Political correctness
- This topic has 14 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
He's got a point except that the idiots he's criticising are not "cultural Marxists" as Marx himself was a staunch defender of free speech and opponent of all censorship. David Aaronovitch in a much more temperate and better argued article in last week's Times called them "soft Stalinists":http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4604877.eceHe gave as one example of these people at work:
Quote:A few weeks ago an ex-Muslim called Maryam Namazie was, for a while, prescribed by Warwick University Students Union. Namazie is a very brave and sometimes abrasive Marxist who does not care much for religion — the religion she knows best being Islam. The student union justified its decision by referring to a "duty of care to conduct a risk assessment for each speaker who wishes to come to campus" …. That risk assessment, having been taken in articles written by Namazie, concluded that "she is highly inflammatory, and could incite hatred on the campus." What would be inflamed, who incited and to what was never specified. But the image … was invoked of students made to feel subjectively uncomfortable to the point of feeling somehow threatened by people just talking.The idiots, with their self-arrogated "duty" to conduct a "risk assessment" of speakers, who tried to ban her were later, quite rightly, made to back down. Aaronovitch went on to point out:
Quote:The appeal to the subjective — to an experience that cannot by definition be questioned (if you say you feel something, who can possibly contradict you?) is a gift to the political authoritarian. All he or she has to do is to invoke the requisite feeling among a section of the masses in order to justify the proscription.He concluded:
Quote:Even the original “no platform for fascists” was wrong, as I realised a few years later. But because it seemed to require objective criteria it was far less damaging than what, routinely, is going on now.Good stuff. The sort of “political correctness” he is criticising is dangerous. We socialists should denounce it and not leave this to ranting, rightwing American professors..
Quote:We socialists should denounce it and not leave this to ranting, rightwing American professors.Can I say that this is what I have previously proposedhttp://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/atheist-banned-criticising-islamic-faith
Quote:Another of my suggestions for a press release by ourselves on our attitude towards religion. I know some say that the muslim apostates are the best suited to tackle this but i think this goes beyond their remit…It is a denial of political freedoms in supposedly a centre of 'intellectual' debate and we ourselves could easily be the next victims to have our free speech curtailed. …Perhaps we could invite her to give a talk at HO as a sign of solidarity…When "self-censorship" of PC arises we should respond. I think there is a critical reappraisal of No Platform For Fascists from bits and pieces i have read, eg
Quote:The basic fact is that ‘No platform for fascists’ and ritual confrontation as a tactic clearly does not work.Aaronvitch himself being a former hardline Stalinist. He still supports war but the other side of the same coin.
Actually it is not just a question of reintroducing the old blasphemy laws by the back door and extending them to other religions. It's more insidious and dangerous than that. It's an attempt to suppress any criticism deemed by some self-appointed censors to make some people feel offended. Here's the other example given by Aaronovitch:
Quote:Just under a year ago a student anti-abortion group booked a room at Christ Church in Oxford and invited two male journalists to "debate" the issue. A college student leader thought that it was not just rum, but somehow inadmissible, to have two blokes debating an issue of importance to women. Yet the plea to the college to cancel (i.e. ban) the meeting was couched in terms of the "security concerns, both physical and mental, of Christ Church students". When the college authorities caved before this demand they were praised for sending "a strong message that the welfare and safety of our students is more important than an outside group's access to use our space".He also mentioned the ban Cardiff University imposed on Germaine Greer speaking because of her views on transgender people.Now it's started where will it stop? Us being banned for expressing anti-patriotic views which offend patriots? It's a threat to freedom of speech generally. The ex-RCPers behind Spiked are quite good on this. The Weekly Worker lot take a similar position but are not so good.
