee-jerk reaction(ary) response to defuse simplistic criticism of right-wing populism. He's at it again today...seemingly determined to defend Johnson from any "counter-revolutionary" notions that the new leader is some sort of Trump-like figure:


This is an attempt at closing down. Yes, Johnson has ditched the ludicrous former capping 'policy' and accepted the reality of the 'undocumented', but for such 'cherry-picking' to be used as the basis to undermine positions casting Johnson as unfit for office or a racist (like Trump) betrays his leanings pretty obviously.

Not impressed with his twitter output.

 

[butchersapron]

Good, thought provoking points butchersapron .
But...what concerns me about Goodwin as the public (social media) academic is his apparent knee-jerk reaction(ary) response to defuse simplistic criticism of right-wing populism. He's at it again today...seemingly determined to defend Johnson from any counter-revolutionary notions that the new leader is some sort of Trump-like figure:

View attachment 178628
This is an attempt at closing down. Yes, Johnson has ditched the ludicrous former capping 'policy' and accepted the reality of the 'undocumented', but for such 'cherry-picking' to be used as the basis to undermine positions casting Johnson as unfit for office or a racist (like Trump) betrays his leanings pretty obviously.

Not impressed with his twitter output.

Divvent look at his twitter then. Why are you fussing about what other people think - what they should be be thinking?

 

[brogdale]

Divvent look at his twitter then. Why are you fussing about what other people think - what they should be be thinking?

Fair point.
But I do follow a range of 'public academics' on twitter and feel, if that's how they choose to present their ideas, then it's fair game to take them on face value.

 

[xarmian]

James Meeks doesn't use the word but this describes a very British form of fascism. LRB · James Meek · The Two Jacobs: The Faragist Future

 

[redsquirrel]

James Meeks doesn't use the word but this describes a very British form of fascism. LRB · James Meek · The Two Jacobs: The Faragist Future

It seems a very confused article to me. The majority of it is a character study of Jacob Rees-Mogg, which Meek trys to use to illustrate a wider phenomenon that the author calls "Farangism". I don't think this concept of "Farangism" is very well worked out at all and certainly the examples Meek uses to contrast it with neo-liberalism are poor, mostly because his understanding of neo-liberalism is poor.

Ultra-low tax, a starveling state, zero tariffs and zero subsidies is his ideal, [Ress-Mogg's] quite prepared to depart from his ideals for the sake of political expediency provided the model is one of quickie patronage for a client group, rather than open-ended, communally funded universal provision as a principle. There’s no other way to explain his enthusiasm for his party’s genuinely vile and wasteful policy of Help to Buy, which spews public funds into the pockets of private housebuilding firms by luring people who don’t actually need the money into taking a state-subsidised loan to buy houses whose price (but not future value) is artificially inflated by the very loan that’s supposed to help them.

Neo-liberalism has always spent money to "spew public funds into the pockets of private firms", that's a key part of it, what does Meek think privatisations/PFI are about?

So then you have comments like the one below which effectively makes neo-liberalism synonymous with populism.

Short-term tax breaks and giveaways from public funds for client groups whose votes you hope to win, combined with a determination to scapegoat and squeeze minorities and the ‘undeserving’ poor, is the very essence of populism.

Neo-liberalism has always been willing to spend money on 'nationalist' projects when it suits it.

After reading it I still have no idea what point Meek is trying to smake - other than that he doesn't like JCM, neo-liberalism or 'Farangism', which is fine but could have been said with better with a lot fewer words.

 

[brogdale]

It seems a very confused article to me. The majority of it is a character study of Jacob Rees-Mogg, which Meek trys to use to illustrate a wider phenomenon that the author calls "Farangism". I don't think this concept of "Farangism" is very well worked out at all and certainly the examples Meek uses to contrast it with neo-liberalism are poor, mostly because his understanding of neo-liberalism is poor.

Neo-liberalism has always spent money to "spew public funds into the pockets of private firms", that's a key part of it, what does Meek think privatisations/PFI are about?

