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

[chilango]

I am speaking generally, not at you.

To some extent, yes this is a common experience even here on Urban too.

It's incredibly frustrating. Championing the rights of the W/C yet speaking in theories/terms that the average w/c person I am in contact with daily wouldn't connect to or care for.

Good, good. I'm just conscious that I'm quite a loud - perhaps repetitive -voice on on some of these threads.

 

[treelover]

but it doesn't matter that the liberal-left didn't attend does it? they're not the audience surely that we need.

Not the core audience, no, but their resources/connections are sadly needed while the left behinds have so little/

 

[chilango]

Not the core audience, no, but their resources/connections are sadly needed while the left behinds have so little/

I disagree.

Things need to be built, sustainably, from the bottom up.

 

[Athos]

I am speaking generally, not at you.

To some extent, yes this is a common experience even here on Urban too.

It's incredibly frustrating. Championing the rights of the W/C yet speaking in theories/terms that the average w/c person I am in contact with daily wouldn't connect to or care for.

Surely the answer is to strive harder to build those broad, class-based networks, though, rather than give up on class politics in preference for identity politics or 'hot button' issues? I mean, not everyody will necessarily appreciate the detail of a lot of the academic end of what's discussed here, but everyone can recognise the benefits of solidarity.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Surely the answer is to strive harder to build those broad, class-based networks, though, rather than give up on class politics in preference for identity politics or 'hot button' issues? I mean, not everyody will necessarily appreciate the detail of a lot of the academic end of what's discussed here, but everyone can recognise the benefits of solidarity.

And that's the challenge. The absence of solidarity is conspicuous. In the US in particular, in many parts of which such solidarity has never existed. So it's probably not quite right that everyone can recognise the benefits of class-based solidarity. Where there are other, vertically aligned, forms of solidarity in place, such as religion-based solidarity or race-based solidarity, these are things that need knocking down in order to build a broad base.

I'm cautious about offering solutions when it comes to the US. Many of its problems can be traced directly back to the end of the Civil War. This isn't easy stuff.

 

[Santino]

If a sustainable, ground-up movement was built and started having a positive impact on politics, then after a while the liberal commentariat would stop criticising it, start supporting it, and eventually claim credit for its successes.

 

[Mr Moose]

The road to hell is paved with lesser evil intentions

Nice, but it's also paved with good ones. Need to find a road many of us feel safe on, has a nice view, decent services etc.

 

[killer b]

This is important ime. It comes across as smug and inflexible. It says do as I say, not as I do. It demands a change in behaviour from others yet sits back and refuses to change anything about itself. As such, it positions itself outside of what is happening to all of us, telling others what they are doing wrong yet not offering up anything it can do better.

I don't see any smugness. I see anger, frustration, sometimes a bit of self-righteousness... but no-one is smug. What is there to possibly be smug about?

 

[Athos]

And that's the challenge. The absence of solidarity is conspicuous. In the US in particular, in many parts of which such solidarity has never existed. So it's probably not quite right that everyone can recognise the benefits of class-based solidarity. Where there are other, vertically aligned, forms of solidarity in place, such as religion-based solidarity or race-based solidarity, these are things that need knocking down in order to build a broad base.

I'm cautious about offering solutions when it comes to the US. Many of its problems can be traced directly back to the end of the Civil War. This isn't easy stuff.

The trouble with those parallel,vertically aligned forms are manifold. First, they divide the working class into silos; secondly, each is dominated by those at the top, and so they don't offer the possibility for meaningful change (becasue it would be against those people's wider interests). If it's easier for women to get into the boardroom, that'll benefit a small minority of women. And do we really want to want police to shoot black and white people in equal proportions? I'd say that the vast majority of women and black people have more to gain from the end of capitalism.

