UKH

  An introduction to (and critique of)  the ideology of critical race theory; a theory which has redefined the concept of racism so that all white people are racists always, that people of colour who don't believe this are racists, and that everything from the structures of society, the concept of rational or scientific analysis to the language of everyday discourse are racist.

When I describe is as "the ideology behind BLM" that is not to argue that every demonstrator in the streets or footballer taking the knee has the slightest idea that this is what is going on.

Takes maybe 20 minutes

https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/reasons-critical-race-theory-terrible-dea...

Secondly: a sensible article discussing race and racism in the UK and the risks to the   progress that has been made. Black people have made progress, racism has declined. There are still problems but the current movement is not the best way to solve them and may be counter-productive.

https://unherd.com/2020/06/facts-vs-feelings-in-the-blm-debate/

Black lives matter by some old white man. 

Fascinating I'm sure.  

And you've just perfectly demonstrated the problem with the BLM movement. Racism is solved by bringing people together not being divisive.

Everyone needs to be involved in the discussion, just because they're white doesnt mean their opinion isnt valid. To suggest it isnt strikes me as a racist in itself....

Every chance you get, you trot out inarticulate bigotry against old white men.  Hypocrisy shouted loud and proud, and with zero self awareness.  How charmless, and how dull.  (I hope you will notice that I did you the service of suggesting your hypocrisy is unconscious, rather than conscious).

An ideology unfamiliar or unknown to BLM explains their motivations and you can't expect them to understand their own motivations because the poor wee things don't have the "slightest idea that this is what is going on".

This is the BLM equivalent of mansplaining.

I have no doubt I will be shouted down but as I white person (also male, middle class, middle aged and heterosexual - so a complete wanker out of the blocks) I can accept that there is racism in this country. I have no idea of the extent of it and would like to think I am not racist. 

However, are we saying  non white people are not also racist? In my view, we are all people who prefer people like us by natural preference. The issue with racism against bame in this country is that they are a minority and so an easier target. But if whites were a minority, would our experience be any different to theirs? 

I was told "Educate yourself". So I did.

I struggled with this bit

"Since Critical Race Theory exists specifically to agitate for and enable radical racial identity politics, it is therefore against free societies and how they are organized."

I can see it would be against how society is currently organised what I don't get is why this means it is against free society in general.

Erm, no one is saying this. Minority communities have been discussing racism for years, just like we have. For example:

https://twitter.com/therealnihal/status/440788675496906752

I've seen loads of discussion and unhappiness from younger Asian people about anti-black attitudes. What, in your view, is the relevance of this question?

I don't know anything about critical race theory, but I can't help feeling suspicious that that isn't actually what it says.

Are you sure that the link you posted is a good introduction, or are more balanced sources available?

I've just skimmed the articles but I don't think you've established a firm link between critical race theory and BLM. I was in the US a few years ago when BLM started getting noticed and the impression I got was that the movement was simply demanding that the police stopped killing black people. I don't think there's anything wrong with that at all and if in doing so the US police end up killing fewer people of all colours then that's a good thing too.

The relevance is the constant screaming that white people are racist. It should be pointed out that racism is not solely the preserve of whites 

Really?  Here is a quote from marsbar on another current thread.

"There is no such thing as racism against whites. You've never suffered abuse, violence, discrimination, or oppression because you are a white male. As white men, we don't even have a handle on the concept of racism."

Al 

Actually a lot of people say (not "scream", tho of course there is an element of that) it's not that individual white people are racist, but that our society is. To quote wikipedia (lazy I know) on the 1999 Macpherson report:

"Sir William Macpherson used the term [institutional racism] as a description of "the collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin", which "can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes, and behaviour, which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness, and racist stereotyping, which disadvantages minority ethnic people"."

Do you think white people receive an inappropriate or unprofessional service from a lot of institutions, due to their race?

While I don't agree with her sentiment on this your own post strikes me as the rather charmless and dull denigration of a poster who presents as one of the more informed and thoughtful voices on here.

I don't think you can just dismiss the actual views of the people involved in the protests like that. I can see that some academics have gone down some rabbit holes but where's the evidence that the criticisms in your first link are actually relevant to the BLM movement as a whole?

There are two things going on here, which both you and marsbar have conflated. Firstly, do some non-white Brits hold racist views? Yes, absolutely. Those aren't always directed at us white people (as I've mentioned above), but sometimes they are, for example the traditional and vile South Asian antipathy to marrying out.

The second thing is, is this being on the receiving end of this racism a widespread experience for white British people? Does it show up in statistics that, across society, we are paid disproportionately less than others, when controlling for age, qualifications, etc? More diffusely, but still a "thing", are we white people ever treated as if we don't belong here and get told to go "back home", as per this clip:

https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1293709/nick-ferrari-afua-hirsch-c...

I would say that, as an online space, UKC doesn't have a great handle on the concept of racism. Why, I recall a prominent poster on here saying that he'd never even considered that the route "Wogs" might have a racial connotation.

I agree with what you say.  I was simply countering your contention that 

"Erm, no one is saying this." Perhaps it's you doing the conflating?

Al

That James Lindsay looks well dodgy to me.  I think I'll go with the wikipedia definition of "critical race theory" if that's all the same to you, which says nothing of the kind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory

Christ. If reading that kind of inane right-wing propaganda is your idea of "education" you really should go back to school. 

Can't you see that when someone claims that people with a different political outlook are "against freedom" and "abolishing the individual" then what you're reading is biased so far to the right that it might as well be wearing a MAGA hat? Would you continue reading an article if it started out addressing readers as "comrades" and kept referring to the "bourgeoisie", or would you think "hang on, this sounds a bit like communist propaganda, I'm not certain I trust it"?

Idiot!

Yes but BLM also don't care whether the shooting was justified or not. Every police shooting is a unfortunate but I get annoyed when examples of criminals getting shot while having weapons and failing to comply with police instructions are help up as examples of unfair treatment. Just look at how Mark duggans shooting was held up as an example of an innocent Black man being shot by police despite the fact he was a known gang member and was in possession of an illegal firearm at the time of his shooting.

This was actually used in BLMUK facebook page about a week ago. Racism is still an issue in this country but when I talk about change I talk about implementing the David lammy review of the judical system which seems to go over most peoples head, despite them telling everyone to 'educate themselves'

I get some people are racist, I get humans are intrinsically biased but having grown up in a multicultural area and gone to the local comprehensive I really struggle to to see how anyone had less opportunities as me growing up. I get this is only a snapshot and may not be replicated all across the country but I do find it a bit ridiculous that people that I grew up with point to institutional racism as to why they aren't doing as well when I could hold up multiple examples of them making different choices that have effected their ability to progress negatively.

I'm a passionate believer in equality of opportunity but a lot of the time what it feels like is that these organisations is equality of outcome. 

Lets not forget that although the police in the US do shot proportionally more Black people than White people. The statistic is reversed when you account for the fact that Black people are more likely to be involved in violent crime and a police officer is something like 18 times more likely to be shot by a black person

But that's exactly what it is, education. I suffered a similar dismissal on here some time ago in regard to climate change.  I stated that when I read some theory I would go out of my way to read an opposing theory to try and arrive at some balanced conclusion. When I quoted a qualified source I was dismissed with "you can't listen to him he's a well known climate denier" Well yes, which is partly why I sought him out. Just dismissing out of hand is unhelpful, it means you are only listening to what you want to hear.

