Ta-Nehisi Coates Rules, The Thread

I think we spoke about RL Stephens several times, as he republished that piece a bit. And no, I'm just tired of it, it's always the same critique, no? The absolutely awful thing about the West thing is that he wrote something stupid on twitter, then Coates showed that it was a misread of the very first page of his book, and still then West got The Guardian to publish something just as stupid. What's the point of Coates even trying, at this point 'critiquing' him seems to lead to getting published no matter how awful it is.

This tweet:

I think Coates has a muddled view of race and racism, oscillating between essentialist mystification and grounded historical analysis. I think he retreats to interiority and fatalism because he's afraid of *revolution*, of what it would take and what it would mean to win.

— R.L. Stephens (@RLisDead) December 19, 2017

It's like, taking these absolutely simple things, which Coates is absolutely entitled to think and say and write, and demand that he does something else. And that is not what being a writer is. And it's so so personal, it's never 'Coates is great, but don't believe that it's the whole truth about racism', it's 'Neoliberal, supporter of American Imperialism, blind to Settler Colonialism', etc.

You baited and switched there, though--it's one thing to say he mixes history with D&D, which is a question of style, and another to say he muddles history with essentialism, which is a question of the soundness of an argument.

though i say that taking it as read that we'd agree essentialism is a bad move, when maybe we wouldn't

But it's a stylistic mix. He describes the history, then uses fantasy language to describe the way it works. He doesn't literally say that Thomas Jefferson wrote a curse into the constitution and since then racism shall rule. He describes how racism is baked into the founding of America, and then depicts it as an eldritch, in a metaphor. It's a question of literary style, and RL Stephens is not a particularly good literary reader, imo.

i think one big difference between RL and TNC is their ages--like 2 decades apart? i expect RL will be much more pessimistic after 18 years of DSA not amounting to shit :)

flopson i'm gonna have at you over that in a better thread

i wish the revolutionaries well, but imo it's not a coincidence that the writer who is puppy-dog excited about The Revolution is 26, and the more pessimistic pov is from a 42 year-old

listen Goosebumps try writing a grown up book before you criticize Coates and West u Halloween ass chump

As far as I'm concerned optimism is a job responsibility for anyone serious about making change in the world. SEIU 1199's advice to rookie organizers has it "every worker is showtime"--optimism is a political choice as much fatalism.

yo hoos

https://i.imgur.com/jynZPlp.jpg

Jefferson had nothing to do with the Constitution.

He smuggled a curse into it.

(I guess I know, he was off getting high with the french, and didn't return until Act 2, I don't really care)

theres a reason RL Stephens keeps getting referenced over & over again & sadly its not bc hes got an especially well articulated critique of ta nehisi coates

I mean, he's a friend of mine. I produced his radio show for 3 years. Tell me more though.

Arrrre you privy to a preponderance of TNC critiques by leftists? I'm sure not.

what odds u want on revolution hoos?

lol

Hoos otm

lol

which imo...idk y'all, is the revolution gonna solve racism

to attempt an answer to this: anyone who claims perfect knowledge of post-revolutionary (I know, I know) conditions is lying, and certainly any post-capitalist society's character would necessarily be defined in large part by what came before. the optimist's view is that if you remove the material basis for conflict between people - no more struggling for resources with the elimination of artificial scarcity, no competition over wage labour in something like a planned economy, etc - then perhaps systemic racism can at least be significantly attenuated over generations. what I don't think is in question for this same crowd is that current economic arrangements (or slightly altered/cosmetically "improved" iterations thereof) never will.

lol

― Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Wednesday, December 20, 2017 1:20 AM (twenty-one minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

does this mean you've got more critiques you're sitting on or does this mean you're passive aggressively ignoring my question

like if you're suggesting "people are lifting up his points because he's a black critic" i'd say that belies that he's a good writer with the mind of the law student he is--harvard law forum seemed to think he was worth bringing in. if you don't think his arguments are worth their salt, maybe say that instead.

