hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 1142 of 1160 FirstFirst ... 14264210421092113211391140114111421143114411451152 ... LastLast
Results 22,821 to 22,840 of 23194

Thread: Political Shots Fired Thread

  1. #22821
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    9,775
    https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/0...-lives-matter/

    There’s nothing Marxist about Black Lives Matter

    This woke movement, supported by capitalists, is disguising the class divisions that Marxism highlights.

    It has become increasingly common for commentators to describe Black Lives Matter as a ‘Marxist’ movement. Most such characterisations have been pejorative, intended to discredit the organisation. But at the same time, one BLM co-founder was more than comfortable describing herself and her colleagues as ‘trained Marxists’.

    It serves the interests of both critics and supporters of BLM to talk about it as a Marxist outfit. Critics get to dismiss BLM as part of the loony left, and supporters get to believe they are part of something genuinely revolutionary. But are they right?

    Perhaps the most defining characteristic of Marxism is its explanation of class and its role in society. The Communist Manifesto famously claims that, ‘The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles’. In other words, class conflict is the driving force of history. Revolutions happen when societies can no longer contain that conflict.

    Marx said such revolutions can only be successful if oppressed classes become sufficiently unified to be able to outnumber and overcome those in power. Attaining class consciousness, and rejecting the artificial differences imposed upon us by our rulers as a means of keeping us at war with one another, is key to bringing about change.

    Fast-forward to today and many of the so-called Marxists of BLM are virtually devoid of any analysis of class at all.

    One example of this refusal properly to engage with class is the accusation of ‘class reductionism’, levelled against those arguing that class is just as important as race in explaining inequality. Adolph Reed Jr – a black Marxist – was recently deplatformed for his ‘class reductionist’ views on race. Taking the traditional Marxist approach lands you in hot water with activists who live and die by the all-subsuming doctrine of institutional racism.

    In fact, the BLM movement doesn’t only ignore class analysis, it also obscures the reality of class relations. The constant focus on ‘white privilege’, for instance, has come at the expense of any recognition that lots of poor white people suffer from deprivations, police violence and prejudice, too. Racial disparities are a problem. But obsessing over white privilege stands in the way of any real attempt to draw on the common experiences of the white and black working classes, with the aim of building a cross-racial campaign for change. Instead of putting aside our differences, we are encouraged to wallow in them.

    Talk of ‘white fragility’, a term coined by Robin DiAngelo and discussed in her best-selling book of the same name, is an example of this trend. It undermines cross-racial unity by focusing on difference and by insisting that all whites are inherently racist. As Luke Gittos has pointed out on spiked: ‘By fixating on “whiteness” as the root of all the problems facing black Americans, DiAngelo discounts the possibility that solidarity in the face of common problems can be more powerful than racial identity.’ The same is true for BLM more broadly.

    Indeed, how can the workers unite across racial lines if today’s anti-racist movement is right that the lived experiences of black and white people are so totally different? And if white workers are inherently racist, why would black workers want to join with them?

    Modern identity politics wrongly views society as a split between a white ruling class and a non-white mass proletariat. It refuses to engage with the reality that Marx identified – that workers can be equally exploited regardless of their origins, and that the key to progressive change lies in building bridges between hitherto distinct communities rather than in setting them apart. In this regard Black Lives Matter clearly stands in opposition to Marxism.

    Other woke campaigns have similarly been described (or dismissed) as an offshoot of Marxism. Right-wing critics of things like identity politics, political correctness and the trans movement say we are witnessing the rise of ‘Cultural Marxism’. But these movements are often more reactionary than revolutionary. We have only to look at how quick multinational corporations have been to endorse the woke worldview to see how utterly un-radical it is.

    Every big firm from McDonald’s to Apple has doffed its cap to Black Lives Matter. Even members of the royal family – the epitome of inherited power and privilege – have backed BLM. When you have the backing of these sorts of people, you know you are not about to turn the world upside down in favour of workers’ revolution. The fashion today is less for champagne socialism and more for iPhone identitarianism, it seems.