Al

Not in Britain, but in China for example ( where I lived for 2 years) absolutely yes. Racism was rife. White people were openly called "big nose," "white ghost," and doubtless many other terms that my language skills were not good enough to detect.

To be fair, the Chinese seemed to openly despise black people more than they did white, but I was routinely and openly discriminated against 

Everyone says this, and it sounds nice (it's supposed to say right-wing good / left-wing bad), but it doesn't actually make any sense. There is no such thing as "equality of opportunity" in any sort of society we'd want to live in. If you grow up in a rich family with parents who value education and have high expectations for you, you do not have equal opportunity compared to someone who grows up in a poor family who don't have the same time, experience or expectations. That's a fact that any capitalist society has to accept.

So while there is no such thing as "equality of opportunity", we should have policies in place such as high quality education, access to childcare and healthcare for all that narrow rather than widen the gap. I.e. high taxes, good public services. It's not going to achieve "equality of opportunity" but it works in the right direction.

I'm off to educate myself about your opinions. Of course I'll read something you have never heard of and ascribe those opinions to you rather than gauge your opinion by what you say.

At least they didn't chuck you into a washing machine .

A quote you countered with an anecdote about how you strayed into a rough, impoverished part of San Francisco(?) and encountered hostile locals.  An isolated incident in another time and another place, which you have no reason to fear may happen to you on the way down to the shops tomorrow.  They abused you with language you've never seen hinted at on a billboard advert, never heard chanted by a football crowd.

No doubt a part of the hostility you encountered was that those locals saw you as a wealthy tourist, with some justification from their point of view.  And in even in that unpleasant situation, you did have the luxury of being pleased to see the police turning up, confident as you were that their presence was going to make things better for you not worse.

Can you really not see how that simply doesn't compare with being on the wrong end of systemic racism day in, day out?  How the bleats of "but white people suffer from racism too" which have been popping up all over UKC lately and characterise this thread especially do indeed seem like 'whining' at best.  'Whatboutery' or something else at worst.

It's depressing to see this, almost more depressing than it is seeing genuine racists being racist in a way y'know, good people giving the racists a leg-up because..  well, why?  What on earth is it?  Can they just not bear for the conversation to just not be about them?

"Well what about 'honky', that's a term of racist abuse too, boo hoo."
Jesus wept, get a grip!

The most effective way to become educated is to avoid all the stuff that's ludicrous drivel, and stick to high quality sources. There is nothing to be gained by reading drivel and propoganda written by idiots driven by ideology. 

It would be easy to find some opposing article that was "SJW" propoganda - something that really did say that all white people were racist, but there'd be no point in reading that either, it wouldn't contribute to anyone's education, because it would be nonsense.

Stay away from the nonsense. It is not helpful. All opinions are not equally valid - they are either backed by good reasons and evidence, or they are nonsense.

Here's some more opposing theory to help you reach a balanced conclusion on important scientific matters. Enjoy!

https://www.tfes.org/

Indeed. And ironic, given where some of the foremost purveyors of right-wing propaganda started out from.

Of course it doesn't compare, I haven't for a moment suggested it did.  I will try to remain civil despite your personal, offensive and ill-informed tone. I was simply answering the proposition that I had never encountered racism because I was white and provided evidence. I understand totally why they responded as they did but it's still racism.

Al

It’s also about black guys/girls not getting killed.

there was a young black guy who killed himself recently, 3 years in prison awaiting trial for shop lifting, constantly trial pushed back. Eventually innocent because they had no evidence.

3 years just because he was on probation when picked up.

so kindly stick your theory up... fill in the rest.

the ideology behind it is we live in a horribly unjust society.

And this is because of historic institutional racism making sure black people live in the poorest neighborhoods.

youtube.com/watch?v=mW764dXEI_8&

if you google more you can read about the house we live in, residential planning, lending.. it wasn’t by chance.

Can you clarify: do you think the article’s synopsis of CRT is inaccurate, and if so which of the points that they list?

Couple of issues here.

Firstly as introductions go I cant help but think that might not be the most positive one.  It would be like pointing someone at a ID website for an introduction to evolution.  Yes there is a time to read criticisms but generally for introduction I would read the fans first rather than some heavily selected quoted introduction from someone a tad opposed.

It is also a bit of a leap to it being the ideology behind BME.  To be honest it seems like the type of academic theorising which never crosses over into the real world. Sure it might have some theoretical overlap but where is the evidence for it being a driving force. Going back to the evolution vs ID example it seems like how you have some theologians defending valiantly against criticism arguing about the deeper meaning in the statements but has no relation to what the average church goer believes or even what their priests do.

That was the US though, not the UK?

That doesn't appear to be true in the current context. The reason we're having this discussion now is because of George Floyd - it was the very specific manner of his death that has kicked off the whole wave of BLM protests.

The problem with arguments using these stats is that they don't shine much light on what the role of racism is driving them. My perception is that the BLM movement isn't driven by any academic theory (this is right-wing propoganda), it's driven by the fact that as long as I've been alive, US police have been getting caught on camera brutalising innocent, unarmed black men. I remember seeing the footage of Rodney King from the early 90s and just thinking wtf. Floyd is exactly the same. And there wasn't a break in between.

We don't seem to see white guys getting this kind of treatment - which does appear to be racially motivated assault and murder - even if white guys are getting shot at a proportionate rate. I doubt that the US police treat say, white drug addicts with a huge degree of respect and sympathy, but the footage of them being brutalised for no reason never seems to emerge.

It appears absolutely obvious to me that Black Lives Matter is a response to evidence we've all seen of US police demonstrating that in certain cases they have acted as though black lives don't matter, and we only know about the cases where we've seen the footage. 

If anyone is any doubt about racism in the US police, here's a good story. The music is awesome, so listen to the whole thing, but if it's not your bag, skip to 15.30.

youtube.com/watch?v=mVJjmyFfuts&

Listen to that, and then come back and tell me BLM is a leftist conspiracy based on critical theory and is undermining social cohesion.

Well, their aims are conveniently vague but listed on their funding website as “‘to dismantle imperialism, capitalism, white supremacy, patriarchy and the state structures." which would seem to have quite an overlap with CRT’s claims of hidden and structural racism endemic to the system that needs to be eradicated. The insistence that only white people are racist, which is obviously nonsense in any traditional sense of the term, their penchant for no-platforming or dismissing as “far right” even their sober critics are straight out if the CRT playbook,

The article's synopsis of CRT is written in language so emotive and meaningless, that there isn't any way that it could be  accurate.

E.g.

relies upon “interest convergence” (white people only give black people opportunities and freedoms when it is also in their own interests) and therefore doesn’t trust any attempt to make racism better

How could that possibly be right? Does CRT not trust CRT?

is against free societies and wants to dismantle them and replace them with something its advocates control

What does this even mean. "Against free societies"? Drivel!

only treats race issues as “socially constructed groups,” [yes, accepted] so there are no individuals in Critical Race Theory

What? How can individuals not exist? How can that be married with the emphasis on storytelling?

That's all I can be bothered with, because the whole thing is just inane.

Where are your critical faculties? Are you totally unable to spot glaring bollocks when they stare you full in the face? 

You know just because you use big words to be racist doesn't stop you being a racist. You don't actually believe in freedom of speech you just believe in the freedom of your speech. 

Yes, but the BLM is originally and primarily a US based organization, so it’s relevant when we talk about the ideology behind it.