Fundamentally, those vertical structures reduce politics to hotch-potch of issues and casues, rather than any coherent ideology, which results in some pretty facile analysis and the adoption of completely counter-productive tactics. Nobody interested in class politics would dismiss the need for anti-racism/sexism/homophobia etc. action, but realise that the most effctive long-term prospect is for those struggles to be seen as part of class struggle.

But, as a straight, white man, that's easy for me to say. I guess we need an effective short-term strategy which doesn't undermine a longer term class-based movement.

 

[Treacle Toes]

I don't see any smugness. I see anger, frustration, sometimes a bit of self-righteousness... but no-one is smug. What is there to possibly be smug about?

Well quite. It does seem smug though, but maybe it is self-righteousness, although they are synonyms and equally can be experienced as condescending and hypocritical.

 

[Pickman's model]

Nice, but it's also paved with good ones. Need to find a road many of us feel safe on, has a nice view, decent services etc.

Yes, I often point out the road to hell paved with good intentions.

 

[Ole]

If a sustainable, ground-up movement was built and started having a positive impact on politics, then after a while the liberal commentariat would stop criticising it, start supporting it, and eventually claim credit for its successes.

I don't think so. The liberal "left", including the commentariat, would use every conceivable means at their disposal to knife it to death before it became too strong. The liberal "left" are fanatically committed to the idea of a ruling-class. They just believe that anyone should have the opportunity to be part of it, regardless of gender, race, religion, sexuality and so on.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

2 facts consistently written out of the martyr myth: Plenty of privileged people are stupid. Plenty of relatively non privileged people are not stupid.

This whole "calling us stupid" thing has become part of the reactionary doublethink. They blather for decades about plain speaking and telling it like it is, but woe betide if one equates constant blatant flaws in logic with some form of stupidity.

It's ok for some to label others as "traitors" and "elitists" etc. but watch them bullyblub if they are labelled dupes.

To look at it from another angle though: I expect the OP is alluding to Trumps victory on top of the Ref result.

Prior to each vote plenty of people backing "Remain", then Clinton, were fully aware and honest about the faults of the EU and Clinton.

But since the vote they have been pointing the finger just about everywhere else.

Trump certainly didn't win because of stupidity. He won primarily because Clinton was a shit candidate. People rejected the EU because it too had fallen short in many ways.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The trouble with those parallel,vertically aligned forms are manifold. First, they divide the working class into silos; secondly, each is dominated by those at the top, and so they don't offer the possibility for meaningful change (becasue it would be against those people's wider interests). If it's easier for women to get into the boardroom, that'll benefit a small minority of women. And do we really want to want police to shoot black and white people in equal proportions? I'd say that the vast majority of women and black people have more to gain from the end of capitalism..

I would agree. And yes, your first point about vertical groups being dominated by those at the top is a very important one. But I'd also want, and need, to go further. The politics I would want to be a part of would say not only that the vast majority of, say, women and black people will benefit, but also stress that their benefit is also to the benefit of the vast majority of men and white people. There are no conflicts of interest here. There is, at a fundamental level, a common cause.

This needs careful handling somewhere like the US, where such things as affirmative action both address an obvious problem and also create problems of their own by reinforcing feelings of vertical solidarity. Always a problem when trying to treat symptoms without addressing causes.

 

[eoin_k]

...
It's incredibly frustrating. Championing the rights of the W/C yet speaking in theories/terms that the average w/c person I am in contact with daily wouldn't connect to or care for.

Any group that attempts to combine critical thought with political action has to strike a balance between unnecessary jargon and dumbing down their arguments. Obviously the language you use in the politics forum of a website with Urban75's history might be different from that used in a leaflet, but it's also hard to unpick how the language of class seems less relevant today from how contemporary capitalism has atomised our lives, which goes to the heart of the problem. Trying to think and communicate credibly about the majority of people, those who need to work in order to live, having the power to change their lives is understandably difficult today.

That said it would be good to have some examples of theories/terms people use, which you see as a barrier to being taken seriously.

 

[Athos]

... There are no conflicts of interest here. There is, at a fundamental level, a common cause.