    The ‘Marxist’ appellation is not simply false, though. It is also both counter-productive and dangerous. George Orwell warned about the political implications of using ‘meaningless words’ in his great essay, ‘Politics and the English Language’. Bemoaning the abuse and overuse of the word ‘fascism’, in words that ring truer today than ever, he said that word now had ‘no meaning except insofar as it signifies something not desirable’.

    In recent years, there has been a resurgence of this desire to brand all political opponents as extremists, without much serious consideration of the terminology deployed. Such hollowing-out of language inevitably leads to confusion and misunderstanding. But it also inadvertently eats away at independent thought and expression.

    Orwell said that, rather than pick the words that best and most clearly convey our meaning, many people often choose the easier route of ‘letting the ready-made phrases come crowding in’. If you do this, you allow these phrases to ‘construct your sentences for you’, and even to ‘think your thoughts for you’. Ultimately, this can lead to ‘partially concealing your meaning even from yourself.’

    This is one of the ways we end up with commentators and politicians attacking their enemies by using little-thought-out terms which they cannot ultimately justify. This is how parts of the modern left are able to brand everyone and everything they disagree with as ‘racist’. But it is also how people can use the word ‘Marxist’ in a similar way, in place of proper analysis or critique. If we are fairly to reject accusations of racism made against anyone who does not take the knee for BLM, we must lead by example. We have to make sure that the words we use have meaning, and that we understand what that meaning is.
    Last edited by Approaching Walrus; July 20 2020 at 05:37:55 AM.

  2. #22822
    Lief Siddhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 15, 2011
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    7,760
    Adolph Reed on Useful Idiots, for context. Interview at 56:12. I can't wait for Lallante's big take on the intro



    Matt's piece on White Fragility

    https://taibbi.substack.com/p/on-white-fragility
    Last edited by Lief Siddhe; July 20 2020 at 05:52:10 AM.
    I was somewhere around Old Man Star, on the edge of Essence, when drugs began to take hold.

  3. #22823
    dzajic's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 15, 2011
    Posts
    3,689
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/0...-lives-matter/

    There’s nothing Marxist about Black Lives Matter

    This woke movement, supported by capitalists, is disguising the class divisions that Marxism highlights.

    It has become increasingly common for commentators to describe Black Lives Matter as a ‘Marxist’ movement. Most such characterisations have been pejorative, intended to discredit the organisation. But at the same time, one BLM co-founder was more than comfortable describing herself and her colleagues as ‘trained Marxists’.

    It serves the interests of both critics and supporters of BLM to talk about it as a Marxist outfit. Critics get to dismiss BLM as part of the loony left, and supporters get to believe they are part of something genuinely revolutionary. But are they right?

    Perhaps the most defining characteristic of Marxism is its explanation of class and its role in society. The Communist Manifesto famously claims that, ‘The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles’. In other words, class conflict is the driving force of history. Revolutions happen when societies can no longer contain that conflict.

    Marx said such revolutions can only be successful if oppressed classes become sufficiently unified to be able to outnumber and overcome those in power. Attaining class consciousness, and rejecting the artificial differences imposed upon us by our rulers as a means of keeping us at war with one another, is key to bringing about change.

    Fast-forward to today and many of the so-called Marxists of BLM are virtually devoid of any analysis of class at all.

    One example of this refusal properly to engage with class is the accusation of ‘class reductionism’, levelled against those arguing that class is just as important as race in explaining inequality. Adolph Reed Jr – a black Marxist – was recently deplatformed for his ‘class reductionist’ views on race. Taking the traditional Marxist approach lands you in hot water with activists who live and die by the all-subsuming doctrine of institutional racism.

