Free Speech and Creepy Liberalism

he probably didn't bring BLM up so as not to appear to be criticizing it or tying it explicitly to #cancelcolbert or whatever

― Blowout Coombes (President Keyes), 27. januar 2016 16:31 (24 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

That is completely ridiculous. He seems more to criticize it by attacking all non-class based leftism. He probably didn't bring up BLM because it absolutely destroys his argument about the bad things in identity leftism.

He "seems more to criticize it" by failing to confuse it with the phenomenon he's criticizing?

i agree freddie does downplay, to the detriment of his argument, the overwhelmingly positive effect the rise of BLM has had on the left and discourse as a whole, even despite some missteps and questionable tactics. i would make the argument though that it is possible for reasonable people to disagree in good faith about the extent to which revolution needs to be race-focused, something i think many on certain parts of the left do not grant

I agree, I'd just also consider including Fredrik de B in that group.

The group of reasonable people who disagree in good faith?

Nah. I think by denying the best argument for the revolution being race-focused, he is not arguing in good faith.

Then you didn't really agree with or understand the post you were responding to, but whatever. He only "denies" BLM by not lumping it in with the performative, non-substantive tendency he's criticizing in that post. I would say the third paragraph here is more like an endorsement of BLM as an actual movement, but I suspect you'll stop reading once you notice it comes after "anti-capitalist" and doesn't namecheck BLM: http://fredrikdeboer.com/2015/12/29/left-materialism-for-2016/

The idea that Marxists have to ignore racism or sexism for fear of being 'identity politicians' is nonsense. It's part of the same mythology that claims anything short of revolution it counter-revolutionary, which is contrary to how Marx approached politics.

boxall, do you really need the snarky remarks? You're hardly a shining example of good-faith-arguing right now.

I disagree with this central part of his argument: 'I’m part of a small but growing collection of people who feel that the left has lost its way, and that it must be steered back to its traditional roots: in materialism, in class solidarity as the basis of political organizing, in recognizing that racism and sexism can only be meaningfully addressed through structural economic change, in privileging the material over the symbolic or the linguistic, and in defining our purpose as building a mass movement — and thus necessarily reaching out and convincing those who are not already convinced.'

I don't think that racism and sexism can only be meaningfully dressed through structural economic change, I would argue a lot of countries that has gone through structural economic change has ended up no less racist, I live in a country with a welfare state the envy of a lot of the American left, right now making headlines for our racist behavior. Ta-nehisi Coates writes convincingly that the fundament of racism remains violence against black bodies, and I don't think the word 'materialist' is good enough to cover that. And if you're arguing in good faith against student leftism, I don't think it proper to dismiss trigger warnings as 'the symbolic or the linguistic', when it is in fact meant as a way to deal with trauma, a way to break the link between the bodily attacks heaped upon women and minorities and the school curriculum, intentional or not a way to keep college more white and male, with huge materialistic implications. We can agree or disagree on that argument, in good faith, but to dismiss it the way Fredrik the Boer does is wrong.

A school curriculum can't make a bodily attack on anyone, which is why calling e.g. trigger warnings a "symbolic" or "linguistic" approach to the problem of violence against women or POC is just an accurate descriptive statement, not a dismissal. If college is too white and male (latter not really as true as the former in the US, I don't think), a wider or warmer embrace of trigger warnings are not the most effective remedy for that problem.

The relationship between positive (to a leftist) economic change and progress against racism might be debatable, but I doubt the experiences of Denmark shed any light on the question in the US.

i take it financial post is canada's version of wsj? anyway lol: http://business.financialpost.com/executive/student-protesters-become-someones-employee-heres-how-to-ensure-they-dont-become-your-headache

http://peterlevine.ws/?p=16357

http://slatestarcodex.com/blog_images/mind_reading.jpg

https://twitter.com/LibertarianBlue/status/694168588631040000

x-post That's true, right?

Correct. There are no laws on the books to protect you from involuntary mind-reading.

Phew!

http://www.salon.com/2016/02/23/dont_teach_sensitive_topics_or_anger_students_university_of_houston_warns_after_campus_carry_gun_law_is_passed/

You Guys Are Great 201
Seriously, you guys are so cool. Do you like pizza? Me too. In this course we'll just sort of see what happens, go with the flow. Readings will include just, you know, books mostly. Or not! No pressure. I love you.

