Coming in late to this thread but the anti-identity current that's growing more and more prevalent on the left lately seems to be somewhat in opposition to contrary to materialism. To say that "class is class and only class has universal validity" strikes me as pretty idealist, not materialist. OneWhile race may not exist to Alexander Bard and Candace Owens, I'd argue that maybe it doesn't exist for them because materially it need not. Alexander is a white man. Candace Owens, while a black woman, has a class position that allows her to skip some over much of what it looks like to be black for most black people, who aren't well-compensated conservative (or liberal) commentators. Most black people's class position is deeply intertwined with the color of their skin. I don't think I need to go into the historical reasons for this. I'd also say that Asad Haider's book was in no way championing victimhood. If that's what one takes away from it then they've read an entirely different book than I did.
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 12:05 PM tbyfield <[email protected]> wrote: > Ian, this idea of 'civility' should be unpacked a bit, because the ~word > lumps together a disparate range of concerns. At its worst, a lot of > babble about civility boils down to is tone-policing, which relies on > etiquette as an all-purpose tool for micromanaging rhetoric — and in > doing so, limiting and even delegitimizing positions of every type > (subjective, relational, political, whatever). In other contexts — > notably, in 'centrist' politics in the US — it serves as a rationale > for institutionalist pliability: 'bipartisan' cooperation, etc. But > those two uses are very different from its function as a foil for the > frightening prospect of outright political violence. These different > strands, or layers if you like, are hopelessly tangled, and that > confusion in itself has serious consequences — hence the culturalist > use of the word 'strategy,' which often is used to get at the nebulous > realm in which individual behavior aligns with (or 'is constitutive of') > abstract, impersonal forces. That's a very roundabout way to get at the > obvious problem, which is the direct way that increasingly uncivil > political discourse foments violence. And, in a way, that's the problem: > the left's path for translating ideals into political practices is > hobbled and misdirected at every stage, whereas for the right it's > becoming all too direct. > > My gut sense is that Land is symptomatic of the left's repudiation of > force — violence — as a legitimate form of politics. Some, like him, > sense that and embark a theoretical trajectory that tacitly accepts or > even actively embraces violence. I'll leave that there, because I don't > want to debate it or even to see a debate about it on this list. Nettime > is fragile, and decades of accumulated effort could be poisoned with a > few, um, 'uncivil' messages. There was a time when the solution was > widely said to be more speech, but at a time when 'more speech' means > trollbot networks that systematically and strategically subvert civil > contexts I think that rule is more problematic than ever. > > As for Bard, whenever his mail appears in inbox my first reaction is > "When's the new book coming out?" But that's a rhetorical question — > no answer needed, thanks. > > Cheers, > Ted > > > On 28 Oct 2018, at 10:48, Ian Alan Paul wrote: > > > Brett - I don't think that the problem of the Left is that we don't > > spend > > enough time with people who think it's worthwhile to discuss the > > potential > > virtues of "Candace Owens, Nick Land and/or Adolf Hitler." If > > anything, the > > Left needs to thoroughly rid itself of the liberal and depoliticizing > > notion that we should all simply get along in the name of preserving > > civility, esp. in a historical moment while fascist gangs are > > literally > > roaming the streets beating up migrants, synagogues are being shot up, > > and > > pipe bombs are being mailed to politicians. > > > > I don't think Alexander's ideas are worth engaging with or even > > refuting to > > be entirely honest, as I hope is obvious to most people on Nettime by > > this > > point. We live in times that are too extreme and urgent to expend any > > attention or energy dialoguing with disingenuous apologists for the > > Right . > <...> > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected] > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: -- Justin Charles 862.216.2467
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected] # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