    In fact, the BLM movement doesn’t only ignore class analysis, it also obscures the reality of class relations. The constant focus on ‘white privilege’, for instance, has come at the expense of any recognition that lots of poor white people suffer from deprivations, police violence and prejudice, too. Racial disparities are a problem. But obsessing over white privilege stands in the way of any real attempt to draw on the common experiences of the white and black working classes, with the aim of building a cross-racial campaign for change. Instead of putting aside our differences, we are encouraged to wallow in them.

    Talk of ‘white fragility’, a term coined by Robin DiAngelo and discussed in her best-selling book of the same name, is an example of this trend. It undermines cross-racial unity by focusing on difference and by insisting that all whites are inherently racist. As Luke Gittos has pointed out on spiked: ‘By fixating on “whiteness” as the root of all the problems facing black Americans, DiAngelo discounts the possibility that solidarity in the face of common problems can be more powerful than racial identity.’ The same is true for BLM more broadly.

    Indeed, how can the workers unite across racial lines if today’s anti-racist movement is right that the lived experiences of black and white people are so totally different? And if white workers are inherently racist, why would black workers want to join with them?

    Modern identity politics wrongly views society as a split between a white ruling class and a non-white mass proletariat. It refuses to engage with the reality that Marx identified – that workers can be equally exploited regardless of their origins, and that the key to progressive change lies in building bridges between hitherto distinct communities rather than in setting them apart. In this regard Black Lives Matter clearly stands in opposition to Marxism.

    Other woke campaigns have similarly been described (or dismissed) as an offshoot of Marxism. Right-wing critics of things like identity politics, political correctness and the trans movement say we are witnessing the rise of ‘Cultural Marxism’. But these movements are often more reactionary than revolutionary. We have only to look at how quick multinational corporations have been to endorse the woke worldview to see how utterly un-radical it is.

    Every big firm from McDonald’s to Apple has doffed its cap to Black Lives Matter. Even members of the royal family – the epitome of inherited power and privilege – have backed BLM. When you have the backing of these sorts of people, you know you are not about to turn the world upside down in favour of workers’ revolution. The fashion today is less for champagne socialism and more for iPhone identitarianism, it seems.

    The ‘Marxist’ appellation is not simply false, though. It is also both counter-productive and dangerous. George Orwell warned about the political implications of using ‘meaningless words’ in his great essay, ‘Politics and the English Language’. Bemoaning the abuse and overuse of the word ‘fascism’, in words that ring truer today than ever, he said that word now had ‘no meaning except insofar as it signifies something not desirable’.

    In recent years, there has been a resurgence of this desire to brand all political opponents as extremists, without much serious consideration of the terminology deployed. Such hollowing-out of language inevitably leads to confusion and misunderstanding. But it also inadvertently eats away at independent thought and expression.

    Orwell said that, rather than pick the words that best and most clearly convey our meaning, many people often choose the easier route of ‘letting the ready-made phrases come crowding in’. If you do this, you allow these phrases to ‘construct your sentences for you’, and even to ‘think your thoughts for you’. Ultimately, this can lead to ‘partially concealing your meaning even from yourself.’

    This is one of the ways we end up with commentators and politicians attacking their enemies by using little-thought-out terms which they cannot ultimately justify. This is how parts of the modern left are able to brand everyone and everything they disagree with as ‘racist’. But it is also how people can use the word ‘Marxist’ in a similar way, in place of proper analysis or critique. If we are fairly to reject accusations of racism made against anyone who does not take the knee for BLM, we must lead by example. We have to make sure that the words we use have meaning, and that we understand what that meaning is.
    Spectacular. It's not really anything new, corporate media has, by focusing all attention on social injustice issues of race and gender, managed to play a damn good divide and conquer.

    Instead of ultra neo liberal capitalism, the one blamed for all the problems of the modern world is "whiteness" and "maleness". And because there are realy and huge issues of systemic racism, misogyny and transphobia it is a position very easy to sell. But it also ensures that the social justice movement will be at best indifferent to the opioid crisis, to the loss of manufacturing jobs in America (and UK, and everywhere else) if not outright hostile since those are problem of racist white people who are by definition the enemy.

