shit MANarchists say

[Nigel Irritable]

I don't see why. It's a race based sublimation of class. No relevance here.

It was originally a theory of the role of racism in the development and operation of US capitalism. A wrong theory, but not a stupid one. But liberal "privilege theory" now really doesn't have much in common with the semi-Maoist "white skin privilege" theory it sprang from, other than both versions pointing towards a politics of individual guilt.

Now it's less a "race based sublimation of class" and more an overarching identity politics theory which flattens out the differences between all forms of oppression, while still pointing towards individual solution to social issues. It seems to me that in this liberal version, which doesn't (sorry) privilege race, its the sort of thing that could be appealing to our liberal identity politics types too.

 

[butchersapron]

It's the same as it ever was -there is no moving away from it's roots to something identity based, it was that shit from the start. It never really had anything to do with maoism or the STO FFS it was only ever the idea of an educated but cut off from the w/c but in some form of authority middle class types. Find me a prof or a civil servant or their ivy league offspring not spouting this shit for years.

 

[revol68]

It's the same as it ever was -there is no moving away from it's roots to something identity based, it was that shit from the start. It never really had anything to do with maoism or the STO FFS it was only ever the idea of an educated but cut off from the w/c but in some form of authority middle class types. Find me a prof or a civil servant or their ivy league offspring not spouting this shit for years.

Think that's the crux of the matter, aye.

 

[Vintage Paw]

It was originally a theory of the role of racism in the development and operation of US capitalism. A wrong theory, but not a stupid one. But liberal "privilege theory" now really doesn't have much in common with the semi-Maoist "white skin privilege" theory it sprang from, other than both versions pointing towards a politics of individual guilt.

Now it's less a "race based sublimation of class" and more an overarching identity politics theory which flattens out the differences between all forms of oppression, while still pointing towards individual solution to social issues. It seems to me that in this liberal version, which doesn't (sorry) privilege race, its the sort of thing that could be appealing to our liberal identity politics types too.

Is it not (also, perhaps) just a continuation of 'intersectional' stuff that feminism was talking about way back when? Which, yes, identity politics.

So anyway, if you have a situation whereby there is a left-wing organisation of some sort, and the members display racism or sexism either externally or internally towards other members, other than saying "don't be a dick" how do you address it? I think it's easy to understand why many turn to the idea of privilege, as a starting point to try to understand why some people act as they do, and are who they are, but how do you move beyond that point and make it more relevant?

 

[revol68]

This one was awesome especially as it came from a canadian ex housemate of mine who was a middle class (in the real sense) international student who spouted shit liberal politics and huffed cos I slagged off her Ad Busters.

 

[elbows]

I have stolen the nipples of freedom, ground them down and reforged them as great paddles of woe with which the buttocks of the innocent slaves will be made to glow for the entertainment of the megaprivs. I am the divide and the conquer, smell my identity, tremble at the thought of what is lost in my wake. I have a relative that specialises in marketing tribes to themselves, oh glorious feedback loop, drive the consumption, drive the disconnect.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

It's the same as it ever was -there is no moving away from it's roots to something identity based, it was that shit from the start. It never really had anything to do with maoism or the STO FFS it was only ever the idea of an educated but cut off from the w/c but in some form of authority middle class types. Find me a prof or a civil servant or their ivy league offspring not spouting this shit for years.

I agree that it isn't something that's particularly connected to Maoism. It just happened to originate on the fringes of US Maoism, but it flourished elsewhere. In that process it was restructured, being recast as a general theory of oppression rather than a theory of the primacy of race. It actually seems to have a stronger hold among American feminists than amongst black movements in the US. And in so far as it establishes a presence here, the conduit will likely be internet feminism. It really is nearly totally dominant on American feminist websites, and those are widely read by young feminists in Britain and Ireland.

 

[cesare]

This one was awesome especially as it came from a canadian ex housemate of mine who was a middle class (in the real sense) international student who spouted shit liberal politics and huffed cos I slagged off her Ad Busters.

What the fuck is that

 

[Nigel Irritable]

What the fuck is that

A preview of the front cover of the forthcoming issue of "Organise!"

