Free Speech and Creepy Liberalism

these people, who definitely don’t exist according to reed, except that I can name plenty of them

except you named Lee Fang and Red Scare. One reporter (not a socialist, natch) and one podcast duo are not pervasive, no.

In any case, let's turn to the very next paragraph Reed wrote after what you quoted!

Although there are no doubt random, dogmatic class reductionists out there, the simple fact is that no serious tendency on the left contends that racial or gender injustices or those affecting LGBTQ people, immigrants, or other groups as such do not exist, are inconsequential, or otherwise should be downplayed or ignored. Nor do any reputable voices on the left seriously argue that racism, sexism, homophobia, and xenophobia are not attitudes and ideologies that persist and cause harm.

Is Red Scare something people take seriously? When did that start?

I've no idea what their numbers are though tbf!

was deej even talking about “liberal identity politics” to begin with or did you contort the conversation to be about it

Identity politics are a minor part of mainstream left wing politics.

― everything,

This is actually the post you're responding to: Free Speech and Creepy Liberalism

except you named Lee Fang and Red Scare. One reporter (not a socialist, natch) and one podcast duo are not pervasive, no.

the popularity of these figures on the left is emblematic of the pervasiveness of this perspective, yes, but also you keep contradicting the multiple people in this thread who said they encounter these people day-to-day in order to support a totally unsupported idea that the entire idea of class reductionism is a liberal myth intended to undermine "The left," the same left whose "identity politics" you see entirely as a liberal plot

This is back to the mad at an amorphous Twitter blob issue - which, fine, if you keep running into assholes you keep running into assholes

so, can I say that assholes are pervasive ... or do you need a census or exhaustive academic data set to define "pervasive" ?

Some clue that they are, in any way, indicative of or influential on the actions and beliefs of the American left would be good?

Or as Reed put it - "the simple fact is that no serious tendency on the left contends that racial or gender injustices or those affecting LGBTQ people, immigrants, or other groups as such do not exist, are inconsequential, or otherwise should be downplayed or ignored."

Red Scare is not "the white left" - their calling card is being obnoxiously opposed to the largest left-wing group in the US today.

as table pointed out upthread (about a month ago) -- that whole bit from Reed contradicts itself near the end, when he basically downplays the injustices of marginalized folx with a "rising tide will lift all boats" narrative.

xpost they are certainly not a "serious tendency" anyway

i think it's both/and.

have liberals used "identity" concerns in order to muddy the waters and kneecap left wing politics? yes. just look at hillary clinton's admonishment of bernie sanders: "if we broke up the banks, would that end racism?"

at the same time, is it true that people who dream of "broad based class politics" downplay the specific concerns of minorities because they think it is getting in the way of their project? and furthermore, do they often smear these concerns by assuming, without basis, that they are always instances of liberal mystification?

yes.

He doesn’t do that, though?

What he does say is

Black Democratic and other neoliberal elites have shown again and again in their sustained denunciations of the Sanders program since 2016 that they ultimately rely on race-specific arguments to oppose broadly redistributive initiatives that would improve the circumstances of African American working people along with all others.

Which is... objectively true? We saw it with Medicare For All concern trolling about medical billing unemployment.

That was many xps

i american politics, and also in division 1 message board posting, people on all sides are distorting one another in completely ridiculous ways. and they're doing it because they want to assert the primacy of their own treasured narrative. it's for psychological comfort as much as anything else. the narrative is what gives their politics shape and meaning; a threat to it is a threat to themselves.

many ilxors argue in this fashion.

Some clue that they are, in any way, indicative of or influential on the actions and beliefs of the American left would be good?

they are indicative of the actions and beliefs of the American left as I personally experience it. I cannot supply you with any data other than that. But the way I see the schism is, on one side, you have the white dudes who are telling marginalized groups, "when the revolution comes, things will be better for everyone, we white dudes got this, wait your turn" and marginalized groups saying, "we are so done with waiting our turns"

how dare you

xp

tbf the white leftists I see are not discouraging BLM organizing but more scoffing at the idea that a Kamala Harris vice presidency does anything real for POC

A Kamala Harris vice presidency is neither a huge step up nor a negligible triviality. It gives a POC another seat at the table. It's not the most powerful seat, but the table where she would sit is a powerful table.