    Anyone who has a for a second heard how supportive big financial firms are of BLM should see how BLM has zero actual Marxist threat in it for the capitalist system.

  4. #22824
    Jack Coutu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 9, 2011
    Location
    marketjacker
    Posts
    1,378
    There are more people involved with groups advocating for change than I can remember, but crazy me talking to actual black people about how to improve their lives and not watching bullshit youtube videos that discuss how BLM is now the end of marxism in a disorganized group like BLM. Fuck man, the president of anitfa is gonna be the next to fall to caplitalist corruption at this rate. Lief and Walrus immediately launch into internet retard scenes.

  5. #22825
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    9,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Coutu View Post
    There are more people involved with groups advocating for change than I can remember, but crazy me talking to actual black people about how to improve their lives and not watching bullshit youtube videos that discuss how BLM is now the end of marxism in a disorganized group like BLM. Fuck man, the president of anitfa is gonna be the next to fall to caplitalist corruption at this rate. Lief and Walrus immediately launch into internet retard scenes.
    Jack, the point is that the movement has been hijacked by interests who are directly supported by capital.

    There was an actual, real chance for police reform when the George Floyd protests started. That chance has now evaporated thanks to the extremist twitter-dwelling fringe that has successfully discredited the entire movement with their rhetoric and actions.

    I also don't appreciate that you think I'm getting my ideology from "bullshit youtube videos", I have always held this ideology ever since the 2008 financial crisis. But whatever, you've constructed an idea of me in your mind to argue against.
    Last edited by Approaching Walrus; July 20 2020 at 07:42:45 AM.

  6. #22826
    Venec's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Europe's Mexico - Poland
    Posts
    7,088
    Then clearly the next riot should be at twitter's server room.

  7. #22827
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    21,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post

    There was an actual, real chance for police reform when the George Floyd protests started. That chance has now evaporated thanks to the extremist twitter-dwelling fringe that has successfully discredited the entire movement with their rhetoric and actions.
    That was always inevitable. I think what we see in modern capitalism is capital 'splitting' revolutionary identities on social lines. These social lines are the result of a fully industrialised cultural output suppressing any ideas of economic solidarity.

    The BLM movement is driven by outrage at conditions rooted in social identity, not economic identity. So you can only produce a revolutionary movement with a social focus. Until you see significant economic outrage in the form of tenancy evictions and foreclosures there won't be much of a revolutionary movement with an economic focus.

    America lived with an enormous amount of social anxiety before it turned to outrage catalysed by the George Floyd murder, now there's a significant economic anxiety which will require a catalyst to become something more real.

    If social conditions act to set a limit on capital's ability to accumulate, capital's universality will require it to treat that limit as a barrier, as Marx wrote in the Grundrisse:

    Quote Originally Posted by Grundrisse: Notebook IV – The Chapter on Capital
    But from the fact that capital posits every such limit as a barrier and hence gets ideally beyond it, it does not by any means follow that it has really overcome it, and, since every such barrier contradicts its character, its production moves in contradictions which are constantly overcome but just as constantly posited.
    We see contemporary capital absorb social movements when they become a barrier, none of the contradictions are overcome, they are just ignored. BLM is a labour movement that doesn't have any internal identity as labour, so it is most easily overcome by capital. The tensions between labour and capital still exist but they are not recognised by labour because the culture industry has been successful in its economic and societal role.
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  8. #22828
    Duckslayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 23, 2017
    Posts
    2,503
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Coutu View Post
    There are more people involved with groups advocating for change than I can remember, but crazy me talking to actual black people about how to improve their lives and not watching bullshit youtube videos that discuss how BLM is now the end of marxism in a disorganized group like BLM. Fuck man, the president of anitfa is gonna be the next to fall to caplitalist corruption at this rate. Lief and Walrus immediately launch into internet retard scenes.
    Calling those who dissent slightly from your message "retards" and being unable to recognize that they support the same fundamental ideas as you suggests to me that BLM is gonna fail hard
    Last edited by Duckslayer; July 20 2020 at 09:49:08 AM.