So then you have comments like the one below which effectively makes neo-liberalism synonymous with populism. Neo-liberalism has always been willing to spend money on 'nationalist' projects when it suits it.

After reading it I still have no idea what point Meek is trying to smake - other than that he doesn't like JCM, neo-liberalism or 'Farangism', which is fine but could have been said with better with a lot fewer words.

Agree that Meek appears to struggle with the notion of the (neoliberal/late capitalist) consolidator state using taxes on earned wages to simultaneously shrink the state and facilitate regressive wealth transfer.
The focus on Mogg was, I think an attempt to embody/personalise the (apparently) contradictory nature of the ‘populist’/nationalist ‘superstructure ‘ and the ultra-globalist, oligarch friendly ‘base’ of their ideology.

Maybe?

 

[redsquirrel]

The focus on Mogg was, I think an attempt to embody/personalise the (apparently) contradictory nature of the ‘populist’/nationalist ‘superstructure ‘ and the ultra-globalist, oligarch friendly ‘base’ of their ideology.

Maybe?

Yes probably not accurate to say I didn't see the point of the article.
More just that his idea of the a contradiction between neo-liberalism and 'Farangism' doesn't exist (at least not in the way described) and so to use a character study of JRM to 'revel' this contradiction falls flat.

 

[brogdale]

Yes probably not accurate to say I didn't see the point of the article.
More just that his idea of the a contradiction between neo-liberalism and 'Farangism' doesn't exist (at least not in the way described) and so to use a character study of JRM to 'revel' this contradiction falls flat.

Yes, it did read like it was written by an author on a learning curve of his own. Not, in itself, a bad thing...but not necessarily a recipe for a ‘world shattering’ piece.

 

[treelover]

It seems a very confused article to me. The majority of it is a character study of Jacob Rees-Mogg, which Meek trys to use to illustrate a wider phenomenon that the author calls "Farangism". I don't think this concept of "Farangism" is very well worked out at all and certainly the examples Meek uses to contrast it with neo-liberalism are poor, mostly because his understanding of neo-liberalism is poor.

Neo-liberalism has always spent money to "spew public funds into the pockets of private firms", that's a key part of it, what does Meek think privatisations/PFI are about?

So then you have comments like the one below which effectively makes neo-liberalism synonymous with populism. Neo-liberalism has always been willing to spend money on 'nationalist' projects when it suits it.

After reading it I still have no idea what point Meek is trying to smake - other than that he doesn't like JCM, neo-liberalism or 'Farangism', which is fine but could have been said with better with a lot fewer words.

His Grimsby article was great,

btw, still hoping for someone to 'gift' me a subscription

 

[brogdale]

Hmmm....kicking off a tweet with "It's popular on the left to argue..."

 

[The39thStep]

Hmmm....kicking off a tweet with "It's popular on the left to argue..."

View attachment 179246

But that is exactly what some people on the left ( and the Guardian) do argue, and lump anyone on the right in with fascism. Not a recent thing its been around for years.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Tbf there is a lot of that shit. 'rainy fascist island' and all that bollocks. Maintain Goodwin is a bit of a prick though, enjoyed his ukip book but often (especially on twitter) he's a knob

 

[brogdale]

But that is exactly what some people on the left ( and the Guardian) do argue, and lump anyone on the right in with fascism. Not a recent thing its been around for years.

tbh I'm wary of anyone who seeks to use their position as a 'public academic' to belittle or discredit concerns about the empirical rise in race related hate crimes in the UK. That looks like a well dodgy agenda to me.

 

[The39thStep]

tbh I'm wary of anyone who seeks to use their position as a 'public academic' to belittle or discredit concerns about the empirical rise in race related hate crimes in the UK. That looks like a well dodgy agenda to me.

I'm not sure if its his vocational position that you are objecting to or the position he takes on whether or not the UK is tolerant? Equally I'm not sure that saying the UK is tolerant undremines concerns about race crime. The tolerance thing is a big picture issue and a rise in race related hate crime is only one measure amongst many. Most surveys indicate that the UK is more tolerant than other European states .Other surveys show that in the UK only a minority think we are more tolerant than we were a couple of years ago . Post Brexit peoples fear about immigration have declined although a majority would like to see immigration reduced. The bare bones is that only 15% in the UK would object to having immigrants living next door to them, around 10% would object to neighbours of a different race, and 10% would rather not have neighbours of a different religion.

 

[brogdale]

I'm not sure if its his vocational position that you are objecting to or the position he takes on whether or not the UK is tolerant? Equally I'm not sure that saying the UK is tolerant undremines concerns about race crime. The tolerance thing is a big picture issue and a rise in race related hate crime is only one measure amongst many. Most surveys indicate that the UK is more tolerant than other European states .Other surveys show that in the UK only a minority think we are more tolerant than we were a couple of years ago . Post Brexit peoples fear about immigration have declined although a majority would like to see immigration reduced. The bare bones is that only 15% in the UK would object to having immigrants living next door to them, around 10% would object to neighbours of a different race, and 10% would rather not have neighbours of a different religion.

I was commenting on the nasty smell emanating from a 'public academic' choosing to cherry-pick one social indicator in an apparent attempt to discount widespread concerns held about the rise of racism in this country as evidenced by Government statistics and people's lived experiences.

 

[Manter]

But that is exactly what some people on the left ( and the Guardian) do argue, and lump anyone on the right in with fascism. Not a recent thing its been around for years.

More tolerant than lots of less tolerant places when one very specific question is asked doesn’t mean the country is tolerant or that racism isn’t a huge problem that blights lives and chances across the country. He’s indulging in a rhetorical fallacy

 

[The39thStep]

More tolerant than lots of less tolerant places when one very specific question is asked doesn’t mean the country is tolerant or that racism isn’t a huge problem that blights lives and chances across the country. He’s indulging in a rhetorical fallacy

To point out that the UK is one of the most tolerant places in Europe isn't to say that racism isn't still a problem.

 

[brogdale]

To point out that the UK is one of the most tolerant places in Europe isn't to say that racism isn't still a problem.

My point...and the reason that Goodwin's twitter output betrays a worrying agenda.

 

[Manter]

To point out that the UK is one of the most tolerant places in Europe isn't to say that racism isn't still a problem.

And his tweet doesn’t say ‘it’s popular for the left to argue that Brexit Britain is awash with racism and actually I have no data on that. Here, have a graph’

He is trying to suggest that Brexit Britain isn’t and the left are wrong based on that bar graph. That’s a rhetorical fallacy

 

[The39thStep]

And his tweet doesn’t say ‘it’s popular for the left to argue that Brexit Britain is awash with racism and actually I have no data on that. Here, have a graph’

He is trying to suggest that Brexit Britain isn’t and the left are wrong based on that bar graph. That’s a rhetorical fallacy

I dont think he needs a bar graph to express an opinion that its a popular opinion on the left that Brexit Britain is awash with racism . A week on social media gives me the same impression tbh and on here.

 

[Manter]

I dont think he needs a bar graph to express an opinion that its a popular opinion on the left that Brexit Britain is awash with racism . A week on social media gives me the same impression tbh and on here.

But there are two parts to his tweet. The left likes to argue that Brexit Britain is awash with racism. Yes, some on the left- even many- do. So do centrists and some of those on the right.
He then goes on to suggest the left are in some way incorrect.... but actually isn’t offering evidence that means that those who make those arguments *are* incorrect.

 

[butchersapron]

But there are two parts to his tweet. The left likes to argue that Brexit Britain is awash with racism. Yes, some on the left- even many- do. So do centrists and some of those on the right.
He then goes on to suggest the left are in some way incorrect.... but actually isn’t offering evidence that means that those who make those arguments *are* incorrect.

Te chart is the evidence.