Yes CRT came before the civil rights movement.. you are randomly deciding the CRT informs that and not vice versa.

I'm glad to see you acknowledge that.

The proposition (which you attributed to Marsbar incorrectly, by the way) was that you had never suffered from racism not that you had never encountered it, and is one your anecdote does nothing to counter. 

Just to put the last bit of that post of mine into context for those who haven't read that other thread, the comment you made there that provoked that "proposition" was this:

But it's not about white people complaining about racism against us too. It's about the hypocrisy and irony of the apparent assumptions that white people are racist because, wait for it, they are white!

It's that sort of crap that pushes otherwise reasonable people towards right wing parties

Footage of white guys being brutalised does emerge, it just doesn’t go viral.  The worst US police violence I’ve seen was against a white homeless man (Kelly Thomas) in CA.  Cops got off.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Kelly_Thomas

You of course forget that opposite does not mean equal. If you look at your climate change example you'll find that there is no debate in the scientific community or if there is it would 99.9% agree climate change exists and is caused by the actions of humans 0.1% disagree. therefore for every 1 climate denial piece you read you need to read 999 pieces which don't. This is a trap most middle of the road news sources also fall into.

But that's not the main point of BLM, being privileged by being white, you are just accept it, does not make you racist it merely means you have advantages in the world over a black person.

Just a note for anyone who may be interested..

The young man Roadrunner is referring to here is Kalief Browder. 

There are quite a few articles written about his case, and it's also dealt with in the Netflix documentary "The 13th", which they recently made freely available on Youtube here: (They discuss Kalief Browder specifically from about 1:09)

youtube.com/watch?v=krfcq5pF8u8&

I don't doubt for a second that cases of police brutality against white men exist. But are you implying - say in the light of Christian Scott's story linked above at 14:43 - that this indicates that there isn't systemic racism in the US police?

One bad apple innit..

don’t even argue the level of brutality And inequality in US justice is equal. The stats are irrefutable.

I’m countering your specific claim.  Such videos do emerge.  The reaction to them is quite different.

I agree with you and I am sure that is right. However, I didn't choose to be born white and my annoyance comes from the suggestion that I should feel ashamed of being born white and accept all the sins of all white people for all time.

I would be much more open to blm and similar movements if I didn't feel like I was being personally attacked for characteristics over which I have no control (sounds familiar I know) 

I think poor white people in the US get a terrible deal and part of that is police brutality. As such, they’d probably benefit from many of the reforms BLM and so on are proposing. 

Why might that be? BLM clearly believe that the cases of police brutality against blacks reflect a systemic problem. Thus the reaction is not just to a specific case but against a system which is perceived as racist. If you're a black guy and you've been discriminated against by the cops in any way, you'd have good reason to believe that, and to contribute to that reaction.

What do you think the footage of police brutality against a white guy shows? Why do you think the reaction is different?

Fixed that for you.

Being accused of racism make you feel like you might as well become a proper racist - well there's an interesting proposition.  Otherwise reasonable people like you?  Or somebody else?

I'm not going to get drawn on this other than to say and despite what some on UKC think, I am NOT a climate change denier, I do believe the threat is real, I also believe that we humans are contributing to it, I also believe that we need to take drastic measures to fight it.  That does not mean that I believe all of the information that some of the more extreme advocates are putting out there.

But lets get back on topic.

Al 

It shows just how brutal US cops can be and get away with it.

The reaction is different because there are no powerful groups around that care about him or people like him.

Why do you think you’re not aware of him, when you are aware of others?

Bloody hell I can't believe it, I agree with you.

Al

Depends on what the reforms are.  Positive discrimination will not help him, for example.

Was this something I quoted?  I’m not sure why I would have put we as white men, I’m not a man. 

I agree. 

I've already explained it:

Thus the reaction is not just to a specific case but against a system which is perceived as racist. If you're a black guy and you've been discriminated against by the cops in any way, you'd have good reason to believe that, and to contribute to that reaction.

Thank you Al.

I’m entirely aware of what I’m saying thanks.  Old white men at the present time might actually not be who we need to hear more from.  That’s my opinion.  Feel free to call me a bigot, it’s hilarious.  

I've lost track.  It gets difficult when you are responding to several threads and multiple opponents. Apologies if I mis-quoted you.  I know what THAT feels like.

Al

I was born white, and I've never been made to feel ashamed of it, or been made to accept guilt for slavery or racism. I've never felt personally attacked for being white. What type of treatment are you getting that I'm not, and from whom?

I just googled (well, duckduckgo'ed actually) "blm proposed police reforms usa" - this was the first hit I got:
https://reason.com/2015/08/21/black-lives-matter-activists-release-pol

You educated yourself on BLM as a white man by reading something else by another white man, that agreed with your current thinking?  

Ok.  

Trump won a majority of white votes in 2016 and said "I love the uneducated" so in theory poor white Americans do have some powerful groups who care about them. The thing is, those powerful groups only care about getting the poor white man's vote, his loyalty and his money. Rather than give poor whites self-respect through improved life outcomes they seek to displace their anger onto others whilst systematically shafting them.

You cite positive discrimination as being of no use to poor whites. Yet there's plenty of research showing that more diverse organisations work better, which presumably would benefit everyone involved. And if we're talking about terrible policing and funds going to armoured cars rather than healthcare, then again many poor white Americans would benefit from BLM.

Still, Confederate flags eh!

Not you - Al misquoted it slightly (a small but, I think, important detail) and also misremembered who had said it. 
The post he was referring to is this one:
https://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/rocktalk/offensive_route_names-720752?v=1...

You don't need to hear more from old white men so that limits your options on UKC .

Presumably because free (as defined by the author) societies tend to choose to denigrate their minorities/powerless so a society where that isn't allowed isn't 'free'.

Jk

Freedom, when it comes to right-wing drivel, usually means "the freedom not to pay tax".

I think you are slightly mis-characterising what dh73 said. I agree no one is making anyone do anything and no one is getting different treatment in this context but there are organisations out there who do seem to be promoting the attitudes dh73 speaks of and they will prove to be unhelpful.

Al

This is what dh73 wrote and it ties in perfectly with Jon's comments:

"However, I didn't choose to be born white and my annoyance comes from the suggestion that I should feel ashamed of being born white and accept all the sins of all white people for all time.

I would be much more open to blm and similar movements if I didn't feel like I was being personally attacked for characteristics over which I have no control"

Dh73 does indeed talk about shame, guilt for past crimes and being personally attacked. As Jon says, I don't feel those things when seeing a BLM protest, so it's interesting that others do. Those are dh's feelings, not "attitudes" promoted by anti-racist movements, so it's worth thinking about why some people feel those feelings.

An uncharitable precis and amalgamation of what I've read on here would be some white people can't bear to see things from others' perspectives (it's very uncomfortable) so the non-white people should just shut up with their opinions and desires. Because otherwise it is makes otherwise decent people into racists and supporters of far-right parties. (Note this isn't from you, or dh, but a broad characterisation of this argument.)

Isn't the point that hearing about the suffering of others supposed to make us uncomfortable? And that we should perhaps dwell on that discomfort for a while, rather than avoid it by getting cross at the messenger?

It's quite ironic how things have shifted politically.  Historically, the confederacy, slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, KKK were all mainly, though not exclusively, Democratic Party institutions but now the same party promotes itself as the party of the blacks.