  9. #22829
    Jack Coutu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 9, 2011
    Location
    marketjacker
    Posts
    1,378
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Coutu View Post
    There are more people involved with groups advocating for change than I can remember, but crazy me talking to actual black people about how to improve their lives and not watching bullshit youtube videos that discuss how BLM is now the end of marxism in a disorganized group like BLM. Fuck man, the president of anitfa is gonna be the next to fall to caplitalist corruption at this rate. Lief and Walrus immediately launch into internet retard scenes.
    Jack, the point is that the movement has been hijacked by interests who are directly supported by capital.

    There was an actual, real chance for police reform when the George Floyd protests started. That chance has now evaporated thanks to the extremist twitter-dwelling fringe that has successfully discredited the entire movement with their rhetoric and actions.

    I also don't appreciate that you think I'm getting my ideology from "bullshit youtube videos", I have always held this ideology ever since the 2008 financial crisis. But whatever, you've constructed an idea of me in your mind to argue against.
    YOu and Lief are saying the same thing in the end, so I'm lumping you in because it's insane to me that people would pretend that movements start and while they may change, they do not decide whether or not capitalist interests become entangled. The frustration with people like you is real from people doing work on the ground. Discounting their work is just what you are doing. to be fair your views (and my socialist views) can be called fringe rhetoric by centrist and conservative americans. I'm unsure what you are speaking of with the people ruining the movement with rheotoric. If you are speaking of defund the police, then you belong with Lief in ignorance land.

    You still sound a lot like most marxist people I've become unineterested in haering from. discoimtomg any change that benefits the opressed as not enough and in service of capital. Imagine being black and fighting and seeing finally some movement happening, becoming motivated, and then just hearing someone say "WELL ACTUALLY BLM IS NOW A CAPITALIST SCAM". It's just insane to discount the people in a disorganized movement because Amazon and the NFL are doing things for good PR.

  10. #22830
    Duckslayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 23, 2017
    Posts
    2,503
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Coutu View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Coutu View Post
    There are more people involved with groups advocating for change than I can remember, but crazy me talking to actual black people about how to improve their lives and not watching bullshit youtube videos that discuss how BLM is now the end of marxism in a disorganized group like BLM. Fuck man, the president of anitfa is gonna be the next to fall to caplitalist corruption at this rate. Lief and Walrus immediately launch into internet retard scenes.
    Jack, the point is that the movement has been hijacked by interests who are directly supported by capital.

    There was an actual, real chance for police reform when the George Floyd protests started. That chance has now evaporated thanks to the extremist twitter-dwelling fringe that has successfully discredited the entire movement with their rhetoric and actions.

    I also don't appreciate that you think I'm getting my ideology from "bullshit youtube videos", I have always held this ideology ever since the 2008 financial crisis. But whatever, you've constructed an idea of me in your mind to argue against.
    YOu and Lief are saying the same thing in the end, so I'm lumping you in because it's insane to me that people would pretend that movements start and while they may change, they do not decide whether or not capitalist interests become entangled. The frustration with people like you is real from people doing work on the ground. Discounting their work is just what you are doing. to be fair your views (and my socialist views) can be called fringe rhetoric by centrist and conservative americans. I'm unsure what you are speaking of with the people ruining the movement with rheotoric. If you are speaking of defund the police, then you belong with Lief in ignorance land.

    You still sound a lot like most marxist people I've become unineterested in haering from. discoimtomg any change that benefits the opressed as not enough and in service of capital. Imagine being black and fighting and seeing finally some movement happening, becoming motivated, and then just hearing someone say "WELL ACTUALLY BLM IS NOW A CAPITALIST SCAM". It's just insane to discount the people in a disorganized movement because Amazon and the NFL are doing things for good PR.
    Ah yes the same NFL that blackballed the kneeling protesters and bound them over with an out of court settlement with a confidentiality agreement. Woke As Fuck. Buy season tickets now!