......lol maybe it doesn't belie but nobody ever said i was a sharp writer

God dammit I wrote a response and it got eaten by the internet

Hold on when I get to a laptop I’ll write it up again, but tbc I wasn’t being glib to be pass agg but bc we had a big argument about RL previously

fair fair ilu sorry i'm salty about my friend

Some good, interesting things in this take:

https://www.theroot.com/from-an-ex-neo-liberal-why-ta-nehisi-coates-keeps-talk-1821429336?utm_source=theroot_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

Came here to post that

The idea that one must address these separate but connected entities is correct at its core, but it is also neoliberal thinking at its highest level.

There's a lot to like in this piece but predictably I take some issue w/ this

I feel like "neoliberal" is being rendered close to meaningless in these discussions. (And in a lot of modern Leftist rhetoric.) It's the new "bourgeois" or "counter-revolutionary" or whatever. It used to have a relatively specific meaning, but now it's just kind of "center-left who isn't left enough for me."

Otm

After reading the last couple links I still can't figure out what Coates wrote that so incensed West other than the banality of the class v. race binary

That plus alleged pessimism/hopelessness/not having a political/economic program. Which I think is true of TNC up to a point, but that's because he's not a political theorist or economist. He's an essayist who uses history to frame and illuminate the racial inequalities of the present. It's not necessarily his job to say "here's how to do community organizing to address these things." And I don't think he's in any way saying DON'T organize or work to address them. It's more like, "Look at all of this goddamn bullshit."

I feel like "neoliberal" is being rendered close to meaningless in these discussions. (And in a lot of modern Leftist rhetoric.) It's the new "bourgeois" or "counter-revolutionary" or whatever. It used to have a relatively specific meaning, but now it's just kind of "center-left who isn't left enough for me."

― a man often referred to in the news media as the Duke of Saxony (tipsy mothra), Wednesday, December 20, 2017 8:38 AM (twelve minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

otm x2

i get why coates is open to criticism, but i would never describe his politics as neoliberal.

I feel like "neoliberal" is being rendered close to meaningless in these discussions.

the author seems to argue that any attempt to address interlocking systems of oppression (eg economic systems and racism) is inherently "neoliberal" which is a bizarre argument imo

ya as a guy surrounded by people who yell neoliberal a bunch lemme just register i'm with tipsy & m bison here

I agree that the left too often uses "neoliberal" where "liberal" will do

it's good to see west helpfully define NLism & even root it in Du Bois (Black Reconstruction in America is the most important Long Book I've ever read)

("good to see" just bcz of the relative lack of clarity around the term being alluded to itt)

Yeah except I don't think West's definition of it quoted in that Root piece really applies to Coates in any way. Privatizing and militarizing schools, e.g., is not in any way something you attribute to Coates' worldview. (Or Obama's, for that matter.) That would be Betsy DeVos.

also agree!

idrg where he gets NL from w/r/t coates

guilt by association. coates defends obama, obama is neoliberal, ergo coates is neoliberal.

It seems to me as though from what West perceives as the lack of an actionable structural critique, he extrapolates "neoliberal."

yeah, no place in his guardian piece is 'neoliberal' defined.

I think it's more an accusation that he provides cover for the neoliberal hegemony by not supporting revolution

By Simons definition Baldwin, Morrison, everyone ever who has dared write anything but an anarchists cookbook is a neoliberal...

dude I wasn't agreeing with him

I don't think he's in any way saying DON'T organize or work to address them. It's more like, "Look at all of this goddamn bullshit."

― a man often referred to in the news media as the Duke of Saxony (tipsy mothra), Wednesday, December 20, 2017 2:50 PM (thirty-seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i mean in a lotta interviews i can recall reading he's expressed general pessimism about the usefulness of efforts to dislodge inequities, which for me is the root of critiques that his pessimism can be an action inhibitor especially among people predisposed to do nothing already