Sam Gerrans of Russia Today brings us our latest piece on universities and safe spaces.

Some of the "suppressed truths" highlighted are... interesting.

"I made an independent trip to Russia in my first year where I learned – by speaking with Russians – what every Russian over 30 knows: that there was very little Russian about the Russian Revolution.

They all knew what Putin declared publically: that the overwhelming majority of the Bolshevik leadership was Jewish. Yet, back in the UK, no one was allowed to mention this fact. Papers were marked down"

Further nonsense includes:

"missionary of moral relativism Peter Tatchell (has) been out-offended and out-outraged by the grandchildren of the people they helped corrupt."

"We are now pandering to a generation of cultural Marxists – iPhone-touting Maoists – indoctrinated snitches on a perpetual witch-hunt for anyone who does not conform with their feelings about an ideology they have been fed but which they do not understand."

Link: https://www.rt.com/op-edge/334733-education-mediocrity-rugby-feelings-compassion/

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/03/10/western-washington-university-students-push-sweeping-demands

The list comprises some of the most of the most expansive -- and resource heavy -- demands put to a university’s administration. Among them:

A new College of Power and Liberation to focus on “the study of histories and communities that continue to be mis- and underrepresented into the mainstream curriculum at Western.” In addition to the college itself, the list calls for “a cluster hire of 10 tenure-track faculty,” a new building to house the college and that the Student Assembly for Power and Liberation have “direct input and decision-making power over the hiring of faculty for the college.”
That $45,000 be allocated to compensate students and faculty “doing de-colonial work on campus,” which is defined as “providing space and resources to learn alternate histories, supporting students' nonacademic work, emotional and intellectual labor that is not about publishing or service to the institution, providing often unrecognized trainings, workshops and/or interventions on behalf of students.”
The creation of a 15-person student committee called the Office for Social Transformation “to monitor, document and archive all racist, antiblack, transphobic, cissexist, misogynistic, ableist, homophobic, Islamophobic and otherwise oppressive behavior on campus.” Using a three-strike system, the committee would have the power to take disciplinary action up to and including dismissal against faculty members who receive citations for creating “an unsafe classroom environment.”
A mandatory online survey conducted by the faculty and administration that would “allow Western Washington University community members to confidentially express concerns of discrimination and safety.”
A new “multicultural residence building,” applications to which would be overseen by the new Office for Social Transformation.
And finally that the university provide tuition reimbursement to “any Western Washington University student who has been targeted by, harassed by or has experienced excruciating acts of violence that [ were ] racialized, sexualized, gendered, based on ability, employment status, citizenship and/or mental health from the university.”

comical number of the demands are to be implemented 'by spring 2016', per the assembly's diktat

uh $45K won't cover the photocopier budget

i think you mean photocxpier

what a bunch of wimps, if they were genuine revolutionaries they'd take over a building. this is asking ("demanding") mommy & daddy to make things all better.

and that the Student Assembly for Power and Liberation have “direct input and decision-making power over the hiring of faculty for the college.”

when i was in college all potential new department hires met with students first for like a lunch/lecture/meet and greet and then students gave their input. i'm sure the administration took some of that input into account when making their decisions. is that not normal at other schools, or are they asking for direct hiring/firing ability?

can't these kids just go start a commune/punk house?

And when the revolution came it was led by the grant writers

" i'm sure the administration took some of that input into account when making their decisions."

much love but lol

honestly you're probably right but they did listen to students opinion and they created an opportunity for them to interact with the faculty. that should probably be the limits of student involvement w/ faculty hires.

"decision-making power" would seem to indicate something closer to direct hiring ability. The student committee section of the demands definitely includes the ability to fire faculty, which I doubt is something any university will ever grant a group of 15 students.

yeah every american university I've been involved with, as student or as faculty, has involved students in the way you're describing, Mordy. but I've been on a bunch of faculty hiring committees & on departmental votes & the opinions of students play as little role as they can.

when I was a 1st year grad student a job candidate explained how his work would be applicable to robots and the others all just gave straight math talks & I pressed the committee to hire the robot guy and was crushed when they ignored my views and hired someone who I thought was kinda boring! I had a lot to learn.

though I remember being a finalist for a job w/ a terminal masters program and on the flyout having lunch with some of the masters students and expressing the opinion that they should seriously consider leaving academia b/c the chances that they'll get an academic job were too tiny to bother and then when I didn't get the job I was convinced (in some stage of handling the disappointment) that the masters students convinced the faculty that I'd be bad for their morale.

i once interviewed for a hillel job and supposedly (i was told later) got the best response of any of the candidates from the students but they didn't hire me :(

It's no Port Huron statement.

