The Great Moving Right Show II: The Kirsty and Phil Years

"Peep Show" guys (partly) write "The Thick of It"? Or have I got that wrong?

given how wrong eagleton gets most french theory and how his guides to it were the coles notes for most students, it must BY LOGIC be his politics which drove GMRS pt1!

(pt2 = the repressive return of universalist "anti-pomo" imperialism obv) (CONTROVERSIAL)

(i have no intention of defending either of these points)

pragmatism = gettin deep into the weeds of how things actually get done, ie activism
theory is mostly gussied up moralism

there is a difference -- our middle-class pinched puritanism vs yr mental evangelicals -- but i'm not sure what dom means here.

I mean, if said somewhat clumsily, that the people we're talking about here aren't your classic British right-wingers, they're taking their queues from an American style of conservatism.

"Peep Show" guys (partly) write "The Thick of It"? Or have I got that wrong?

-- Tom D., Friday, August 17, 2007 4:35 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

one of them does -- but not exclusively, there are about 4-5 writers.

the "mental evangelicals" weren't such a constitutive force of the american right back then, i don't think of them as a major leg of reaganism anyway, which = deregulatory fervor & unceasing hawkishness wrapped up in a national renewal set of mythemes = basically a def of either thather OR reagan, which is why i don't get what dom was trying to say.

xp see that doesn't clarify things much either dom, esp as american style conservatism is undergoing some serious implosion of late along its usual fault lines. i don't get what you're trying to shorthand here.

"usual" = "already understood"? not being very clear myself, sry

Would you not agree that, to take a random example, Jeremy Clarkson has more in common with the classic American right than the classic British right?

Seems like everybody be hatin' on "Peep Show" these days while biggin' up "TToI" (xxp)

(pt2 = the repressive return of universalist "anti-pomo" imperialism obv) (CONTROVERSIAL)

within the academy part two is "saint paul = lenin" stuff, i think. which may be the same thing.

mark, what is moralism, or how is having "moral" scruples/sensibilities bad? or conversely how can your politics *not* have a moral component?

Peep Show: yeh. hmmm. they're probably not evil or nowt but it's a lot harder to mis-interpret than the thick of it. maybe. do people mis-interpret or is it just playing to the gallery now?

What is the Passantino "classic righ-winger"? Heseltine? Macmillan? Portillo? Boris???

"american conservatism" and "american right" not really (uncomplicatedly) the same thing, dom

ps THE THING:

http://www.celluloiddreams.co.uk/images/thething2.jpg

Would you not agree that, to take a random example, Jeremy Clarkson has more in common with the classic American right than the classic British right?

-- Dom Passantino, Friday, August 17, 2007 4:42 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

yeah but thatcher wasn't part of the classic british right (at least at the top level of The Thing).

I don't know that Thatcher was that different, when was "Selsdon Man"?

What I mean is, she wasn't that different from other Tory right wingers

by "moralism" i guess i mean judging politics/culture in ref.behaviour -- in respect of a chart of good and bad -- rather than in.ref outcomes

(that is very compressed) (e.p.thompson's "against theory" begins an argt against marx's notorious, rigorous anti-moralism which i THINK is a kind of morris-esque "the good is the beautiful or the useful" kind of an argt, transfrred from making chairs to making movements)

(ie the "good" of the outcome was not -- as marx somewhat tended to argue -- "in step with the marhc of history" so much as, "social good, we are humans and we know it when we're in it")

but Thatcher had to be seen to be in some sense classic for her schtick to have played right? then again she was the "grocer's daughter from grantham" which doesn't figure with the sloaney '80s as well as it might. who were Thatcher's biggest fans, the aristos or the people who were allowed to buy their council houses?

xp

karl and will led kind of sheltered lives, maybe...

haha THE THING looks like clarkson

And Ted Heath was actually nicknamed The Grocer, wasn't he? (xxp)

the "grocer's daughter from grantham"

is why she wasn't classic british right (at the top level anyways). obviously the sloanes and yuppies didn't add up to a whole lot of her vote come election day.

selsdon man was c. 1971 and heath was indeed a bit 'ech' so far as tories were concerned. i guess he was the almost-there prototype.

ok that's YOU setting off rightwards henry!

but Thatcher had to be seen to be in some sense classic for her schtick to have played right?

She pushed on the Churchillian Right buttons on the top of the desk, while pushing the Keith Joseph Looney Right ones under it

i think i posted abt this before -- ps i finished filling in the form -- but i once saw some ancient tory grandee on TV saying of heath, "of course, his AWFUL cockney accent!"

!

haha allow me to toss this grenade in here:

Maybe also worth mentioning an irony in the larger issue: 'Chavs' (sorta kinda UK rednecks) are way closer to the Iggy Pop school than the loserist manifestoes would have it. They're confident, unapologetic, fun-loving, substance abusing and a distinctly post-Thatcher phenomenon, arising from the onslaught against the feudal-socialist axis when Britain briefly had a 'neoliberal' (pro-capitalist) government in the 1980s. It was Thatcher who sparked the emergence of the 'barrow-boy' money dealer, shaking up the previously 'toff' controlled financial industry by opening opportunities based on merit. Of course, that was all far too American to last, so the left made sure the guilt-based 'progressive' public school types (epitomized by the BBC and other major media) restored as much of the natural (feudal-socialist) order as possible. Now we're back to the good old days, with the proles expected to know their place and whine about how unfair it all is to their lip-trembling paternalistic masters.
[N1ck L4nd, off his blog] | 07.18.07 - 2:44 am | #

but i once saw some ancient tory grandee on TV saying of heath, "of course, his AWFUL cockney accent!"