Al

Especially when that white man is well-known for having an axe to grind around this area. Sounds like seeking out material that confirms the OP's biases. The Goodhart piece is a little more measured but it's still just gathering together a set of handy acts and arguments that support his political position rather than a serious analysis. I hope PmP continues his education anyway...

I think I responded absolutely directly to what dh73 said, by asking a genuine question: what is it that makes you feel that? There is no misrepresentation there as far as I can see.

dh73 spoke in terms of his perceptions.  You turned that into a question of direct actions and actual people. Your words lent strength to your side of the argument without actually addressing his and my concerns i.e. there are organisations out there promoting the agenda he talks about.

I agree with your argument, it's hard not to, which was put forward as a counter to dh73's point but he is also correct.

Does that make sense. I'm struggling to put my thoughts into words.

Al

It's pretty subtle, but I think I can see what you mean!

Yes, it's almost like freedom is a zero sum game. 

I wouldn't expect a straight person to know what it's like to live in the UK as a gay man, so, what marsbar said about the race of the OP and his critique of BLM may be more along those lines, rather than a pop at his race in particular?

Well, he's correct in terms of describing his feelings but the point is, why does he feel those things? What is it in the BLM movement, or the broader anti-racist movement, that makes him (and you) feel uncomfortable? Is it the "shut up, you're a white guy, we don't want to listen to you" tone?

I mean, this thread started with someone saying that in order to really understand this movement you have to go to a couple of white academics. It's almost like - excuse my cycnicism - many posters on here don't want to hear from the legions of black writers and thinkers who can talk with insight and understanding about the situation they are in. That's not to say white people can't contribute, but perhaps we should listen to what others have to say.

He (dh73)  said this:
"However, I didn't choose to be born white and my annoyance comes from the suggestion that I should feel ashamed of being born white and accept all the sins of all white people for all time."

There are no organisations out there promoting this 'agenda'.

Really?  There seem to be plenty of videos of students on university campus's who seem to spend most of their time doing precisely that. Not realising for a second that if there were a list of people who had benefited from slavery and should pay back in some way,they would possibly come near the top.

Al

Maybe this is worth a read?

“In 2011, DiAngelo coined the term “white fragility” to describe the disbelieving defensiveness that white people exhibit when their ideas about race and racism are challenged—and particularly when they feel implicated in white supremacy. Why, she wondered, did her feedback prompt such resistance, as if the mention of racism were more offensive than the fact or practice of it?”

https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/a-sociologist-examines-the-whit...

Al, could you name the organisations promoting this agenda. I'm a white middle class, middle aged man and feel no shame about this, it's a fact of life. I understand the advantages these attributes gave me. I can also understand that I still had to work to get where I am. Within the current BLM protests I see no drive for equality of outcome, just that we should strive for a level playing field when it comes to race (and gender) and I see no organisations with an agenda that is trying to make me:

to quote dh73.

Facing up to our history, and learning about it without the blinkers on, re-assessing "great" people in our nation's history with a more critical eye and accepting them as imperfect individuals is no bad thing in my opinion.

It doesn't trust any attempt by whites to make racism better

"Bell first articulated his interest convergence principle in 1980. According to the principle, the interests of black Americans will only be promoted when they either advance or do not impede the interests of white Americans. Perceived racial progress, Bell contends, only occurs when the interests of blacks and whites align. Moreover, Bell holds that racially progressive measures are systematically rolled back when those measures no longer serve the interests of whites."

What it says? "The ideal of individual autonomy that underlies liberal humanism (the idea that people are free to make independent rational decisions that determine their own fate) was viewed as a mechanism for keeping the marginalized in their place by obscuring larger structural systems of inequality. In other words, it [free society] fooled people into believing they had more freedom and choice than societal structures actually allow." (DiAngelo)

  CRT demand equality of outcomes which by necessarily demands restricting freedom, and it regards debate as a patriarchal construct. This is the "intellectual" rationale for no platforming ie. restricting freedom of speech.

  > only treats race issues as “socially constructed groups,” [yes, accepted] so there are no individuals in Critical Race Theory

  The storytelling is simply a way to explain and promote the interests of the group. There is nothing contradictory in that. Individuals are defined by their membership of a group.

"There has been, in recent years, a small but flourishing academic movement to forsake conventional scholarship in favor of telling stories. Tales or fables, the movement's proponents argue, can express cutting truths and demonstrate everyday reality far better than brittle-as-a-dried-leaf scholarly prose.

Bell sees no need to prove or demonstrate anything; he merely asserts conclusions. In these and previous tales, his truths are simple: black people always behave nobly while white people behave atrociously. In those few instances in which they don't, it is solely because of a cynical if submerged self-interest."

NY Times on Bell.

  My critical faculties are used to recognise the glaring bollocks of CRT and it's associated ideologies. This website is useful because it neatly summarises what the ideologues,black and white, say themselves. Read them. Educate yourself!

You have consistently argued that the wilder fringes of CRT, intersectionality, identity politics etc were basically confined to a few kids on the West Coast. As was utterly predictable, it's now gone mainstream as these kids come into the workplace and demand that their employers do as they say (cf: the New York Times) and shut down those who disagree.

  You've acknowledged you know nothing about CRT. Get your head out of the sand and  educate yourself. There is phrase for your position and it's two words starting with "useful".

You can lead a horse to water......you know the rest.

Yes it was but it applies to America where there are other serious issues, not least of which is history, that need to be addressed which both compound and confuse this issue.  She makes some valid points but I think she is wrong with regard to it being simply a matter of colour. Isn't there a term "trailer trash" to describe one element of underprivileged whites. We are not the USA, we do not have the same baggage and indeed led the way in abolishing slavery. It's an unfair comparison in many ways.

Al

I can't name specific organisations and I agree no one is "compelling" anyone to do anything.  I thought I had been clear on that. There are loads of videos out there showing students on several university campus's promoting this message through coercing, peer pressure, shouting down, no platforming and inducing feeling of guilt. The media is guilty,to some extent, of encouraging this.

Agreed. but rather than unilaterally pulling statues down we should discuss.  I would prefer to see plaques attached to these statues stating clearly and in no uncertain terms who this person was. When we allow the mob to take control we are lost.

Al

As much as CRT is a reasonably radical theory that isn't foolproof, you do have a somewhat skewed take on it and run the risk of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Bell seemed a pessimistic fellow who believed racism was a fact of life in the US and that the only way to find peace as a black person in the US was to accept that, but to still find honour in attempting to combat it, just to be aware that you would fail in the end. This was based on the fact he believed that the black movement was not powerful enough to make any meaningful change and any that any changes made would be when the powerful white Americans could see a benefit. As such, he encouraged people to see where where those scenarios were, and to exploit them.

What I'm a bit baffled about if why you believe this is the sole basis of the BLM movement, a youth-led social media driven movement of the disenfranchised youth mobilised by imagery of police brutality, not a Harvard based theory.

I would imagine the footage of a man slowly being choked to death by those sworn to protect him, while other officers watched on has galvanised a lot more people that a somewhat flawed but interesting and useful theory.

Here's a better example of BLM - defund and disband the police to reduce crime and increase public safety.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-53083559/what-happened-when-a...

I can perfectly well understand why that case would be made, but I'm not in a position to evaluate whether or not it's true. However, it is ridiculous misrepresentation to claim "CRT doesn’t trust any attempt to make racism better". It's rubbish.

I'm no wiser as to what a "free society" is meant to be and how CRT is supposed to militate against it. What are the freedoms that CRT proposes are curtailed, and how are its proponents supposedly going to take these freedoms away from us? 

