Not All Woke on the Left

[Alphus and Omegus]

I oppose corporate efforts to destroy the solidarity of intersectionality, but I also understand that the Christofascist right is trying to manipulate people into focusing on a small injustice while it perpetuates a far greater one by destroying our democratic system. Part of this effort is to create "red-brown" coalitions in which people with economic-centric left views are tricked into thinking that fascists are actually populists.

I'm not saying that's happening to you Kishkumen, but this is a very real strategy by far-right people. Here's an example of how this ploy worked in the UK, where a formerly socialist magazine was taken over by people funded by the Koch brothers:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... foundation

The radical right must be utterly destroyed electorally. Then the other stuff can be argued about. Conservatives need to be put in charge of the Republican party instead of Christofascists.

I am aware of that. My concern is obsession about form taking precedence over action toward results. If I am asked to choose whether we should be concerned about the future of the middle class or whether exotic pronouns are taught in schools or not, I am going to go with the former over the latter. Until the Left is robust and serious enough to do the same, we are basically screwed. Fascists use populist movements borne of the frustration that comes from being ignored and left behind. I have a feeling I know where the conversation is likely to go next, such as, maybe, who is "really" left behind, but I am convinced that the economic issues should precede those of identity. The identity obsession is often a new way for privileged whites to perform their righteousness to each other.

I'm curious as to who specifically on the political left that you can say is engaging in this behavior. I personally have dealt with many high-level Democrats and they do not talk about pronouns. The only people who talk frequently about them are Republicans and their media propagandists.

[Morley]

This reminds me of definition of art that I once read that went something like: Art is that which the larger art community decides is art.

The problem I see is that everything in your definition is a moving target. If we could now agree on who makes up the left--as well as what constitutes race and what comprises gender--we might get somewhere.

It's not surprising Neiman didn't define the term.

So you do not see the existence of prevailing politics of race and gender on what passes for America's Left and are thus still confused about what wokeness means?

I'm not saying either of those things. My comment concerned the difficulty of adequately defining the term.

[Kishkumen]

I'm curious as to who specifically on the political left that you can say is engaging in this behavior. I personally have dealt with many high-level Democrats and they do not talk about pronouns. The only people who talk frequently about them are Republicans and their media propagandists.

Oh Lordy. Thanks. I think we have hit an impasse.

[Res Ipsa]

I oppose corporate efforts to destroy the solidarity of intersectionality, but I also understand that the Christofascist right is trying to manipulate people into focusing on a small injustice while it perpetuates a far greater one by destroying our democratic system. Part of this effort is to create "red-brown" coalitions in which people with economic-centric left views are tricked into thinking that fascists are actually populists.

I'm not saying that's happening to you Kishkumen, but this is a very real strategy by far-right people. Here's an example of how this ploy worked in the UK, where a formerly socialist magazine was taken over by people funded by the Koch brothers:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... foundation

The radical right must be utterly destroyed electorally. Then the other stuff can be argued about. Conservatives need to be put in charge of the Republican party instead of Christofascists.

I am aware of that. My concern is obsession about form taking precedence over action toward results. If I am asked to choose whether we should be concerned about the future of the middle class or whether exotic pronouns are taught in schools or not, I am going to go with the former over the latter. Until the Left is robust and serious enough to do the same, we are basically screwed. Fascists use populist movements borne of the frustration that comes from being ignored and left behind. I have a feeling I know where the conversation is likely to go next, such as, maybe, who is "really" left behind, but I am convinced that the economic issues should precede those of identity. The identity obsession is often a new way for privileged whites to perform their righteousness to each other.

I don't understand why you frame economic action and "identity politics" as an either or choice. In particular, given the correlation between race and income/wealth in the U.S., it strikes me as difficult to rebuild the middle class without considering racial "identity politics."

[Morley]

As I see it, because the word is so amorphous, when politicians use "woke,' they're often signaling an attempt to avoid discussion of specifics.

[Morley]

I'm curious as to who specifically on the political left that you can say is engaging in this behavior. I personally have dealt with many high-level Democrats and they do not talk about pronouns. The only people who talk frequently about them are Republicans and their media propagandists.

The pronoun issue is one that occurs often in academia.

[Res Ipsa]

I'm curious as to who specifically on the political left that you can say is engaging in this behavior. I personally have dealt with many high-level Democrats and they do not talk about pronouns. The only people who talk frequently about them are Republicans and their media propagandists.

The pronoun issue is one that occurs often in academia.

Yes. Kish encounters the pronoun issue in a much different context than lots of the rest of us. In both my profession and in my day to day life, using people's preferred pronouns is viewed as a simple courtesy and is rarely a controversial issue.

[Alphus and Omegus]

I'm curious as to who specifically on the political left that you can say is engaging in this behavior. I personally have dealt with many high-level Democrats and they do not talk about pronouns. The only people who talk frequently about them are Republicans and their media propagandists.

The pronoun issue is one that occurs often in academia.

So in other words, it is not something that is a political issue that affects people outside of a few universities that are dominated by corporate neoliberals. The average person does not encounter this in their daily lives.

[Morley]

The pronoun issue is one that occurs often in academia.

So in other words, it is not something that is a political issue that affects people outside of a few universities that are dominated by corporate neoliberals. The average person does not encounter this in their daily lives.

That average folks don't encounter this in their daily lives is what makes this even more of an issue. They often think that (as you put it) "a few universities that are dominated by corporate neoliberals" are dictating right-minded culture to them.

[Alphus and Omegus]

So in other words, it is not something that is a political issue that affects people outside of a few universities that are dominated by corporate neoliberals. The average person does not encounter this in their daily lives.

That average folks don't encounter this in their daily lives is what makes this even more of an issue. They often think that (as you put it) "a few universities that are dominated by corporate neoliberals" are dictating right-minded culture to them.

Your remark is illogical. If something exists in only a very small sector of the population then it is even less of an issue. It's like saying that a dispute between McDonald's and its employees affects everyone else and is of greater importance than Republican politicians in dozens of states trying to impose totalitarian censorship against public libraries offering books some adults want to read.

It's fine not to like corporate liberals who obsess about pronouns and such, but they are a tiny minority of people on the left. Most Democratic politicians and basically all Democratic voters are not buying what these people want.

Less than 5,000 activists in a few universities who constantly whine about stuff are nowhere near as important as what Republicans are trying to do to criminalize running a drag show, reading a book about Ruby Bridges, or being an open atheist or LGBT person. Donald Trump trying to glorify the treasonous attack of January 6, 2021 in political rallies and openly threatening mass violence against prosecutors who uphold the law is infinitely more concerning.

How you counter annoying corporate neoliberals is that you talk about how their essentialist complaints betray left-wing values. Calling someone what they want to be called is no different than learning how to pronounce their name correctly. It has no bearing on one's own moral worth or intelligence. So what if it's awkward at first?