why do you guys keep bringing up kamala and joe biden like this is an argument about them? no one here is trying to conflate "identity politics" (the conceptualization of which is more of a 'myth' than class reductionism to be real) with liberal politicians except the people trying to minimize the concerns of "identity politics" by conflating them with liberal politicians

I get that the left has a (much-discussed) concern w the ways "identity politics" are used to smuggle in neolib ideologies and no one I know denies that happens but those same ppl on the left seem completely unwilling to accept the notion that it works the other way too: that class reductionism to varying degrees minimizes the concerns of people who aren't white. again, the sanders' campaign which sees an outer horizon for class change dismissing reparations as a pipe dream is the firmest articulation of this tendency on the left you could ask for

the sanders' campaign which sees an outer horizon for class change dismissing reparations as a pipe dream is the firmest articulation of this tendency on the left you could ask for

High level politicians (president, governors, congressional reps and senators) will approach the idea of reparations for slavery and Jim Crow in much the same way that such politicians approached the idea of gay marriage, gingerly and with extreme caution, far more likely to give private than public encouragement, until a movement for reparations can display enough public sympathy and political muscle to indemnify those politicians who come out publicly in favor of it.

That's how US politics work on the practical level. Show them some strength and they'll let you clear the path and follow along a few steps behind you.

why do you guys keep bringing up kamala and joe biden like this is an argument about them? no one here is trying to conflate "identity politics" (the conceptualization of which is more of a 'myth' than class reductionism to be real) with liberal politicians except the people trying to minimize the concerns of "identity politics" by conflating them with liberal politicians

― ILX’s bad boy (D-40), Monday, September 21, 2020 11:09 AM (thirty minutes ago)

otm.

and the "solidarity" imperative works both ways. Maybe this was just a fringe thing that I saw, but after the massive uprising after the Floyd shooting, there were a number of left dudes I'm friends with posting about how "BLM are corporate sell-outs" (like, hey, Maximum R&R for president). But none of these dudes were considering the option of "how about the left practice solidarity with a black-led coalition" ... not saying all white left dudes are/were of this opinion. Just that the people who were espousing this recalcitrance were white cis-dudes.

That might say more about the left dudes you’re friends with than “the left” or “left dudes”?

And, sorry if this is a tangent but, while not super immersed in activist groups, I am part of various groups for non-profit leaders and there is a lot of discussion and prominence being given to Equity and Inclusion, and centering marginalized voices, and putting those voices (and people) in positions of leadership. And that's mostly where I'm coming from with my criticism of "class-centered" activism and "class reductionism".

and i also realize that I live in one of the most leftist parts of the U.S. and there is definitely a bubble here that is often not reflective of the country as a whole, though, historically, we tend to be "ahead of the curve" lol

i wish those left-Twitter white cis-dudes would stop giving all us white cis-dudes a bad name.

i only see the ones on Facebook fwiw

(bows down. holds head in hands) worse, then. much worse.

Making sweeping judgements of a political spectrum based on your personal interactions with bloggers who live for the next Red Scare episode or crusty dudes with spiderweb tattoos who are still proud of booing Jawbreaker just seems incredibly misguided and pointless. The local DSA chapter was founded by a couple of 9/11 conspiracy theorists who had to be shunned and pushed out - at no point would it occur to anyone to suggest that Truthers are “pervasive” in the DSA or on the left, right?

It’s also what makes it seem like the not particularly good faith left punching that comes from liberals. Sanders didn’t back reparations - but the DSA does and it was an issue in terms of a Sanders endorsement. Which one represents “the left”? Do they offset?

crusty dudes with spiderweb tattoos who are still proud of booing Jawbreaker

how rude

crusty dudes with spiderweb tattoos who are still proud of booing Jawbreaker just seems incredibly misguided and pointless.

actually most of these dudes are into prog and analog synths and tube amps and have fairly decent hygiene but ... idk maybe we need to update the thread title to "Free Speech and Creepy Liberalism and Sweeping Judgments"

saying a particular ideological stance is pervasive within the left bloc of the country (millions of people) is not the same thing as making "sweeping judgements". I'd say its a substantial and tenacious stance for people (a minority? a majority? I couldn't say; but I would still say "substantial") i see discussing this stuff in many difft tiers: anecdotal, published in magazines, coming from (yes) more DIY trendy podcasts, on "the left"'s primary presidential candidate's platform, etc. I don't know how many more examples we need to give before you'll accept that "pervasive" is an appropriate word...but I think it is.