I don't believe these assertions - who said "debate is a patriarchal construct"? This concept of a zero-sum game between "freedom" ( = good, but totally undefined, just a word used to justify any right-wing policy you can think of) and "equality of outcome" ( = bad) doesn't have any substance. A particular policy to, say improve diversity in a certain workforce or whatever, can be evaluated in terms of its costs and benefits. I don't buy "freedom" vs "CRT". Sorry, it's just rubbish.

I'm sorry this just doesn't mean anything. Membership of a group may have some impact on your life, such as how you're treated by the police. You're still an individual. There is no point to be made here, it's just rubbish.

I'm not making any appraisal of Bell's work. I'm not particularly interested in it. I can just see ludicrous right-wing propaganda a mile off, when I read expressions like "against freedom" and "the individual does not exist".

I don't claim to understand CRT, but I strongly object to the nonsense you are pedalling in this thread. BLM is a response to police brutalising innocent black men. It is not a left-wing conspiracy, and your attempt to discredit it as such irritates me intensely.

I'm sorry, you're going to have to spoonfeed me. What is it that I am supposed to be worried about? Why should I care about CRT, when what I'm somewhat preoccupied with is the fact that the world is completely f*cked due to a combination of coronavirus and incompetent right-wing governments who've allowed it to run rampant through their populations, killing tens of thousands and destroying their economies. Partly, as it happens, in the name of "freedom". 

And you want me to worry about critical race theory. Give us a break.

Yes, the article describes the American situation. But don’t you see a similarity between the behaviour it describes and some of the posts we’ve seen on this thread? Haven’t you seen a strong desire to make those wanting to talk about racism the problem, rather than racism itself?

As for history, of course it’s different here to the US. But if the first thing you reached for is the abolition of slavery - obviously a good thing - are you perhaps not being slightly disingenuous?

That doesn't feel like an organised movement, just students without the required critical thinking abilities and an absolute belief they are right. I spouted a lot of rubbish with absolute conviction and belief in my youth that I'd struggle to defend now! I don't think that reflects the world/the UK in general. If I question a work colleague for saying something pretty racist, it's me that is "ganged up against".

Are we unilaterally pulling down statues? Colston was pretty symbolic but I don't think that's the blueprint for every dodgy statue. There had been efforts over many years to have plaques added but to avail. No-one's actually calling for Winston to be toppled, but maybe an education as to how people can have abhorrent views, do some pretty questionable stuff but still rise to the occasion and be the right person at the right time wouldn't go amiss

Since I bothered to read those links, perhaps you could have a go at understanding BLM from a different perspective:

The music is awesome, so listen to the whole thing, but if it's not your bag, skip to 15.30.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVJjmyFfuts&

Now, are you sufficiently confident in your position that you'd tell Christian Scott that the ideology behind BLM is to undermine the "free society" he lives in? I would pay good money to see his reaction!

It should perhaps be mentioned, since we seem to be wilfully misunderstanding what the movement is about on here a fair bit, that nobody is suggesting 'defunding' the UK police.  Unlike their American counterparts they've already had more than enough of that under successive governments over the last 10 years.

It's perhaps worth remembering too that we in the UK also happen to have some relatively recent experience of disbanding an entire police force that had become irretrievably toxic, albeit for reasons to do with religious sectarianism rather than race.  Goodbye RUC, hello PSNI.

I think there is some truth in your last paragraph. I am doubtless not as open minded as I think, so I will in fact take on board what you say and not get so defensive. And not post on forums like this which brings out the worst in me and I find myself arguing for things I don't really believe 

The two are not mutually exclusive, they are both problematical. I can dislike racism whilst at the same time dislike arguments against racism that are nonsense and unhelpful.

Disingenuous? In what way? It was simply an example off the top of my head.

Al

I thought that was what I said but students or not they seem to be able to influence the universities thinking, philosophy and agenda so they are not harmless.

Well that statue was unilaterally pulled down, others were defaced, and there has been lots of talk about pulling down others.  But it's the precedent it sets that worries me.  It's mob rule and if they get away with it, it will encourage them to push the boat out a little further next time.

Al

According to a particularly odious bloke I met on site today the black lives matter movement is being driven by the Muslims hiding in the shadows playing black against white to weaken both sides allowing them to slide in to power. A few people were agreeing with him. Apparently anyone at a protest wearing a black bandana is a Muslim instigator.

I asked how they are driving it from the shadows when thousands of Muslims are turning up to protests going on the amount of black bandanas and face coverings in the photos and videos.

It worries me that these people walk amongst us. These people being ignorant, racist, bigoted arseholes and not suspected Muslims in black masks. 

Wow, that's big of you.  This isn't the sort of post you see on here every day, good on you.  (Not being sarcastic.)

On what seankenny is saying there about feeling uncomfortable and getting defensive, did you see the clip of Trevor Noah talking about that and comparing his experience of growing up in South Africa with living in the USA?  (Somebody posted the link in another thread - the bit I'm on about starts at 7:50, but the whole thing is worth watching, he's funny.)

youtube.com/watch?v=LoBJOkhtDQQ&

I have no desire to get embroiled in this discussion however I thought this BBC podcast on the topic was excellent and so worth a listen if you are interested. With the obvious caveat that this is one perspective in a multi-faceted debate and to stress that it not directly linked to BLM. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000d70h

  It's instructive that you think it's "a different perspective". It's not.

   It's perfectly possibly to recognise that US cops can be out of control and casually racist, that there are  broader problems of racism in the US,  that the UK still has elements of racism, and that this needs to be redressed but not necessarily to believe that "silence is violence", that nuance in one's views should put one's job at risk , that cultural icons should be eradicated  and that only "lived experience" validates one's views on this subject (or anything else) , or the white people in 2020 are responsible for something done by other white people in 1720 on the basis of their skin colour etc etc. These latter ideas which have become inextricably linked with BLM are illiberal and, as the NY Times debacle shows, will eat liberals like yourself as revolutions tend to.

  When people who are supposed to be teaching our children to think believe that gender or colour of skin automatically invalidates comment then the very liberal values that underpin our fragile democracy have a problem.

Nice music, good guy.

See you in the tumbrils....

Put it this way, I think that the whole point of BLM is to address the issue Christian Scott describes in the clip. I think that's important. 

I see the issues you connect to CRT as peripheral and in the context of BLM, trivial. The "critique" of CRT using language like "against free societies" is something I just can't take seriously because it's so obviously just propoganda and has no credibility. And it irritates me that such propoganda should be used as an attempt to undermine BLM, when I think the point of BLM is extremely serious. 

As such, I can't see how you can understand BLM from Christian Scott's perspective, and yet still seek to undermine it with right-wing propoganda. That makes no sense to me.

Oh yes! 

 Cant imagine why.

Hello Mr Postman,

I've been wondering with some of the links Coel has been sharing in recent weeks whether these are website, blogs, twitter accounts that he has been following for some time, or whether he finds them when he is searching for articles and the like that have a particular ideological slant.

So with the "New Discourses" site - did you come across it whilst trying to educate yourself on the BLM ideology (which actually I suspect is next to impossible because any BLM organisation is secondary to a protest reaction, but anyways...) or have you been a reader previously and then saw their explanation of the BLM ideology when it was published recently? If the former, why out of all the explanations of what the Black Lives Matter protests are asking for, do you find this is the best explanation? And if the latter, did you not think they would have a clearly ideological take on it in line with all the other stuff on that website?

