Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, July 17, 2017

There is a particularly aggressive strand of social justice activism weaving in and out of my Seattle community that has troubled me, silenced my loved ones, and turned away potential allies. I believe there should be openness around the tactics we use and ways our commitments are manifested over time. Beliefs and actions are too often conflated with each other, yet questioning the latter should not renege the former.

As a Cultural Studies scholar, I am interested in the ways that culture does the work of power. What then, is the culture of activism, and in what ways are activists restrained by it? As someone who has spent the last decade recovering from a forced conversion to evangelical Christianity, I'm seeing a disturbing parallel between religion and activism in the presence of dogma.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

doth i infer you now Republican?
take heed and too take heart, goodsir!

#1 | Posted by ichiro at 2017-07-17 09:02 PM | Reply

Coming from a QTPOC this is a shocking admission of, well, how aggressive and dogmatic the whole SJW movement has become:

There is a particularly aggressive strand of social justice activism weaving in and out of my Seattle community that has troubled me, silenced my loved ones, and turned away potential allies. I reject that...I wish for a new societal order that does not revolve around relations of power and domination.

Telling people what to do and how to live out their lives is endemic to dogmatic religion and activism. Punishments for saying/doing/believing the wrong thing include shaming, scolding, calling out, isolating, or eviscerating someone's social standing. Discipline and punishment has been used for all of history to control and destroy people. Why is it being used in movements meant to liberate all of us?

If we are interested in building the mass movements needed to destroy mass oppression, our movements must include people not like us, people with whom we will never fully agree, and people with whom we have conflict. That's a much higher calling than railing at people from a distance and labeling them as wrong.

I want to spend less time antagonizing and more time crafting alternative futures where we don't have to fight each other for resources and care. For an introvert like me, that may look like shifting my activism towards small scale projects and recognizing personal relationships as locations of mutual transformation. It might mean checking in with myself about how I have let my heart grow hard. It may mean admitting that speaking my truth isn't justification for being mean. It means cultivating long-term relationships with those outside my (not that) safe and exclusive community, understanding I will learn so much from them. It means ceasing to "other" people and leave them behind. It means honoring their humanity, in spite of their hurtful political beliefs and violent actions. It means seeing them as individuals, not ideologies or systems. It means acknowledging their agency to act justly. It means inviting them to be with us in love, and pushing through repeated rejection.

The reason that I give the SJW's such a hard time is not that they are wrong, but the means through which they try to enforce their ethos on others, to quote Jeff Spicoli, makes them "as bogus as those other guys."

It's refreshing to see someone who has truly been fighting against a society that is not very accepting of her as a person coming to the realization that change truly comes from within.

#2 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-07-17 09:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#1 yes. Nullify and macktard convinced me.

#3 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-17 10:44 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Those SJW are just speaking their mind. Standing up for their beliefs.
Or is that only allowed if you are Republican?

#4 | Posted by bored at 2017-07-17 10:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Those SJW are just speaking their mind. Standing up for their beliefs.

LOL, while they are "shaming, scolding, calling out, isolating, or eviscerating someone's social standing."

Not my words, but coming from a QTPOC, really telling. It doesn't matter which side of the political spectrum you are on, that is just wrong.

#5 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-07-17 11:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Wow!

Great thread, Bruce.

Progressive politics is simply not a platform for those who want to be left alone to live how they want to live - you have to go toward moderate liberal/moderate conservative/Libertarianism for that.

#6 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-07-17 11:19 PM | Reply

- not that they are wrong, but the means through which they try to enforce their ethos on others

Joining the far right demagogues against social justice, who as you say are wrong, because you don't like the tactics of people who care about social justice is self-defeating.

Talk about the tactics you don't like and suggest others, by all means, but don't join the crazies like some here have and call it "Cultural Marxism".

www.splcenter.org

#7 | Posted by Corky at 2017-07-17 11:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Progressive politics is simply not a platform for those who want to be left alone to live how they want to live"

What is an example of being left alone to live how you want to live?

Clearly not baking cakes, since your business is dependent on the opposite of being left alone; a steady stream of gay and non-gay customers.

Certainly not issuing marriage licenses, where you'd face an onslaught of gays and others hoping to get paperwork out of you.

Who then should shun progressive politics? Hermits, hoarders, and shut-ins?

#8 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-07-17 11:33 PM | Reply

This is a leftist author. Saying the aggressive sjws represent the left is lazy. They are annoying to everyone. The difference is that the left can police themselves meanwhile the right can not.

#9 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-18 12:05 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

This is a leftist author. Saying the aggressive sjws represent the left is lazy.

They don't represent the left. But they do advocate left-wing causes.

They are annoying to everyone.

No. They are annoying to everyone on the right. They are annoying to some on the left - particularly annoying to liberals who abhor their hatred and their methodology. Unfortunately, far too many liberals are silent when it comes to their repugnant caricatures and methodologies.


The difference is that the left can police themselves meanwhile the right can not.

#9 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

Conservative media is way more critical of Republicans than the MSM is of Democrats. This is the rare occasion where tribalism rules - big government advocates excuse and cover for poor behavior in a way that limited-government types can't.

