Thanks Campbell, lovely piece.
Great to see Peter back playing, & I hope he makes it to Wellington at some point.
Why do it in the street when you've the internet & social media?
Challenging 'hegemonic' ideas is all well & good, But finding examples of what I'm talking about isn't exactly difficult nor the idea that 'white liberals' are often the 'enemy'. Nor is the criticism that it leads to a regressive form of politics uncommon either.
I understand the arguments just find it odd that if you frame your politics in those terms you're surprised when people retreat into their own narrow outlook.
It seems people are happy to adapt some bits of Marxism but not the implication of those ideas.
I might not agree with GT but at least there's a logical consistency.
To see 'identity politics' as it's come to be practiced as simply another name for 'civil rights' is to completely miss the point, and the problem. In fact those most wedded to it would dismiss 'civil rights' just as much as any of the 'old left' would reject reform within the structures of a liberal democracy as a solution. It's sadly imbued in the left the idea that you can't conceive of a politics outside of your own experience, and that anything resembling solidarity or empathy are simply the preserve of a deluded white middle class to be mocked (see any number of twitter hashtags). "Asking middle class liberals to be more class-conscious and at the same time expecting them to fight or care for the working class is a contradiction." is really no different to the idea no matter how enlightened men will always be part of the 'patriarchy', white people will always be part of a 'white supremacy'. They're sides of the same coin, not poles apart, and it's a bit bizarre to preach that form of politics and then complain when people won't embrace anything outside what's perceived as their own 'interests'.
The idea that you could support the idea of marriage equality, for the identical reason you care about Pike river, namely justice, and that justice need not be tied to either class or narrow definitions of identify, or be limited by your own 'privilege' seems to have been lost by a lot of the modern left (Or at least is now an idea to be openly ridiculed). That you could think Pike river matters because the families deserve justice, and a just society is one which provides decent conditions for workers just seem to be treated as a bourgeois delusion.
Thankfully the impact of what are quite regressive ideas on the like of the Greens is limited.
The different behaviours GIovanni talks about goes back to my original point among moral policing as opposed to debate.
Certainly his & Russell's response to the WJ JT thing was a world away from the kinds of shouting down via various ists, isms & phobes you often see.
I'm sure once the numbers get up, regardless of the language things can seem pretty full on, but there's a world of difference between challenging something that's said or an idea vs simply denouncing the person that's said it.
It's when it's the later I think problems start & can quickly turn into what someone described as Maoist hazing.
But the people she was talking about feeling silenced or deciding to keep quiet weren't the 'slut shaming' types but simply people (often feminists, POC etc) who conception of politics differed. Being a liberal universalist secular humanist seems to be enough to fall foul of some of the 'call out' brigade.
But the point of Goldberg bringing up Intsectionality in relation to the absurd 'call out' culture is that much of the basis of that culture (within elements of the radical left) is from people purporting to practice intersectional politics. Surely youur beef seems to be with people supposedly misusing the concept rather than someone picking up on how the idea's used in practice as opposed to what you see as its real meaning.
My point about moral policing is the tendacy to go way beyond what any reasonable person would deem abuse or harassment and to attack people for expressing ideas that are deemed beyond the pale (often ideas that outside certain online bubbles are probably held by a lot of people) via a refusal to consider context or even to stop & consider what someone might of meant. The only thing that counts is your subjective interpretation & subsequent outrage, which you'll express not with a better idea but with 'How dare you even think it's ok to say that, shut up' × 1000 people piling on.
It's illiberal, intolerant & a terrible way to convince people of your position.
The hounding of Liz Shaw got quite disturbing at one point, especially as it involved people who'd probably see themselves as compassionate right on types. Thankfully I've not seen anything for ages.
Amanda Palmer is another one who seems to get it. I find her quite annoying, but also find myself rooting for her each time she gets dumped on. To her credit she seems to not let it bother her.
Certainly one problem is the tendency for online debate to be reduced to a kind of moral policing, in which what's said isn't challenged but merely condemned along with whoever has said it.
Can't remember the last time I saw a response along the lines of 'What did you mean by X,as it appears to suggest Y & I'd have a problem with that'. Almost always there's instant judgement (On the worst assumption possible) & an attack on the speaker & their right to speak.
It's not helped by the implication speech = harm & the answer isn't more speech but to condem & attack the person for having spoken at all & suggest their only response should be silence.
Debate (which I now gather in certain circles is 'problematic' in itself) is replaced with hounding people for expressing a view which falls foul of certain people's idea of what can & can't be said.
You could expand this bedroom (largely) one person band thing to Tiny Ruins, Luckless, Cool Rainbows, Dear Time's Waste, Grayson Gilmour, Zen Mantra all of whom have released excellent records of late.
It's often a bit dubious lumping people into a 'scene', but (Tiny Ruins who's more folk aside), there is a minimal but lush dream pop vibe to a lot of it.
Given so many of them are young, and are just starting out I don't remember a time of being so excited by all the talent about.