 

[revol68]

 

[redsquirrel]

It's a meme as well, with Ryan Gosling. But I don't know what Ryan Gosling has to do with it, who is he anyway? I don't think I know any of his films.

The saviour of Laurie Penny

 

[Fez909]

I won't claim to understand every point made here; I am not an anarchist, nor a political junkie. So, as an 'outsider' who sympathises: that OP is truly cringe-worthy. It's attacking a form of activism that I have only ever been aware of on the internet, and only amongst Americans. I don't see the relevancy it has to UK politics whatsoever.

I also read the next link posted, "youmightbeamanarchistif.." and that wasn't any better. How does anything there address the needs and worries of the British w/c? Or even British women, whether w/c or not? It's got that horrible feeling of empty American 'left' politics (which I guess is what people refer to as lifestyle anarchism? Not an anarchist so I'm not too familiar with the terms). I seriously hope that isn't the current state of British anarchism.

 

[revol68]

As a mate of mine in solfed said, it's like a lot of people ran away from the activist ghetto and all it's crazy internal politics in favour of class struggle in workplaces and communities but having found out that all the will in the world can't just make it happen, no matter how good an "organiser" they are, they have ended up falling back into the activist ghetto they railed against as it provides some sense of "doing something".

Though he might have been just trying to make me feel better about being a lazy, cynical prick.

 

[barney_pig]

The saviour of Laurie Penny

It's like 3 degrees of separation, a new rule for P&P, all threads will return to Laurie Penny within 3 pages.

 

[cesare]

I won't claim to understand every point made here; I am not an anarchist, nor a political junkie. So, as an 'outsider' who sympathises: that OP is truly cringe-worthy. It's attacking a form of activism that I have only ever been aware of on the internet, and only amongst Americans. I don't see the relevancy it has to UK politics whatsoever.

I also read the next link posted, "youmightbeamanarchistif.." and that wasn't any better. How does anything there address the needs and worries of the British w/c? Or even British women, whether w/c or not? It's got that horrible feeling of empty American 'left' politics (which I guess is what people refer to as lifestyle anarchism? Not an anarchist so I'm not too familiar with the terms). I seriously hope that isn't the current state of British anarchism.

"We don't like your ivory tower, so in response we're going to construct loads of ivory towers of our own and argue with you from the tops of those".

 

[cesare]

A preview of the front cover of the forthcoming issue of "Organise!"

It doesn't bode well for the Bookfair does it It's bad enough pushing past the dogs on strings and pervasive odour of BO without the prospect of a bunch of Laurie Pennys in V masks queuing outside AFED's meeting on Privilege Theory, tweeting about how hip and cool and subversive it all is.

 

[chilango]

I wonder if I'll have to talk about this at play group this morning?

 

[cesare]

Oh, happy birthday, revol!

Damn. You're just online, not your birthday. Congrats on the job though.

 

[revol68]

Oh, happy birthday, revol!

Damn. You're just online, not your birthday. Congrats on the job though.

but it is my bday

 

[cesare]

but it is my bday

I thought I'd made a mistake when I also saw you on line (and didn't scroll down to double check). Happy birthday!

 

[JimW]

It's the same as it ever was -there is no moving away from it's roots to something identity based, it was that shit from the start. It never really had anything to do with maoism or the STO FFS it was only ever the idea of an educated but cut off from the w/c but in some form of authority middle class types. Find me a prof or a civil servant or their ivy league offspring not spouting this shit for years.

Wasn't the phrase 'white skin privilege' coined by some Detroit car workers' organisation? Have a vague feeling of reading a sixties text when I first came across this sort of argument online and trying to see if there was anything to it beyond the obvious nonsense.

 

[butchersapron]

Wasn't the phrase 'white skin privilege' coined by some Detroit car workers' organisation? Have a vague feeling of reading a sixties text when I first came across this sort of argument online and trying to see if there was anything to it beyond the obvious nonsense.

That stuff did come out things like the Sojourner Truth Organisation, members who went on to Race Traitor and other similar things. The League of Revolutionary Black Wokers and the various RUM groups in the factories didn't really have those views, they were pretty much straight down the class class - and the STO members in the new book on them criticise themelves for coming up with these ideas when they didn't really have any real ties with either the former groups or their working/social environments of that part of the class (that's from my skim reading of the book to be fair, i've if misread that i'll come back and say so when i get started on it a few days).