  11. #22831
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    21,917
    Social change is good, but it isn't going to solve poverty or fix capitalism.
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  12. #22832
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    9,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Coutu View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Coutu View Post
    There are more people involved with groups advocating for change than I can remember, but crazy me talking to actual black people about how to improve their lives and not watching bullshit youtube videos that discuss how BLM is now the end of marxism in a disorganized group like BLM. Fuck man, the president of anitfa is gonna be the next to fall to caplitalist corruption at this rate. Lief and Walrus immediately launch into internet retard scenes.
    Jack, the point is that the movement has been hijacked by interests who are directly supported by capital.

    There was an actual, real chance for police reform when the George Floyd protests started. That chance has now evaporated thanks to the extremist twitter-dwelling fringe that has successfully discredited the entire movement with their rhetoric and actions.

    I also don't appreciate that you think I'm getting my ideology from "bullshit youtube videos", I have always held this ideology ever since the 2008 financial crisis. But whatever, you've constructed an idea of me in your mind to argue against.
    YOu and Lief are saying the same thing in the end, so I'm lumping you in because it's insane to me that people would pretend that movements start and while they may change, they do not decide whether or not capitalist interests become entangled. The frustration with people like you is real from people doing work on the ground. Discounting their work is just what you are doing. to be fair your views (and my socialist views) can be called fringe rhetoric by centrist and conservative americans. I'm unsure what you are speaking of with the people ruining the movement with rheotoric. If you are speaking of defund the police, then you belong with Lief in ignorance land.

    You still sound a lot like most marxist people I've become unineterested in haering from. discoimtomg any change that benefits the opressed as not enough and in service of capital. Imagine being black and fighting and seeing finally some movement happening, becoming motivated, and then just hearing someone say "WELL ACTUALLY BLM IS NOW A CAPITALIST SCAM". It's just insane to discount the people in a disorganized movement because Amazon and the NFL are doing things for good PR.
    You touched on a key point of why this moment is going to produce no meaningful structural change in US society: the lack of leadership and cohesive ideology. All successful social movements or revolutionary organizations have leaderships and cohesive ideologies, and those that don't are easily subverted, redirected, and manipulated. So yes, a movement that actually had leadership could have resisted being hijacked by fringe groups and capitalist interests instead of "having no decision in becoming entangled with capitalist interests".

    The people I'm talking about who are ruining the movement with their rhetoric is the absolute fringe, the kind of people that established CHAZ/CHOP. For some fucking reason, anarchist thought is widespread in the American left and it's activist groups and it's one of the big reasons why they all struggle to accomplish any lasting change. Whether you believe it or not, those people's actions have killed the legitimacy enjoyed by the protesters after the George Floyd protests. The same types of people crippled occupy wall street too.

    I don't "discount any change that benefits the oppressed as not enough and in service of capital". THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE because of the direction the movement has gone, that is what I am saying. Voice actors resigning from their jobs because they aren't the proper skin tone to their character is not a meaningful change. Pulling episodes of golden girls off hulu is not meaningful change. Etc.

    Actual Marxists understand how absolutely fringe they are in the US and their goals are not to fucking overthrow society or something but support incremental reform, unionization, etc. Police reform was literally within sight after George Floyd's murder, and now it's out of reach again.
    Last edited by Approaching Walrus; July 20 2020 at 11:27:54 AM.

  13. #22833
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    9,775

  14. #22834

    Join Date
    August 18, 2014
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Social change is good, but it isn't going to solve poverty or fix capitalism.
    Perhaps social change can help identify if those two issues are mutually exclusive?
    Last edited by Ego Proxy; July 20 2020 at 12:05:19 PM.

