Following Russell's lead, I will henceforth no longer deign to call myself a 'public intellectual'. Firstly, there's a chance I might end up being associated something like the élite intellectuelle, to grab a phrase from an online translator. And we can't have that.
Secondly, and more concerning, is that I might be associated with someone like Tammy Bruce, a 'cut and paste' intellectuel dragged out here by someone in the ACT Party. Sorry guys, nothing can save you. What also set warning bells was this OpEd piece. Say no more.
I particularly liked two lines.
I have seen first-hand how the agendas of feminism, black power, multiculturalism and gay advocacy have been consciously used to break down morals and values that the activists saw as obstructions to their achieving, first, cultural acceptance and, ultimately, cultural domination.
The left relies on multiculturalism to isolate groups so that there is no unity and they can maintain a victim sensibility
Now, the 'morals and values' we're talking about in this instance are in all likelihood the Christian values that kept women like Bruce in the closet in the first place. And as for cultural domination, I'm not entirely sure what she's talking about. In all likelihood, this phrase is just indicative of the armoury of dog-whistle terms Sandra quotes in the second link above.
A great example is where Sandra quotes Bruce linking paedophile priests with gay blokes who can't keep it in their pants (To summarise). There's one major problem there, not all paedophiles are gay. The two things are entirely different. But, as a dog-whistle, the two ideas are easily linked by persons wanting to vilify gay men.
The next dog-whistle is this multiculturalism. What really warned me about Bruce was her limited take on this issue (sexuality politics is not something I'm at all well-read in). Linking 'ghetto' and 'multicultural' is a very, very common conservative tactic. And is, COMPLETE. AND. UTTER. BULLSHIT.
Although trying to pose herself as a liberal, Bruce is in fact a conservative. Maybe she is of the more lenient side of the conservative spectrum, and seems to use her sexuality as a means to validate her conservative opinions, don't be fooled. I call her a 'cut and paste' intellectual because, based on a cursory reading of the newspaper reports, and my gut instinct, Bruce seems to have constructed a kind of mélange of fact and opinion that is pitched at an audience who's already made up their minds on the things she discusses.
As I say, the multicultural thing is a great indicator. There is no liberal democracy I'm aware of that utilises multiculturalism to construct 'ethnic ghettos'. To claim that the policy does this is little more that a lie. A BIG lie.
Australia, who you've seen me criticise at length, is one of the globes most successful multicultural stories. A conservative Government adopted multicultural policy 30 years ago as a means to better bring minorities into participation with the Australian nation. As it was, without multicultural policies and programmes migrants were not effectively integrating into society. Today, while there are obvious issues to be resolved, the great majority of second and third generation migrants have successfully nationalised as Australians.
Multiculturalism is aimed at EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE to minorities having a victim mentality. Once again, Australia in 1975 was a deeply racist and xenophobic society. But, in spite of that they brought in policies that asked minorities how they could be better integrated. In other words they consulted with the minorities about what needed to be done to make things better for them. Sure, minorities said, "We want to build little colonies here, just like you British did." But, the majority said, "No can do, how about we just make things comfy for you until your children and grandchildren are dinky-di Ockers?" To which the minorities said, "Well, better than a poke in the eye". The rest is history.
So, what do I want to be if not a 'public intellectual'? Good question, but I'm going to have to take my lead from Mr. Brown, who at the launch of the book the other day described me as something else altogether. Oh, and I got his and Jim's autograph, that means I still need Tze Ming's and Mr. Lange's.
So from now I shall no longer be an intellectuel publique, but instead, an intellectuelle bogàn. Kind of fitting really.
But of course, suggestions from someone who actually understands French would be welcome.