Yes, I agree. Sadly, too often we've seen identity politic campaigners rejecting the class based left wing. Largely, becuase the leaders of those movements don't have the same fundamental interets as the working class.

 

[chilango]

To look at it from another angle though: I expect the OP is alluding to Trumps victory on top of the Ref result.

I'm talking about a pattern that I've personally seen repeated, louder each time it seems, after the rise in the BNP, after the emergence of UKIP as an electoral force, during the EDL's fifteen minutes of fame, after the Brexit vote and now after Trump.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

I'm talking about a pattern that I've personally seen repeated, louder each time it seems, after the rise in the BNP, after the emergence of UKIP as an electoral force, during the EDL's fifteen minutes of fame, after the Brexit vote and now after Trump.

Fair enough. In many of these instances the "less privileged" being white heterosexual males, yes?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yes, I agree. Sadly, too often we've seen identity politic campaigners rejecting the class based left wing. Largely, becuase the leaders of those movements don't have the same fundamental interets as the working class.

Also, we're talking of fine margins here, too. It's not like the entire US has just lost its mind, or even half of it. If Sanders had gained momentum earlier, he could have beaten Clinton, and it's not a coincidence that those crucial rust belt states are exactly the ones in which Sanders beat Clinton. In his albeit very liberal American voice, Sanders at least addressed the question of class, and the question of a conflict of interests between the rich and everyone else. We weren't that far off a Sanders presidency being the product of current conditions, not a Trump presidency.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Any group that attempts to combine critical thought with political action has to strike a balance between unnecessary jargon and dumbing down their arguments. Obviously the language you use in the politics forum of a website with Urban75's history might be different from that used in a leaflet, but it's also hard to unpick how the language of class seems less relevant today from how contemporary capitalism has atomised our lives, which goes to the heart of the problem. Trying to think and communicate credibly about the majority of people, those who need to work in order to live, having the power to change their lives is understandably difficult today.

That said it would be good to have some examples of theories/terms people use, which you see as a barrier to being taken seriously.

I'll use something from your post as an example if that is okay. I think it is a passive way that this kind of attitude manifests. Particularly salient on a thread with this title too I think.

Any group that attempts to combine critical thought with political action has to strike a balance between unnecessary jargon and dumbing down their arguments.

Removing jargon is not dumbing down an argument. If we are talking critical thought and political action there will surely be everyday examples to attach to and illustrate the point/s being made. Whilst there is certain terminology that is necessary/useful I think there is almost always a way of describing/discussing things in ways that don't exclude others. It takes effort though, granted.

 

[chilango]

Fair enough. In many of these instances the "less privileged" being white heterosexual males, yes?

In these instances many of whom (but not all by any means) would be white, many of whom (but not all by any means) would be male and many of whom (but not all by any means) would be heterosexual. Yes. But also many of whom (but not all by any means) would be working class, many of whom (but not all by any means) might not have had access to Higher Education and many of whom (but not all by any means) might live in areas of deprivation (as far as community resources, amenities, etc etc go).

Your point?

 

[eoin_k]

...
Nobody interested in class politics would dismiss the need for anti-racism/sexism/homophobia etc. action, but realise that the most effctive long-term prospect is for those struggles to be seen as part of class struggle.
...

The best class analysis goes well beyond this to also recognise that class relations are racialised and gendered. You can't seriously get to grips with class without recognising how racial and sexual division have also been used to maintain class power, and this has been a dynamic process which has evolved with capitalism.

 

[Athos]

The best class analysis goes well beyond this to also recognise that class relations are racialised and gendered. You can't seriously get to grips with class without recognising how racial and sexual division have also been used to maintain class power, and this has been a dynamic process which has evolved as capitalism has evolved.

Absolutely.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The best class analysis goes well beyond this to also recognise that class relations are racialised and gendered. You can't seriously get to grips with class without recognising how racial and sexual division have also been used to maintain class power, and this has been a dynamic process which has evolved with capitalism.

yep. Most certainly. I don't think anyone is saying 'don't talk about race/gender'.