I haven't got to any talking yet but the music is fantastic! I went through a stage where I listened to a lot of classic modern jazz, but haven't listened so much in recent years - but this is wonderful - I'm going to listen to more of their stuff I think. And he's got a Joy Division t-shirt!

Since you liked that, I've started a thread just for you:

https://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/culture_bunker/contemporary_jazz_nice-720...

What am I made out of fricking wax? He should be top of the list for racist statues getting toppled. 

Who says that we are 'responsible' for slavery?

In this current instance with blm Isn't that just another way for white right wing people to ignore black voices when they are being lynched? 

What is so fragile about this " democracy"? 

' We need to hear more women's, BAME and minority voices on matters that affect them from their perspective instead of all the usual old white guys all the time constantly shouting down and dismissing all of the above, which drives all of the above away' . Then when we do hear these voices above the old white right wing men what do we get told by the old right wing men? 

'Because I'm white right wing and male I am not being heard on issues specific to these other groups so I'll make it sound as if I'm not being listened to on every single issue because I'm a white right wing male and that this is all a big threat to democracy?' 

Lol,spolied drama queen, there are issues where our inputs are not wanted, relevant or helpful you know? And when it is best to stop talking and listen. Then we can heal wounds and join together to make a better society. 

I really don't know about others but as far as I can see, there is a systemic racism in this country.

You'd probably prefer one of Stalin... 

Are you talking about the US, UK or both?

    The BLM movemement (as they say on their funding website) and the SJW movement of which it is a part makes a lot of arguments which, by traditional criteria, are not rational or are clearly bollocks: white people are all racist, black people can't be racist, art and culture should be "decolonised", the nuclear family should be eradicated, the police should be defunded etc etc.

  So I was exploring the rationale behind a movement superficially focused with ending police brutality associating itself with these movements. This process very quickly leads one to CRT, intersectionality, the roots in postmodernism etc. I came to the Discourses website very late in the process and it seemed to summarise pretty neatly both the rationales I had read elsewhere and the criticisms, many of which I had reached myself.

  Apart from the fact that it argues against CSJ and CRM, which are tools of the hard left, why do you consider it to be "right wing" ?

  What did you think of the Goodhart article?

I didn't say "right wing". James Lindsay calls himself apolitical in his twitter bio, although I guess we can take that as with a pinch of salt.

BLM is pretty organic movement and like others of that type, the pro-Brexit movement for example, is full of people who seem to have very different back ground ideas and plans for the future and areas of specific interest. I was reading in this weeks Economist just last night in the British BLM chapter there is quite a generational divide between young organisers who were described as moderate and wanting to work with and in existing structures, and older an generation (40s) who are more revolutionary.

Do you think the people protesting on the street know what Critical Race Theory is? Perhaps they don't have to - I guess you can be a "foot soldier" and not understand the ideology of the movement you're in.

I haven't read the Goodhart article yet - although I heard him being interviewed yesterday, can't remember what programme on.

  No, Jon did.

   At least two of the three founders of US BLM are avowed Marxists. I can't get through the Economist paywall but from what I've been able to google the founders of BLM UK emerged from the Occupy bring down capitalism movement.

   Read my OP "When I describe is as "the ideology behind BLM" that is not to argue that every demonstrator in the streets or footballer taking the knee has the slightest idea that this is what is going on."

  More disconcertingly, the mainstream establishment, media and corporates (and millionaire sportspeople!)seem happy to support a movement that is campaigning for their destruction.

   It's standard revolutionary tactics: exploit a reasonable cause that nobody can argue against (preferably with a neat slogan) to further your own ends. I notice that the SWP has now tried to attach itself on to BLM like a bad smell.

Which actually questions how much CRT can be the ideology behind it. I was googling last night and found an article from a British academic journal called "Critical race theory in England: impact and opposition". The writer seems to argues that most of the resistance to CRT in England has come from Marxist sociologists and social theorists who say it avoids analysing class by focusing solely on race. It's a very long standing criticism of Marxist theory though - that by positing that class is the dominant form of social stratification it misses other structures like race and gender (disability and sexuality would be others). So I don't think CRT is particularly special in that respect. 

  The left, including many Marxists, has largely abandoned the class based approach and replaced it with race, gender, etc (as you know). There are now doubt many internecine battles over this abandonment (I can give you some links) but clearly demanding the end of capitalism, the destruction of government structures and so forth is a Marxist goal and since most Marxists have had to extrapolate and interpret his meaning in a contemporary context I don't think that the Marxist leaders of BLM would find it difficult to embrace CRT.

Do you spend a lot time reading contemporary debate in Marxist social theory!? Brave man. I guess we all need our hobbies!

I don't think you can really be a Marxist if you abandon a "class based approach". There isn't really much to Marxism beyond class analysis, but what evs.

I'm not really sure what you mean by "the left" - beyond a strawman for "bad stuff". Whilst Lindsay says he is apolitical, I'm sure Pluckrose has said she is of the left in interviews so even some of those who are pushing the whole "CRT is the ideology of BLM" discourse (see what I did there ) are of the left. 

Do you accept at all that what you might be expressing is a narrative in its own right? A counter narrative perhaps, but still a story which is trying to make sense of something in a way that you like, when perhaps there isn't much sense to made yet.

'old right wing men'. I'm assuming that you being a Marxist-Leninist that's any that are to the right of Lenin -thats  a lot of old men which would include me. I reserve the right to be offended by your post, Perhaps as a minority group we could get together a protest group to air our grievances against ageism firstly and for some of us being labelled 'right wing' secondly. Everybody seems to be in some sort of minority group which is open to abuse and contempt from others. It might not be as serious as racism but its still abuse and contempt (something that comes across in your posts).

   There's a risk of getting into Peoples' Front of Judea territory in all this, but if some people profess to be left wing, or Marxist left wing, and are also adherents of CRT, identity politics and the whole caboodle then I'm not going to argue whether this is possible. The bottom line is that the BLM movement is not a simple movement about police racism or even about racial iniquity. It is a movement aimed at undermining liberal democracy as we understand it.

  What is "left wing"? Well, "lefty" is a term that lefties use to describe themselves so maybe you should ask them. But it's a problem. I usually use it in a fairly conventional sense defined by the amount of State interference people  believe is required either to create or to redistribute wealth to create their template of a good society. This, is of course inadequate in the age of culture wars. So people like Tom Walker and Andrew Doyle (Jonathan Pie) who both self describe as "liberal lefties" are accused of being Tories or fascists because they rebel against woke culture. This would suggest that much of the left thinks that woke culture is a defining feature of their leftism.

Incidentally, I've also seen Lindsay described as of the left so I suspect that both he and Pluckrose suffer from the Jonathan Pie problem but I don't know. Maybe we should ask Jon he seems to think that not buying into identitarian wokery makes someone "right wing" or worse.

Yes, I do accept that I am buying into an alternative narrative, obviously. The question is whether it is accurate and I concluded that it generally  is. 

I first became aware of the link between identity politics etc, Marxism and postmodernism from Jordan Peterson. It was pooh poohed on here and elsewhere so I dug around and what I discovered is that many "woke academics" themselves acknowledge the debt that they owe to the postmodernists (although, being academics they can't quite agree what it is). To me, there is simply too much overlap between the arguments of the postmodernists and those of the identity politics folk (liberalism is a tool of oppression, language is a tool of power, people are defined by their place in the hierarchy not by their individual character etc etc) to think this is  coincidence.