A new College of Power and Liberation to focus on “the study of histories and communities that continue to be mis- and underrepresented into the mainstream curriculum at Western.” In addition to the college itself, the list calls for “a cluster hire of 10 tenure-track faculty,” a new building to house the college and that the Student Assembly for Power and Liberation have “direct input and decision-making power over the hiring of faculty for the college.”
That $45,000 be allocated to compensate students and faculty “doing de-colonial work on campus,” which is defined as “providing space and resources to learn alternate histories, supporting students' nonacademic work, emotional and intellectual labor that is not about publishing or service to the institution, providing often unrecognized trainings, workshops and/or interventions on behalf of students.”
The creation of a 15-person student committee called the Office for Social Transformation “to monitor, document and archive all racist, antiblack, transphobic, cissexist, misogynistic, ableist, homophobic, Islamophobic and otherwise oppressive behavior on campus.” Using a three-strike system, the committee would have the power to take disciplinary action up to and including dismissal against faculty members who receive citations for creating “an unsafe classroom environment.”
A mandatory online survey conducted by the faculty and administration that would “allow Western Washington University community members to confidentially express concerns of discrimination and safety.”
A new “multicultural residence building,” applications to which would be overseen by the new Office for Social Transformation.
And finally that the university provide tuition reimbursement to “any Western Washington University student who has been targeted by, harassed by or has experienced excruciating acts of violence that [ were ] racialized, sexualized, gendered, based on ability, employment status, citizenship and/or mental health from the university.”

jesus just found your own fucking university, it's been done before

https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2016/03/11/open-letter-students-about-course-they-call-racist-essay

straight fire, no doubt, and the pushback the instructor experienced was probably all too real. but - if she even did mean this as any kind of pedagogical act, beyond the gesture of publishing it for eyeballs, which seems kind of not very student-centered - it seems like an utter pedagogical failure. how is this degree of dogmatism ever going to fly in a college course that's supposed to be concerned with the students' responsibilities for their society? there's more give in calculus.

I am torn because on the one hand I'm sure the emails she got were entitled and obnoxious, but on the other hand -- you know how students of color rightly complain "it's not my job to be endlessly patient and teach white students about how race works, I'm not paid for that"? They're right -- but this professor IS paid for that and it IS, literally, her job to teach white (and nonwhite) students about how race works.

That is, who gets to produce knowledge about race and racism that is accepted, and why?

the term "knowledge production" is so sleazy

seize the means of knowledge production

The notion of reverse racism is a myth. Silencing white stories does not change what it means to be white in this country, and it certainly does not impact public policies that continue to privilege white people.

if silencing white stories does not change what it means to be white in this country and does not impact public policies then what exactly is the point of doing it?

Second, it is true that not all whites live a privileged life. However, even poor whites have the privilege of whiteness even if they are unable to see it because of their inability to put Wonder Bread on the table.

it's a good thing you can eat privilege if you're hungry

if silencing white stories does not change what it means to be white in this country and does not impact public policies then what exactly is the point of doing it?
--Mordy

Um learn something maybe? It is a class.

lol as if this kind of shit has anything to do with learning

The questions -- really, belligerent interrogations -- you posed in class today seem pertinent both pedagogically and epistemologically

that's a lot of polysyllabic words in one sentence – and an opening sentence

xp Oh university classes are about what then?

xp LOL total flashback for me.

some university classes are about scholarship and learning. others are about imparting political values. sometimes broader abstract paradigms are useful for better understanding reality, but when reality is in service to the paradigm and not vice-versa i can't consider that "learning."

You have a very narrow definition of learning is all I'll say to that.

technically speaking all life experiences constitutes learning but i'm using the term in a less flexible way to explicitly mean the kind of study that has historically characterized the academy

it's the difference between teaching an ideology by assigning reading of its main proponents and understanding its historical + social context and teaching an ideology as the correct political platform for students to follow. you can do the former and have students decide after reading marx that they are really marxists, but the latter is indoctrination not pedagogy imho.