  15. #22835
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,839
    Quote Originally Posted by dzajic View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/0...-lives-matter/

    There’s nothing Marxist about Black Lives Matter

    This woke movement, supported by capitalists, is disguising the class divisions that Marxism highlights.

    It has become increasingly common for commentators to describe Black Lives Matter as a ‘Marxist’ movement. Most such characterisations have been pejorative, intended to discredit the organisation. But at the same time, one BLM co-founder was more than comfortable describing herself and her colleagues as ‘trained Marxists’.

    It serves the interests of both critics and supporters of BLM to talk about it as a Marxist outfit. Critics get to dismiss BLM as part of the loony left, and supporters get to believe they are part of something genuinely revolutionary. But are they right?

    Perhaps the most defining characteristic of Marxism is its explanation of class and its role in society. The Communist Manifesto famously claims that, ‘The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles’. In other words, class conflict is the driving force of history. Revolutions happen when societies can no longer contain that conflict.

    Marx said such revolutions can only be successful if oppressed classes become sufficiently unified to be able to outnumber and overcome those in power. Attaining class consciousness, and rejecting the artificial differences imposed upon us by our rulers as a means of keeping us at war with one another, is key to bringing about change.

    Fast-forward to today and many of the so-called Marxists of BLM are virtually devoid of any analysis of class at all.

    One example of this refusal properly to engage with class is the accusation of ‘class reductionism’, levelled against those arguing that class is just as important as race in explaining inequality. Adolph Reed Jr – a black Marxist – was recently deplatformed for his ‘class reductionist’ views on race. Taking the traditional Marxist approach lands you in hot water with activists who live and die by the all-subsuming doctrine of institutional racism.

    In fact, the BLM movement doesn’t only ignore class analysis, it also obscures the reality of class relations. The constant focus on ‘white privilege’, for instance, has come at the expense of any recognition that lots of poor white people suffer from deprivations, police violence and prejudice, too. Racial disparities are a problem. But obsessing over white privilege stands in the way of any real attempt to draw on the common experiences of the white and black working classes, with the aim of building a cross-racial campaign for change. Instead of putting aside our differences, we are encouraged to wallow in them.

    Talk of ‘white fragility’, a term coined by Robin DiAngelo and discussed in her best-selling book of the same name, is an example of this trend. It undermines cross-racial unity by focusing on difference and by insisting that all whites are inherently racist. As Luke Gittos has pointed out on spiked: ‘By fixating on “whiteness” as the root of all the problems facing black Americans, DiAngelo discounts the possibility that solidarity in the face of common problems can be more powerful than racial identity.’ The same is true for BLM more broadly.

    Indeed, how can the workers unite across racial lines if today’s anti-racist movement is right that the lived experiences of black and white people are so totally different? And if white workers are inherently racist, why would black workers want to join with them?

    Modern identity politics wrongly views society as a split between a white ruling class and a non-white mass proletariat. It refuses to engage with the reality that Marx identified – that workers can be equally exploited regardless of their origins, and that the key to progressive change lies in building bridges between hitherto distinct communities rather than in setting them apart. In this regard Black Lives Matter clearly stands in opposition to Marxism.

    Other woke campaigns have similarly been described (or dismissed) as an offshoot of Marxism. Right-wing critics of things like identity politics, political correctness and the trans movement say we are witnessing the rise of ‘Cultural Marxism’. But these movements are often more reactionary than revolutionary. We have only to look at how quick multinational corporations have been to endorse the woke worldview to see how utterly un-radical it is.

    Every big firm from McDonald’s to Apple has doffed its cap to Black Lives Matter. Even members of the royal family – the epitome of inherited power and privilege – have backed BLM. When you have the backing of these sorts of people, you know you are not about to turn the world upside down in favour of workers’ revolution. The fashion today is less for champagne socialism and more for iPhone identitarianism, it seems.