LOL. Gorblimey!

Still plenty of barrow boys in the City, believe me, I've met 'em

i think the term "classic conservative" becomes very extremely confused if yr trying to micro-apply it across extended times of highly complex largescale social re-organisation (as viz the UK since let's 1925)

nick land is a total fucking retard

"the natural (feudal-socialist) order" = wtf!

how is judging the good by outcomes more or less right-wing than the opposite?

ept in that book argues that marx *was* a moralist -- as does lucio colletti, a thoroughly kantian marxist... till he stopped being a marxist -- how else to explain what he was doing? i don't think he was notoriously anti-moralist at all.

xpost hell

Who is Nick Land?

Who was dude that was going to be Prime Minister (or at least leader of the Tories in the 70s) before he did this big speech arguing for eugenics? The one who Thatcher took most of her schtick for? Was this guy looked at as a Cameron-esque "moderniser" at the time, or was he just seen as a new Heath?

the anti-moralist thing was tied up in naturalist theories of historical development that got appended to marxism, no? and then got regurgitated as scientific marxism -- natch there was no place for moralism in a scientific marxism.

keith joseph

xpost. very much a moderniser but not a la cameron. more a la... pinochet.

Are you kidding, Keith Joseph would never have been PM, he was a scary weirdo!

And slightly to the right of Pinochet!

That "Tory Tory Tory" documentary seemed to suggest that Joseph as Conservative leader was pretty much a foregone conclusion before he overstepped the mark by basically arguing for the killing of poor people.

i don't think i said judging by outcomes was more OR less rightwing, it depdns on the outcomes you favour presumably -- i think yr bein rightwing if yr arguin that "social good: we are humans and we know it when we're in it" is a coddled delusion

doesn't ept argue marx is like secretly a moralist despite often and loudly denouncing "moralism" -- he doesn't however state what the moral basis is; i *think* ept is making a kind of morris-ist argt abt what that basis must be, if it isn't to be "idealist" (another thing marx wasn't)

he is somewhat rescuing marx from aft-times "scientific marxsism" yes, but also i think rescuing him from the consequences of his own rhetoric in particular tactical debates at the time (it's an age since i read it, and i am reaching for the morrisism based on a book by ept I HAVE NEVER READ)

What did Macmillan say about Keith Joseph? Something like "the only boring Jew I ever met in my life".

This is all very interesting (really), but how are you going to transmit it to all the apolitical, complacent suits-in-the-making, who, after all, will have some degree of control over this country's social future?

I thought the moralism point was RE crit theory as philosophy. the analytics, deludedly probably, want to make philosophy SCIENCE and give TRUTH VALUE. whereas the crit theory dudes do there thing which purports to abandon the author or the metaphysics of presence, basically whip SCIENCE's knicker down, or summat but is often defined by their won moral postion.

xp

http://www.artofbarter.com/gif-bin/FlipchartMan.gif

How about a NEW PUNK ROCK.

it is one long-ass book, and i haven't read it either. i don't think it's a coddled delusion exactly, just that it has to leave so much unsaid -- and already assumes a load of "freedoms from", i think, which must have some moral basis all we humans agree on ('cept we don't... ;_;).

i think marx's moral basis is not a million miles from other socialists/anarchists of the mid-19th c tbh. he was anti-moralist insofar as moralism is a poor basis, or no basis at all, for understanding the historical process.

xpost

Maybe 65daysofstatic can do something about it

author = authority = rightwing
metaphysics of presence = you had to be there dude = culture of celebrity = rightwing

i am a hobbesian lettrist: i foment war between the VERY MEMEBERS OF THE ALPHABET har har

http://www.hobbyistsoftware.com/Initiate-backgrounds/hobbes3.jpg

and now i am off to the pubbe

mark: i agree w/ you re: land, but i'm really curious why you think so

The Facebook groups of someone in my extended network:

Black Plastic ▪ Boris for Mayor ▪ Facebookers in Support of SIR Salman Rushdie ▪ Petition to make Top Gear of The Pops...A weekly program ▪ I know NOTHING about cars, but I still LOVE Top Gear ▪ I HATE people who get offended at Top Gear. ▪ Modelling yourself on Bernard Black is a perfectly valid lifestyle choice ▪ BBC's Ghostwatch was the scariest fucking thing I have ever seen. ▪ FBS girls ▪ Mr. Jones- More than a History Teacher ▪ You know you went to Frances Bardsley when.... ▪ A Cup of Tea Solves Everything ▪ The New London 2012 Logo Is Really Horrid ▪ Get that fucking tomato out of my sandwich! ▪ Rockabaret ▪ May I Light Your Cigarette, Madam? ▪ Ban teaching of Abstinence as part of Sex Education ▪ Luxembourg - Pop Noir ▪ dim sum, sushi, tapas and all small pieces of foods appreciation club ▪ The Dylan Moran is a Drunken Genius Society ▪ Fuck This...I'm Going To Hogwarts ▪ Stay Beautiful Club ▪ Seeing Scarlet ▪ RCPCH EXAMS TYPES ▪ I Love Kittens. ▪ Feeling Gloomy ▪ Ron's Marathon Sweepstakes

lol middle class people