#10 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-07-18 12:15 AM | Reply

Yeah, I especially hate the part when the ones in Portland confront mostly outsider skin heads, KKK, and fascist white power militias. Those people have feelings, too!

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2017-07-18 12:23 AM | Reply

The difference is that the left can police themselves meanwhile the right can not.
#9 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

What are you talking about?

Not a word about Evergreen College, in fact if you are paying attention they are now doubling down.

Never saw a left leaning media type even interview Wienstien, or anyone come down on the students at Evergreen.

No. They are annoying to everyone on the right. They are annoying to some on the left - particularly annoying to liberals who abhor their hatred and their methodology. Unfortunately, far too many liberals are silent when it comes to their repugnant caricatures and methodologies. - JeffJ

Agreed...

#12 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-07-18 12:26 AM | Reply

-Those people have feelings, too!

See? Now Andrea's upset.

#13 | Posted by Corky at 2017-07-18 12:32 AM | Reply

Conservative media is way more critical of Republicans than the MSM is of Democrats.

#10 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2017-07-18 12:15 AM | FLAG:

I don't see it. I think they chastise bipartisanship, increasing division.

Here we see leftist authors arguing against divisionary tactics.

#14 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-18 12:43 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

What are you talking about?
Not a word about Evergreen College

#12 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS AT 2017-07-18 12:26 AM | FLAG:

I am not familiar. This better not be another black French lesbian dance squad story.

#15 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-18 12:44 AM | Reply

Andrea.

Do you have a point about Evergreen?

Out of 4000 students, 200 are causing trouble.

The administration is doing everything they can to stop disruptive behavior.

Meanwhile, students are speaking with their checkbooks and enrollment has fallen drastically.

The school has been known for its boisterous activism since the 70s.

Clearly you've been listening to too much Glenn Beck. He's just trying to sell you survival rations.

www.seattletimes.com

#16 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-18 12:50 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#5 It is a good thing
Pot smokers
Adulterers
Unwed mothers
Religious minorities
Etc.
Never had to experience
"shaming, scolding, calling out, isolating, or eviscerating someone's social standing."

Karma is a bitch snowflake.

#17 | Posted by bored at 2017-07-18 12:53 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

I wholeheartedly agree with the author's position, and we've said it truthfully enough times here that Corky actually bothered to try to head off any further discussion of it by bringing it up early to disparage it: a large faction of the SJW community is employing the same Fascist/Stalinist tactics they claim to be fighting against.

There's an interesting statement in the article that brings up another salient point: the worst of them are probably being paid to do so.

I am interested in the ways that culture does the work of power.

Lost in most media coverage of the larger marches and protests is the often clearly displayed sponsorship by power, or at least by those seeking it. I'm not talking about congressmen. I'm talking about SEIU, the aligned Soros groups (it's a long list), Communist Party USA, Socialist Party USA, ACORN, yada yada yada.. hiring protestors and organizers to go stir up trouble. Google "who paid the protestors" or better, "#CutTheCheck". The thing is...most of the actual protestors have no idea, or at least only an inkling, that they are actually "doing the work of power". They think they're out saving the world for the little man, but they're shock troops for the power brokers looking for a bigger slice of the pie. Do you think the Bolsheviks would have overthrown the Tsar if they had known what Stalin would be like?

#18 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2017-07-18 08:00 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"I'm talking about SEIU, the aligned Soros groups (it's a long list), Communist Party USA, Socialist Party USA, ACORN, yada yada yada.."

You said it.....yada yada yada. What a bunch of garbage. Take it out it stinks. Stalin indeed. Hilarious.

#19 | Posted by danni at 2017-07-18 10:03 AM | Reply

"Conservative media is way more critical of Republicans than the MSM is of Democrats."

Because differences of opinions are allowed among Democrats but Republicans are expected to march lock step with the GOP.

#20 | Posted by danni at 2017-07-18 10:04 AM | Reply

Mustang is spot on did you ever see an interview with some of the protesters? They have no true idea why they are there if you look at it from afar its not unlike any radical party down through history and history will show them for what they are paid stooge.

#21 | Posted by WTFIGO at 2017-07-18 11:11 AM | Reply

#17

The funny thing is, you have no clue that you are making the author's point for her.

Nice lack of reading comprehension (assuming that you even bothered to read the article, which I doubt at this point.)

#22 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-07-18 11:23 AM | Reply

If you don't like being judged, don't judge others. It's the golden rule.

#23 | Posted by bored at 2017-07-18 12:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Because differences of opinions are allowed among Democrats

#20 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2017-07-18 10:04 AM | FLAG:

Was allowed. That ship sailed, and we're in the era of Internet driven party purity contests.

#24 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-07-18 04:37 PM | Reply

Now what would a libertarian know about purity parties, lol...

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-07-18 04:39 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

It's getting bad when they have to break Pelosi out of her dementia long enough to point out how stupid the litmus tests are.

#26 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-07-19 09:35 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable

Drudge Retort