On Revleft recently some Trots wanted me banned for being a homophobe for citing the following; Today, LGBT citizens have most of the same legal rights as non-LGBT citizens and the UKprovides one of the highest degrees of liberty in the world for its LGBT communities. In ILGA-Europe's 2015 review of LGBTI rights, the UKreceived the highest score in Europe, with 86% progress toward "respect of human rights and full equality" for LGBT people and 92% in Scotlandalone.[2]Recent polls have indicated that a majority of British people support same-sex marriage[3]and 76% of the UK viewed that homosexuality should be accepted by society, one of the highest in the world.[4]Additionally, the UKcurrently holds the world record for having the most LGBTI people in parliament with 27 LGBTI MPs elected at the 2015 election. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_United_Kingdom The context was, I seem to remember, the sensible capitalist class realising that all this stuff is of no interest to them and even gets in the way of things as gender orientation etc does not affect exploitability. The company I work for is owned by the ever pragmatic Japanese capitalist class and they are mad on it. We all have to go on regular training courses to teach us not to be horrid to our fellow workers of different gender orientation ‘colour’ etc etc as it is not very nice, gets in the way of the team co-operative spirit and these people can be very clever and talented. It is amazingly currently topical as today, I tell no lie, we all got another email/ computer refresher course to complete; which ‘only’ takes 15 minutes to complete. Like that one in the ‘Big Bang Theory’ TV programme that Sheldon Cooper had to do. I thought that was a good episode On the last group training session there was about 30 of us, mostly grunts, even most of the middle management are cultural proles by origin (it probably helps in that environment- the workers don’t like toffs) and we had to split up into teams to do a picture quiz on famous people who weren’t ‘normal’. The team I was in won because we were well balanced with football fans and Hayley Anne Cropper coronation street watchers ( although I knew that one) and me who got the hard ones like deaf Beethoven and Alan Turing ( I think the woman who was running it was a bit pissed off that someone got that one). The factory I have worked in is full of ‘classic proletarians’ located in Bernard Manning country and I have seen a massive change in attitudes over the last 20 years. I don’t think it is just a case of the introduction of formal disciplinary procedures. They are not great though I think on the disabled and other stuff that can interfere with things. We have some strict QC Muslims in Manchester and Bradford site who are supposed to taste the product (fruit juice) as part of their job. It is pleasantly surprising how ordinary working class bods try to accommodate ‘them’ by agreeing to switch shifts during Ramadan etc. Although you would think people would like to swop and be taken off the 10-6 night shift some of them like the money. Although I was told off recently by a longstanding Trot friend for being a ‘chauvinist’ for being horrid to German intellectuals on Libcom.
Although ZeroHedge source seems to be right-wing, there certainly seems to be a trend at the moment for suppressing free speech especially in universities
Quote:Tensions at Yale University hit a boiling point yesterday after an email about Halloween costumes created a week-long controversy on campus. Students called for the resignation of Associate Master of Silliman College Erika Christakis after she responded to an email from the school’s Intercultural Affairs Council asking students to be thoughtful about the cultural implications of their Halloween costumes. According to The Washington Post, students are also calling for the resignation of her husband, Master of Silliman College, Nicholas Christakis, who defended her statement. FIRE President and CEO Greg Lukianoff recorded video of students confronting Nicholas Christakis yesterday in the courtyard of the Silliman College dormitory complex at Yale. Lukianoff was on Yale’s campus to speak at a conference on issues related to free speech in higher education.https://www.thefire.org/yale-students-demand-resignations-from-faculty-members-over-halloween-email/However any progressive group hosting public events ought to be trying to create a safer space where abuse, intellectual bullying or belittling or unrelated prejudice is not enabled with the effect of discouraging participation.I'm not so sure about a slippery slope argument against safer spaces leading to censorship, you might as well argue in favour of safers spaces by saying "Comrade Bala's" "Workers Institute" was the result of no safer spaces policy.
Two threads collide.http://www.independent.co.uk/student/news/university-college-london-union-officer-asad-khan-bans-macer-gifford-from-giving-students-isis-a6722431.html
Quote:Head of the Kurdish Society at University College London (UCL), Kavar Kurda, issued a statement online saying he was ‘angered’ and ‘deeply offended and disgusted’ after University College London Union’s (UCLU) activities and events officer, Asad Khan, blocked Macer Gifford from speaking at an event which was being organised by Kurda.Things sound bad both in the US and here. Ironic that so-called "safe spaces" should have resulted in the growth of intolerance or been a cover for it. Best to leave this policy well alone.
It's not a question of "more likely" they *already have* been used as a pretext against free speech…
Looks like a good article opposing this dangerous and disturbing nonsense but here's a link to it which works (I think):http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/Don't know why Robbo's doesn't (at least not for me)
That link didn't work but this is probably the article you meant…http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/greg-lukianoffs-story/399359/
Russian State, student union tinpot censors, same struggle. Someone in Russia risks a year in prison for offending the sensibilities of christians by saying "there is no god":http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35715325Where will it end if these student activists go in for politics?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.