My simple view is that postmodernism is ultimately nihilistic and that "woke politics", which is in a sense its practical implementation, is deeply anti-liberal because by embracing the idea that there is no objective truth and  that everything is simply a power game, it undermines all the values of liberalism and enlightenment rationalism.

Incidentally, Sam Harris's latest podcast is interesting (but long). https://samharris.org/podcasts/207-can-pull-back-brink/ 

He is, probably justifiably, concerned (as in lesser way is Goodhart) that current events will strengthen Trump's support and  enable him to move towards some form of authoritarian state. Either way, the centre may not hold (indeed, it already seems to have capitulated).

PS. I can't remember, is Sam Harris supposed to be an alt right nut job or a sensible liberal?

This 'simple view' isn't really useful or valid. Ignoring the complexities around post-modernism is problematic because there isn't any one post-modernist position but many, applying to different disciplines in different ways. Postmodernism in architecture manifests very differently from postmodernism in political theory for example. To claim that post-modernism is nihilistic may be true in the case of someone like Baudrillard, but doesn't really apply to people like Lyotard or Derrida. Woke politics is possibly simpler, but as the term has been appropriated by people who wish to undermine the quest for racial and social justice, it is also hard to pin down.

Good critique of some of Harris's ideas here:

https://www.wired.com/story/sam-harris-and-the-myth-of-perfectly-rational-t...

' Jordan Peterson' doesn't have a clue about Marxism so I'm surprised you would look to what he says on anything to do with Marxism. Sigh! My overwhelming feeling from your posts about the left, socialism and a Marxist revolution over the many years we have fought it out on here( and its good to see you back btw) is that they are your windmills spied from atop your old mare. Certain words jump out to you in bright neon red that get your pulse racing, make you pull down the rusty old visor of your Bacinete raise your lance and charge at imaginary giants that will take away your freedom. And you seem to be seeing more now than ever. 

I was in the communist party for years, hell I was even about to stand as a prospective MP in the 2014 General election in Glasgow until they found out about my long history of partying and raves. And I can tell you proper Marxists are against identity politics as they detract from the class struggle but we are in full support of equality for all and support any individual or group which is oppressed. And no, there is no sign on any horizon of any Marxist revolution now or in the future and in the UK? That is laughable as the capitalist ruling class have had the power stitched up here for centuries and would never let go of it as everything is in their favour. I wish your concern was justified but it isn't. 

So stop worrying, it will make you ill. No Bolsheviks are ready to sieze a proportion of your wealth. 

But we are working on it 🇨🇳 lol

I dunno. The Revolutionary Communist Party after their cunning ploy of pretending to switch to be frothing right wingers seems to have infiltrated the tories to a high level.

Absolutely spot on. PMP isn't alone here there is a trend for those on the right to this of late. I might add some on the left do similarly...

The RCP are two guys and a dog. 

They're playing the long game. Munira Mirza, adviser to our esteemed idiot Prime Minister and newly-announced head of the commission on race and ethnic disparities, is a 'former' RCP supporter. 

Working from within ...

He was clearly with his dark side, in also being pleased about the creation of India and Pakistan so that the two countries could never reform into their more numerous smaller regions (which could have likely become countries eventually), and having left Kashmir as a point of contention between the 2 (independence for Kashmir should really happen), but, he also helped to save the world from a regime which had racism and intolerance at it's core. Given Hitler's dislike of other groups as well as Jews, including artists and the disabled and gays and lesbians and gypsies and people with various characteristics he didn't like, the world could now be very different, with how Britain was so important as a country to fight the Nazis and their allies from, even with his racism I think his role in world events needs to be recognised, but I wholly see why he's disliked for his racism and general world view. 

Yup. His whole "post-modern neomarxist" thing is a load of bollocks. Post-modernism (very vague term, but from what I can manage to establish from philosophy introductions) isn't compatible with Marxism because its whole point is to reject precisely that type of grand narrative.

Peterson makes money from basically an "incel" audience who need a dad to tell them to tidy their room, and he exploits this market to promote his conservative agenda. His narrative requires an enemy, and he misuses the word "marxist" because for his audience, it signifies "bad".

It's some of the most depressing nonsense I've come across in my entire life.

  So how do you explain that virtually every major post modernist was a self professed leftist/Marxist?

They were not Marxists. 

Did I say they were? No.

They were all on the far left of the political spectrum. Their precise relationship with strict marxism ebbed and flowed. Foucault, for example, started as a marxist and became a Maoist. Derrida was aligned with the French communist party. Lyotard was hard left but had differences with pure marxism etc etc

The point is not that , as you wrongly claim, that they couldn't be marxists because they didn't believe in meta-narratives. The point is the obvious contradiction that they rejected the concept of  meta-narratives but embraced one of the great meta-narratives. Go figure....

That may be your point. 

My point is that Jordan Peterson's concept of "post-modern neomarxism" is incoherent; and that attributing this non-existent ideology as driving BLM is nonsense.

I know, but repeatedly  asserting it with no analysis doesn’t make it true, especially since you acknowledge that you don’t know much about it. (I don’t blame you. It’s mainly gobbledygook).The idea that t is a “non existent ideology” is plainly wrong. You can even find it on wiki for God’s sake.
  Your emotion based knee jerk dismissal  of anything that doesn’t fit your own very limited and personal  idea of what is “liberal” as  “right wing” or worse does you no favours. Maybe you think Jonathan Pie is a fascist 😀

You can find "post-modern neomarxism" on the internet because Jordan Peterson is very successful, and for no other reason.

Jordan Peterson is not a credible source, he's a plonker. I haven't got time now to bang on and on about all the different ways in which what he says make absolutely no sense. Perhaps I will on another day, but I'm pretty sure I've done it before.

You've no reason to believe that my dismissal of Jordan Peterson is emotion based and/or knee jerk. I've listened to hours and hours of him dribbling on about dragons and lobsters, and read reams and reams of critiques of his pitiful output. Everything I have to say about the worthless crap pedalled by that fool has been said by many other people far more well-read in post modernism and Marxism and feminism and history and evolutionary biology and philosophy than I am. You really don't have to take it from me that the man is a buffoon. 

Have you read any of Foucault's books? Or Derrida's?

As I pointed out earlier, postmodernism isn't an 'it' - there are a number of post-modernist positions. There's a useful brief summary in this article, broadly distinguishing two main aspects of postmodernism, a Marxist-influenced one, and one that rejects Marxism:

https://merionwest.com/2018/05/18/on-marxism-post-modernism-and-cultural-ma...

Also useful if anyone wants to think beyond the oversimplifications that tend to attach to these arguments is this piece by the same guy on Wendy Brown's work:

https://merionwest.com/2020/05/29/why-wendy-brown-remains-as-relevant-as-ev...

Wendy Brown is a critical theorist who even those who don't like critical theory may find interesting (eg. see her critique of identity politics).

But you're not a black guy, and neither are many of the people contributing to the reaction.  The reaction isn't from black people, it's from some people, and some of them are black.  That doesn't answer why you know about it.  I'd imagine we can agree it's because there are powerful interest groups that are making sure you do.

Going back to what you said:

This is simply not true.  It's not the manner of his death, if he'd died in that manner and was white there would be no BLM protests.  The reason we're having this discussion is because of the colour of the people involved, because the cop was white and the other man black.