regardless of the degree to which it's infiltrated the left or is a misrepresentation of it or has always been there or whatever,

I find myself confronting situations where people suggest race and gender issues are overstated concerns on a pretty regular basis, even if they pay lip service to the idea that they are, of course, still relevant. now, if i was spending a lot of time around the liberal entrepreneurs who post weird graphs abt microaggressions on their IG stories all day as praxis, I might shift my argument. but im not, im spending it around a lot of people who i think are too willing to let concerns of social justice become an optics problem for their ongoing fantasy of convincing the white working class to vote D in more substantial numbers by pretending race no longer exists

If I can characterize the position further, it's not even that they're necessarily making a strategic argument abt winning elections; it's that theyre not even acknowledging or incorporating the above stated critique, even if to reject it, bc the convenient excuse of characterizing all efforts at orienting the conversation towards non-class related issues can be handwaved away as "liberal" identity politics and therefore an undermining conspiracy by neolibs

im spending it around a lot of people who i think are too willing to let concerns of social justice become an optics problem for their ongoing fantasy of convincing the white working class to vote D in more substantial numbers by pretending race no longer exists

exactly! glad it's not just me and my hypothetical crusty spiderweb tattooed friends

I also get the feeling that all the memes that are variants on "listen to black people!" are uh, partially referring to the pervasiveness of the handwaving

The most leftward people winning elections are women and POC, and the DSA is radically inclusive and Bernie's voting coalition wasn't very white in 2020 and his great strength was with Latinx voters and children of immigrants.

"They're only concerned with the white working class" was a cudgel used to beat the left (and Sanders) in 2016 and after the election - but that was very obviously not the case. You know who actually concern themselves primarily with the WWC? Moderate Democrats like Claire McCaskill.

Someone like Adolph Reed doesn't reject identity, they disagree with some about tactics in furthering a socialist agenda. That's why, as he says, "class reductionist" is harmful in that it shuts down debate and camaraderie in favor of making the 'class reductionists' political enemies.

again you're conflating who someone wants as a candidate with their stated ideological goals; i also wanted bernie to win the nomination. it doesn't mean i thought his platform was especially smart w/r/t race, and i think his loss in south carolina illustrates that ... he wasn't especially smart when it came to race. that there were ways to make his platform better on subjects that might have helped him cinch the nomination more readily. i think you could even argue, in an effort to look from the bottom-up, that it was this very *pervasive* tendency on "the white left" that allowed a candidate like bernie to get so far without doing more on that subject

in *advance* of his loss in SC

And part and parcel of this is that all party politicians to the left of center rely on the Black vote without ever doing much to talk to Black people or deal with the problems (often caused by white supremacist structures) within Black communities except by throwing small bits of money their way and saying some patronizing bullshit.

I don't know a single Black person who trusted Bernie to do anything for Black people, and that's a big fucking problem.

The best indicator of how poorly the US has handled Covid-19 is that a lot of conservatives are debasing themselves to the level where “look, it’s not *that much* worse than Europe” is meant to be a defense — we’re talking about a continent where they don’t have ice cubes!

— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) September 28, 2020

Lol at 8000 Europishes in the replies saying, ‘But we do have ice cubes!’

https://img.discogs.com/j8Eznh3_R9-24USr2lAJqwjwIWw=/450x600/smart/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/A-13732-1227553467.jpeg.jpg
no we don’t

Is this the thread where people talk about Red Scare?

Lmao they did Red Scare pic.twitter.com/3E6SLzr6Hc

— Cletus Van Damme (@Callicleez) January 9, 2021

Yeah, they've been banning a lot of vocal Trump supporters, so...

It was an inactive account. I assume Twitter's banning spree involved looking at old reported tweets that they previously hadn't acted upon, which is... interesting

I mentioned it on the Chapo thread. honestly fuck 'em

Khachiyan has been suspended before - trying to roll this into some kind of "now they're coming for the left" thing still seems like a stretch

Can’t say it’s a great loss but weird to go after an inactive account and leave someone like Andy Ngo active and verified.