Point about the AF meeting, i'm going to ask them for a copy of the discussion document, i'm hoping that the blurb was just poorly written, suggesting as it does that this might represent a new start point for the AF rather than just a debate, because even if there is significant section of the (new?) membership taking this seriously then the AF would be going backwards. I'm not convinced that they are, but will read the document. I'm coming round to nice one's point above from when the thread first started that this might be coming in off the back of new set of young anarchists who haven't seen the sort of class struggles that the older generation have and that formed their politics and so the new set concentrate on pointing their fingers inwards (iyswim).

 

[sihhi]

I won't claim to understand every point made here; I am not an anarchist, nor a political junkie. So, as an 'outsider' who sympathises: that OP is truly cringe-worthy. It's attacking a form of activism that I have only ever been aware of on the internet, and only amongst Americans. I don't see the relevancy it has to UK politics whatsoever.

I also read the next link posted, "youmightbeamanarchistif.." and that wasn't any better. How does anything there address the needs and worries of the British w/c? Or even British women, whether w/c or not? It's got that horrible feeling of empty American 'left' politics (which I guess is what people refer to as lifestyle anarchism? Not an anarchist so I'm not too familiar with the terms). I seriously hope that isn't the current state of British anarchism.

Americans are traitors Unless They Vote Obama.

you might be a manarchist if you believe it's more important to work towards boycotting and dismantling the State than it is to vote for whatever party classifies women as actual people so that, while the awesome fight against the State continues, women can actually survive.
Asked by Anonymous

This person gets it, almost. Never forget that the conservative “War on Women” is just the newest face of the age-old drive to squash out anyone who doesn’t fit into or can’t or won’t be used by the system, and by not focusing on how people of color, trans*people, disabled people, and neurodivergent people are affected, we let the baddies win by erasing peoples’ experiences.
But yes, if you believe in voting for the worst candidate in hopes that the system will implode on itself, you might be a manarchist.

http://youmightbeamanarchistif.tumblr.com/

 

[SpookyFrank]

YOU NEGATE OTHERS' EXPERIENCES, EXERT YOUR PRIVILEGES TO THEIR FULLEST, AND GENERALLY PERPETUATE HETEROPATRIARCHAL BULLSHIT.​

I would say that just dismissing someone as a 'manarchist' because they don't agree with you counts as negating their experiences and exerting your privileges. The very phrase 'manarchist', used as a negative, is a device for exerting (or creating) privilege, as it is apparently only women who get to use it. Worse, it seems that men are afforded no means to defend themselves from it.

 

[Random]

" if you believe in voting for the worst candidate in hopes that the system will implode on itself, you might be a manarchist."

American lefties have very very weird things to fight over.

 

[Das Uberdog]

this stuff is rife all over the UK. NUS has recently No Platformed Tony Benn and George Galloway because of their support for Assange, which apparently makes them predatory 'rape apologists' who can't be trusted to share a platform with female student twats. hilariously, Galloway is suing them for defamation. clusterfuck

ETA - i should explain that the moves to No Platform Galloway have come from the same identity/privilege politics cunts who have actually taken control of the "union"


check your privilege folks

 

[cesare]

this stuff is rife all over the UK. NUS has recently No Platformed Tony Benn and George Galloway because of their support for Assange, which apparently makes them predatory 'rape apologists' who can't be trusted to share a platform with female student twats. hilariously, Galloway is suing them for defamation. clusterfuck


check your privilege folks

Hang on, that's not why the NUS no platformed Galloway (dunno about Benn).

Edit: ah yes, here we are: http://www.socialistunity.com/the-n...-the-door-to-legal-action-by-george-galloway/

 

[Lo Siento.]

I suppose the thing that jumps to mind for me is, what's the point? I mean step (1) rid the anarchist movement of "manarchism", step (2) err...? victory?

 

[Das Uberdog]

it's because of his comments r.e. supporting Assange - his 'sex game' business. Benn was hooked in because of a far more general and less offensive support for Assange

 

[8ball]

Usually when I learn a new word I feel it's added to my life in some small way.

Not today.