    The ‘Marxist’ appellation is not simply false, though. It is also both counter-productive and dangerous. George Orwell warned about the political implications of using ‘meaningless words’ in his great essay, ‘Politics and the English Language’. Bemoaning the abuse and overuse of the word ‘fascism’, in words that ring truer today than ever, he said that word now had ‘no meaning except insofar as it signifies something not desirable’.

    In recent years, there has been a resurgence of this desire to brand all political opponents as extremists, without much serious consideration of the terminology deployed. Such hollowing-out of language inevitably leads to confusion and misunderstanding. But it also inadvertently eats away at independent thought and expression.

    Orwell said that, rather than pick the words that best and most clearly convey our meaning, many people often choose the easier route of ‘letting the ready-made phrases come crowding in’. If you do this, you allow these phrases to ‘construct your sentences for you’, and even to ‘think your thoughts for you’. Ultimately, this can lead to ‘partially concealing your meaning even from yourself.’

    This is one of the ways we end up with commentators and politicians attacking their enemies by using little-thought-out terms which they cannot ultimately justify. This is how parts of the modern left are able to brand everyone and everything they disagree with as ‘racist’. But it is also how people can use the word ‘Marxist’ in a similar way, in place of proper analysis or critique. If we are fairly to reject accusations of racism made against anyone who does not take the knee for BLM, we must lead by example. We have to make sure that the words we use have meaning, and that we understand what that meaning is.
    Spectacular. It's not really anything new, corporate media has, by focusing all attention on social injustice issues of race and gender, managed to play a damn good divide and conquer.

    Instead of ultra neo liberal capitalism, the one blamed for all the problems of the modern world is "whiteness" and "maleness". And because there are realy and huge issues of systemic racism, misogyny and transphobia it is a position very easy to sell. But it also ensures that the social justice movement will be at best indifferent to the opioid crisis, to the loss of manufacturing jobs in America (and UK, and everywhere else) if not outright hostile since those are problem of racist white people who are by definition the enemy.

    Anyone who has a for a second heard how supportive big financial firms are of BLM should see how BLM has zero actual Marxist threat in it for the capitalist system.
    Wake me up when marxists do something useful for the planet.
    meh

  16. #22836
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Then clearly the next riot should be at twitter's server room.
    Literally, shouting at clouds.
    meh

  17. #22837
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    9,775
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Wake me up when marxists do something useful for the planet.
    The Bolsheviks industrialized the most backwards agrarian state in Europe and put a man in space within 40 years. They also committed barbarities in the name of their ideology. But so did the colonizing powers under capitalism so vOv

  18. #22838
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Wake me up when marxists do something useful for the planet.
    The Bolsheviks industrialized the most backwards agrarian state in Europe and put a man in space within 40 years. They also committed barbarities in the name of their ideology. But so did the colonizing powers under capitalism so vOv
    THey had to kill a lot of their own people to participate in a vain race with capitalism, might be a better way to put that.
    meh

  19. #22839
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    3,766
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Wake me up when marxists do something useful for the planet.
    The Bolsheviks industrialized the most backwards agrarian state in Europe and put a man in space within 40 years. They also committed barbarities in the name of their ideology. But so did the colonizing powers under capitalism so vOv
    THey had to kill a lot of their own people to participate in a vain race with capitalism, might be a better way to put that.
    There wouldn't be many slavic people around today if they hadn't rapidly industrialized

    Erich with the genius history takes...

  20. #22840
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,252
    If the left could unify around a single, cohesive, socialist-progressive platform, they would defeat the right without much effort.

    There are too many flavors of "left", and those flavors hate each other far too much, and refuse to compromise on their preferred version of "left", and so there is no unified powerful left....just 1,952 club level groups of various lefties screaming into the void and letting the right win.

    It's not a big tent. It's 1,952 separate tents, each planning how they'll murder the 1,951 other tents occupants once they take over.

    The right is horrible, but unified.

    The left is by far better, but divided.

    And we get what we get.


Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •