Privileged people calling less privileged people "stupid" doesn't seem to be working...

[Treacle Toes]

No he doesn't, he explicitly places himself inside it. He distances himself from the 'left'-liberal end of things.

I have rewatched this morning and you are right on the highlighted point. Very early on in the rant he says 'the left did this, people like me...' I missed that first time probably because for most of the vid (after that) he uses the term 'them' or 'the left'.

 

[ska invita]

post by IB off facebook
Ian Bone
Yesterday at 05:48 ·
There comes a time comrades when continuing down the 'middle class Lefties got all the deserve' becomes a convenient comfort blanket to hide our own failure. Why did our politics - similar in many ways -opposition to the metropolitan elite- fail to resonate?
If Marine le pen wins in France, Gerd Wilders in the Netherlands do we hear the same chorus. When Hitler won his largest vote in 1932 did all we did was go 'serves the fucking social democrats right'.

The woman in the clip below has got t right- these are fucking dangerous times. Soon a black or Hispanic person will be shot dead by the cops and Trump will support the cops and then.........

So I don't want another bystander telling me its 'only middle class students protesting'.........take another look at the woman in the clip.

Being working class has no inherent virtue in itself - its just a sociological definition -only when our class becomes class conscious - a class for itself - does it become a political force.
So lets stop absolving our own class for voting Trump and say ' you fucking idiots - look what you've done - but it aint too late - you can undo it.................but only on the streets.........or we could continue to smugly comfort ourselves that it was .............

.theres a war coming........and as the old civil rights song went. 'who's side are you on'

 

[juice_terry]

There's as much a cultural break in direction/outlook needed in the left, that while not of course unconnected to the political perspective, is IMO one that might be harder to deal with.

We need to move from an introspective, sub-cultural, low ambition, activist focused scene to a class based, massively ambitious, problem solving, organized movement.

Answers as to how to do this on a postcard please...

And it's taken 20+ years and an even further shift to the right for people to start saying what was being said by IWCA all those years ago



.

 

[Dogsauce]

The barrier that will hit is how few people would identify themselves as 'working class' to start with. The term seems only to be applied to a narrow section of society now, for example it doesn't seem to include large immigrant populations which are doing a lot of the traditional working class jobs. You can't have a broad movement without solidarity, and that's been hugely eroded, quite deliberately.

 

[bimble]

" When Hitler won his largest vote in 1932 did all we did was go 'serves the fucking social democrats right'."

I think history books tell us that one significant part of the reason why Hitler won almost unopposed was that the Communist Party in Germany was busy tearing into the Social Democrats, obsessively accusing them of being 1000 times worse than an open fascist dictatorship.

Lessons of defeat: German communists and the rise of Hitler | Socialist Review

 

[redsquirrel]

Really it was the fault of the communists was it.

Have you actually read that piece you linked to? The one that concludes

We should take the experience of the SPD before 1933 as a warning: a workers’ party that allows itself to become an administrator of the capitalist system by joining or supporting bourgeois governments—and thereby providing left wing cover to austerity—runs the danger of becoming identified with the system itself. It risks discrediting any claim to be an alternative to the status quo. In times of economic crisis like 1929 in Germany or today in Greece, however, millions begin to turn their backs on a status quo that no longer offers them a future. It is precisely then that a credible socialist alternative is needed to channel the anger of the masses in an emancipatory direction. The building of such an alternative is a task the importance of which must not be understated, particularly in the midst of the deepest economic crisis since 1929.

 

[bimble]

Oh right, it was all the fault of the Social Democrats then.
Just like in ska invicta's post, which was, I think, meant to be ironic.

 

[butchersapron]

The things that you read on this site sometimes: hitler won almost unopposed, working class people voting for the ruling classes favoured candidate is class loyalty and not doing so is class traitory, you can accuse the kpd of helping hitler into power but to do the same of the spd is to resort to polemical crudity. Remarkable stuff.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Polemical crudity is to eschewed at all costs.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Polemical crudity is the meat cleaver of political discourse, when what is called for, is a stiletto.

 

[Spymaster]

Polemical crudity is to eschewed at all costs.

As is traitory, aka treachery.

 

[redsquirrel]

Oh right, it was all the fault of the Social Democrats then.

I did say any such thing. But don't let that stop you with the smears, you never do.

 

[LDC]

And it's taken 20+ years and an even further shift to the right for people to start saying what was being said by IWCA all those years ago.

Amongst others. But yes, not a new thing to observe. Are you/have you been involved in the IWCA? Be interested to chat if so.

 

[chilango]

...again, it might be worth people thinking about the practical implications of what they're arguing for here (and the various other threads).

It happened because X (well, X,Y,Z and a bunch of others really) so that means we need to do A and I personally am going to do B.

So, does that mean doing something differently or carrying on as normal?

 

[butchersapron]

And it's taken 20+ years and an even further shift to the right for people to start saying what was being said by IWCA all those years ago



.

If only that were the case. What i see is basically the same people putting that sort of perspective across against a now even further entrenched basket of identity politics derived positions that add up to a sort of common sense idea of what politics is - one that governs much political discourse across the right and the left (and here i don't mean parliament etc i mean ordinary people who any sort of escape has to come from and current political activists) and that therefore governs what peoples expectations of politics are and in turn how they organise politically (or are put off from doing so). I don't see any wider acceptance of the points put over the last 20 years - even now, when the meat of the analysis and the predictions based on it have been borne out.

 

[butchersapron]

Little snippet here - don't worry, don't have to watch whole thing, i've kindly linked to the relevant bit - simply not an option to engage

 

[bimble]

'lets say that trump voters were one third sexists one third racists and one third genuinely economically disturbed' he says, and then that 'the only thing that's malleable to public policy is the economic part'.
Maybe that's true if public policy simply means the actions of the State. But what about everyone else, who is not the government: Surely this is not a good time for feminists and anti-racists to be told to pipe down, or even told that they are a big part of the problem, with their alienating identity politics etc.
There has to be a way for these concerns to not be mutually exclusive and locked in a zero sum game type fight.

 

[butchersapron]

Why do you have to do this on every post? Why suggest that the clip above suggests "feminists and anti-racists to be told to pipe down..."? It seems nearly every post from you contains one of these. It's just so pointless - and frustrating for those it's aimed at.

edit: and that's before even touching on the assumption that feminists and anti-racists are fans of identity politics, or the reciprocal formulation that those who oppose identity politics reject feminism and anti-racism.

 

[J Ed]

'lets say that trump voters were one third sexists one third racists and one third genuinely economically disturbed' he says, and then that 'the only thing that's malleable to public policy is the economic part'.
Maybe that's true if public policy simply means the actions of the State. But what about everyone else, who is not the government: Surely this is not a good time for feminists and anti-racists to be told to pipe down, or even told that they are a big part of the problem, with their alienating identity politics etc.
There has to be a way for these concerns to not be mutually exclusive and locked in a zero sum game type fight.

There was a major presidential candidate which fused class-inflected campaigning with explicit anti-racist, anti-sexist policies. The inevitable one who just lost to the serial rapist racist with a five second attention span ensured that he couldn't win.

 

[gosub]

Really helpful that.
Just to put what he's saying in pictures, 1st map's population density by county, and 2nd one's the election result by country.
View attachment 95360 View attachment 95362

Election maps

So what the Democrats needed was a candidate that understood farming

 

[Athos]

'lets say that trump voters were one third sexists one third racists and one third genuinely economically disturbed' he says, and then that 'the only thing that's malleable to public policy is the economic part'.
Maybe that's true if public policy simply means the actions of the State. But what about everyone else, who is not the government: Surely this is not a good time for feminists and anti-racists to be told to pipe down, or even told that they are a big part of the problem, with their alienating identity politics etc.
There has to be a way for these concerns to not be mutually exclusive and locked in a zero sum game type fight.

How can you get so many things wrong in one post? !

 

[Sasaferrato]

Don't forget how the those of us who didn't like either candidate but preferred Hilary over sexual predator Trump will be criticised as liberals and therefore; stupid.

Anyway; the people have spoken. We must respect the result. All hail the rise of the right.

Perhaps the rise of the right is due to the failure of the left?

 

[Joe Reilly]

How Half Of America Lost Its F**king Mind

Which half?

 

[brogdale]

Succinct.

 

[pengaleng]

lol

 

[J Ed]

Succinct.

Phil Greaves has a lot of, uhh... novel ideas, but he is right here. Funnily enough Corbyn's account follows his account on twitter.

 

[Pickman's model]

'lets say that trump voters were one third sexists one third racists and one third genuinely economically disturbed' he says, and then that 'the only thing that's malleable to public policy is the economic part'.
Maybe that's true if public policy simply means the actions of the State. But what about everyone else, who is not the government: Surely this is not a good time for feminists and anti-racists to be told to pipe down, or even told that they are a big part of the problem, with their alienating identity politics etc.
There has to be a way for these concerns to not be mutually exclusive and locked in a zero sum game type fight.

I would have thought many racists sexist too, and quite possibly also "economically disturbed". so don't believe your division into separate categories holds water

 

[Pickman's model]

How can you get so many things wrong in one post? !

And without obvious effort

 

[brogdale]

Plenty of "rust, race and ignorance" maps in the Sunday's; this from the Observer...

 

[Sasaferrato]

A significant proportion of Trump's vote was explicitly and deliberately racist and misogynistic. A spectrum of voters, from Nazi-fascist Hitler worshippers to much of the mainstream religious right, clearly fits this bill. Beyond these constituencies many others clearly responded favourably, or at least failed to be put off, by his racist, anti-immigrant campaign and multiple credible allegations of a history of sexual violence, making it hard to argue that any vote for Trump wasn't structurally racist and sexist. But we are also confronted with exit polls that seem to show that the swing toward Trump was made up of those on low incomes including union organised Democratic Party affiliates. It even seems to have been larger among voters from ethnic groups other than white (only up +1% on a lower white turnout). No doubt these figures need to be interpreted carefully even if they are accurate, but they also suggest the need to reflect on how Trump was allowed to win. How do we get beyond a situation where defending women's reproductive freedom and opposing white supremacy means voting for a corrupt establishment candidate who cleaves to a broken and exploitative economic model, leaving the field open for the Tories and Trump to offer an alternative to a segment of the electorate who are rightly disillusioned with the status quo?

Just like Bill Clinton then.