 

[Mr Moose]

Yes, I often point out the road to hell paved with good intentions.

So did Chris Rea. And he had to drive it home for Xmas.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

In these instances many of whom (but not all any means) would be white, many of whom (but not all any means) would be male and many of whom (but not all any means) would be heterosexual. Yes. But also many of whom (but not all any means) would be working class, many of whom (but not all any means) might not have had access to Higher Education and many of whom (but not all any means) might live in areas of deprivation (as far as community resources, amenities, etc etc go).

Your point?

People who are shat on and are white, working class are shat on because they are working class, not because they are white. The elite spin some distraction bollocks claiming to support their class (Theresa May has been laying this on with a trowel, just as staunch prolrtarian activist George Osborne did before)

The far right have long pretended to act on behalf of the working class, while being instinctive enemies of the class through, among other things, union busting, nationalism etc.

So in the wrong circumstances it's easy enough for a hoax alternative to be sold, whereby the establishment also promotes that alternative as "anti establishment", look at the efforts made post 2010 to say that UKIP were a northern alternative to Labour (not overlooking Labour's own failures to represent)

For all this, a lot of the moaners of the alt right etc. aren't relatively disadvantaged in any case. They do indeed tend to be white, straight males and are often not very economically disadvantaged, especially in world terms. What they are is martyr myth wankers, not even neccessarily stupid but very eager to suck up and bolster horseshit memes.

There's so much over simplification in this debate. For example, this "liberal elite" meme that is all the rage, pushed by Theresa May so be very careful of buying into it. I know plenty of liberals. None of them are in the elite. But you know who stands to gain from the victory of that meme? The authoritarian elite. As a result of what the establishment defines as "anti establishment" votes, large amounts of extra power have been handed to parties who have dominated their countries for centuries. You couldn't make this shit up.

 

[chilango]

For all this, a lot of the moaners of the alt right etc. aren't relatively disadvantaged in any case. They do indeed tend to be white, straight males and are often not very economically disadvantaged, especially in world terms. What they are is martyr myth wankers, not even neccessarily stupid but very eager to suck up and bolster horseshit memes.

Are they the same as the people I mentioned?

 

[krtek a houby]

Best news I've heard in a while.

Surprised you hear anything at all, above the sound of your own witterings.

 

[eoin_k]

I'll use something from your post as an example if that is okay. I think it is a passive way that this kind of attitude manifests. Particularly salient on a thread with this title too I think.



Removing jargon is not dumbing down an argument. If we are talking critical thought and political action there will surely be everyday examples to attach to and illustrate the point/s being made. Whilst there is certain terminology that is necessary/useful I think there is almost always a way of describing/discussing things in ways that don't exclude others. It takes effort though, granted.

This response feels a bit 'smug' to me. If you read my post in good faith it's clear that I used the phrase 'unnecessary jargon' as shorthand to acknowledge that technical language can sometimes be useful and that critical thinking can involve hard work, before going on to make a point you seem to broadly agree with.

I'm genuinely interested in what theories and terms people who talk in terms of class on Urban75 use, which you see as irrelevant.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Are they the same as the people I mentioned?

No, perhaps you were being studiously selective. Perhaps I was too. This is a problem of the whole discussion - we try to apply analysis to very broad situations, huge numbers of people, and cant fail to pick out mere factions of those numbers to make points.

Saying that stupidity is stupid has never been an answer, though it doesn't make it less so.

There's a cross over here with the whole "don't say racism is racist, it might make people more sympathetic to racists" line. Very easy for people who aren't victims of racism to say.

Perhaps the left should say nothing at all and let stupid lies reign supreme. Who knows?

Ideally though, we are on the ground working in communities, we often are and we don't need to be told. The problem is more centered around voting periods, the dynamics of the system, parties etc.