They shine a light on the reality of the current situation.  There's an assumption made by those watching these videos that the event is due to racism, based as far as I can see on nothing more than the colour of the people involved, and in the presentation of the video.  The stats challenge the idea that cops have it in for black people, data which should affect your perception of the situation.  Did you listen to Sam Harris on this?  You like him iirc?

As said though, it does.  But no one really cares, and that's because people don't really care about police violence as such very much, or at least they don't feel they have to do anything about it.  What in these videos makes it appear racially motivated?

It's clearly much wider than that.  It's not aimed at the police.  "Join the Movement to fight for Freedom, Liberation and Justice"  https://blacklivesmatter.com/ 

Are you mad?

Try this instead...

https://artmetropole.com/shop/9669

Lydia Davis tries to read Foucault. 

I genuinely asked because you were saying to someone else that they didn't seem to understand the philosophy of postmodernism. But I guess you are also relying on what critics say about them? I've not read any Derrida although I have read some bits of Foucalt in the dim and distant. I make no claim to expertise, but names get bandied around in these sort of discussions and you wonder why and where people who aren't sociology or similar grads hear about them.

When my work involved studying the developing anti-Muslim new/far-right blogosphere, about 15 years ago before social media was very big and before the term alt-right  had been coined, I started seeing references to the Frankfurt school and cultural Marxism popping up all over the place in that world. There is a deeper history to the use of the Frankfurt school in anti-semitic conspiracy theories, probably going back to the 80s amongst American far-right "thinkers", but what it all seemed to have in common was it had very little or nothing to do with the actual work the Frankfurt school did. I get a nasty feeling that critical race theory is  becoming that supposed 'core ideology' for those who for whatever reason are against the black lives matter movement. 

I get the feeling you’re not too impressed by Jordan Peterson...

Are you familiar with the phrase flogging a dead horse? 

Jon told us that he knew little about postmodernism or critical theory-which seemed an odd position from which to damn the idea that they might be connected.

Yes, as you know much of the postmodern output is written in such (deliberately) impenetrable prose that the only time efficient way to understand it is via the commentators. One tries to overcome the natural tendency to focus on the critics rather than the proponents, not always successfully. I don't have the time or the will to have more than a superficial idea of the subject-just as it's nice to know the principles of how a plane can fly without wanting to be an aeronautical engineer.

I don't think that Peterson is even the source for the postmodern-frankfurt-critical theory narrative. I think that is Stephen Hicks although he was probably not alone. In a sense, it doesn't matter. As Bob says, there are numerous variations of Marxism/communism/leftism, of postmodernism, and of critical theory. It would be mad to think that some of them didn't cross pollinate, just as it would be mad to claim that they believe all  the same things. Hicks seems to me to give a convincing explanation as to how this cross pollination happened but one can disagree..

I'd subscribe to Ockham's razor. If Black Lives Matter and its adherents share many of the demands (and I'm not talking about better policing and racial justice), slogans  and analysis of the critical race theorists, which are also shared by the far left (I'll call them marxists but make your own choice) then it's an odds on chance that this is not a coincidence.

Message to Jon: shouting louder isn't an argument and thinking that either marxism (which I assume you believe exists) and/or CRT are not very helpful ideas doesn't make one "right wing", let alone alt-right.

In ’reply to wbo2:

I’m willing to believe people like Sam Harris on the stats, I see no reason not to.  I don’t know what non evidence of racism means.

I'm not sure how much about american policing, and how they're used for cash generation by cities, but the more I see the less I like, and it's an excellent example of institutional racism in action. 

I listened to it. Stats bit is a long way in.

There’s a lot not to like in US policing, and in the wider justice system.

   I know I should drop this, but the fact that you are unaware of the statistics and the arguments to which Thomas (or is it Thomas who's unaware? I'm confused ) refers demonstrates just how far the media has been hijacked. There are numerous conservative black commentators who make the same points as Harris and also question whether racism is actually the cause of inequality etc. But you won't hear much of this in the mainstream media, and especially not from white commentators. Melanie Philips (boo, hiss, loony racist blah blah) dared raise the question and the Times is now apparently under pressure to fire her.

  Personally I don't doubt that there are deep racial problems in the US but the level of deaths at the hands of the police seems is arguably much more about the gun culture and poorly trained and shit scared police than about straightforward racism.

  Stopping open debate on the topic cannot be the way forward.

Slavery has been a curse of humankind for thousands of years. The Egyptian, Greek and Roman civilisations all practised it, to name just a few. It was normal and accepted practice to either kill or enslave the people of other tribes/countries who you conquered in war, and this has carried on right up until, and even after WW2.

Pretty well all races practised it, in one way or another, and even now it goes on with sexual exploitation of vulnerable people. During the period which we now think of as the days of the Slave Trade when Africans were shipped across the Atlantic to the Americas and Caribbean under appalling conditions to work as slave labour on sugar and cotton plantations owned by white estate owners, slavery was going on in Africa as it always had as a result of tribal wars. When Europeans stated getting into the African slave trading, other Africans and Arabs were capturing and enslaving Africans to sell to the European slavers.

It was a dirty dirty business and the fact that Africans were also involved in the trade doesn't make it right, but neither were they innocent, something that tends to be overlooked when people try to make it a simple black and white issue, with the whites being the only bogey men. It was far more complicated than that.

Yes indeed. As just one example, his theory (when arguing against feminism) that men and women have been working together in harmony in their struggle to survive against the harshness of nature until industrialisation made life more agreeable doesn't begin to stand up to scrutiny, going as far back as the Abrahamic religions, they cast women as the downfall of humankind, and it as being right that men should have dominion over them, to start with, and in Medieval times it was said that women could only get pregnant if they enjoyed sex, and rape could only be proven if a woman became pregnant, which left women in a horrible fix (to put it mildly). One can go back through history and find many examples to disprove his argument that there hasn't been subjugation of women, or inequality. He basically just rambles on.

So much of his thinking is based on cherry-picking. He has an agenda and a career to pursue though...

I’m not sure why you think I’m excusing him. Maybe you missed my attempt at sarcasm?

Always a problem, that tone thing...

1. I openly didn't make any argument about JP, I just slagged him off. I simply said that it was a reaction based on a lot of exposure to JP, and reading a lot of criticism. On another day, you can post some guff by JP, and I'll go through line by line and explain precisely why he's full of shit. Make it a rainy day when I'm off work.

2. What I said was "right wing" was an article using language like "against free societies" and "the individual does not exist". That's the language of right-wing propoganda, just like addressing readers as "comrades" and blathering on about the "bourgeoisie" is the language of communist propoganda. It's not hard to spot. And I think you are the first person to use the phrase "alt-right" on the thread (I certainly haven't).

Don't misrepresent.

My favourite Jordan Peterson moment (which I just happened to stumble upon, it wasn't part of some hit piece) was a Q&A in which he was asked something along the lines of "I'm gay, but I think I should marry a woman, because I believe that's the right way to live - is that what I should do?".

Peterson's response: "I don't know."

He didn't know. Unbelievable. The man is supposed to be a clinical psychologist. How on earth has he managed to keep hold of that licence?

Or his rambling about the masculine being order and the feminine being chaos, and it being widely recognised by philosophers, before being slightly shaky about how widely recognised and by whom when asked about that. He seems quite intelligent, which kind of has me wondering what's going on. 

Seems like a good excuse for good ol' white folk to dismiss the systemic racism in the US to me. A very ideologically driven argument with opinion conflated as fact...

But thanks for the read.

Davie