Coming February 6, 2024 . . .
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
Coming February 6, 2024 . . . MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Comments
I was going to comment on the first thread on this book that I can't bear reading anything with the word "hegemony" in the title.I guess because it reminds me of the idiocy of my radical youth.
So your new post finally made me click through. And I went back and checked out the other piece, too.
I like this paragraph from your piece, I think it's spot on:
It is the "interest group" thing in the Democratic party. It is also the problem of the right wing listening only to same memes over and over and over from conservative talk media, and nothing else.
But then I was raised by a rather independent, anti-group father. He didn't even like team sports of any kind. I kind of flinch when people start talking in glowing terms about any "community." It might even be genetic....
Edit to add: one thing I have convinced myself of from my study of American cultural history: an independent anti-community spirit is a very strong factor in this country's culture.Whether genetic or not. Many people would rather "move" before they will "join in"; they moved from the old country to this one, and then they "pioneered" to avoid newly forming groups.
by artappraiser on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 8:39am
The worry about "identity politics" caring about only one thing is largely BS. While fighting against Stop and Frisk in NYC, Reverend Sharpton reached out to the LGBTQ community. Moral Mondays in NC reaches across racial lines. Reverend William Barber is reviving the "Poor People's Marches". focusing on poverty in all communities. Black Lives Matter events draw a diverse crowd. The Women's March had diverse leadership. I think the concept of identity politics where groups didn't care about other issues is a thing of the past. Current activists realize their are multiple problems and try to cooperate. The only ones truly practicing identity politics are on the Right.
Edit to add:
I note that Reverend Sharpton and Reverend Barber fight for justice based on their Christian faith. This occurs despite the attacks on Christianity that come from some on the Left. Are those who attack Christianity promoting "identity politics"?
by rmrd0000 on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 9:49am
My first reaction to reading you here was to say that the annoying insidery 'community' aspect to the Democratic party is just a function of how party politics works. It struck me as inevitably highly tribal in nature. But then I thought of my experiences elsewhere - being close to some old school members of Blair's Downing Street and yet viscerally averse to Corbynites (despite my own politics), being close to far left activists in France and Italy despite my comparative moderate politics, and here in Switzerland being close to centrists and even center right politicians and highly allergic to the more like-minded socialists. The common denominator seems to be the whiff of cultishness that surrounds the groups I avoid. It's hard to gain a solid grasp of, but I tend to avoid people who have their identity somehow too much bound up in their party membership, sometimes to the point where the question of what they think of the party manifesto, say, hardly makes sense. It's almost not their job to think for the hive mind. Just throwing that half-baked thought out there.
by Obey on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 12:37pm
That did it - music break.
by PeraclesPlease on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 1:54pm
Just what I needed!!
by Obey on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 5:09pm
An ironic quote in light of the Democratic primaries: "One byproduct of focusing too much on group identity is being dismissive of potential allies because they were not radical enough." The paradox is that many champions of group identity politics - Madeleine Albright ("special place in hell for women who don't support women"), the HRC, Dr. Julianne Malveaux - opposed Bernie because he was too radical.
by HSG on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 9:51am
Dr. Julianne Malveaux
Malveaux thought that Sanders was trying to define who was a Progressive.
Those who thrown out the "identity politics" crap are going to have to explain how they are going to deal with the mass exodus that will occur when Democrats turn their backs on complaints about mass deportations, police abuse, voter suppression, right to an abortion, etc. If Democrats are going to continue to fight vigorously for the aforementioned issues to prevent the exodus, please define" identity politics".
by rmrd0000 on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 10:34am
Right - Malveaux specifically identified Clinton's moderateness, as opposed to Sanders' more radical vision, as a reason to vote for Clinton.
by HSG on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 11:03am
Malveaux had a broader definition of "Progressive" why is that "identity politics" rather than the narrower definition being labeled "identity politics"?
Why should Democrats who favor opposing injustice, rollover for people who want to place limits on opposition under the banner of "identity politics".
"Identity politics" is a slander used to avoid having to define the term. Malveaux uses a more inclusive definition of "Progressive" but she is charged with the libelous term "identity politics".
by rmrd0000 on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 11:10am
Will Rogers
"Identity politics" was a meme created by the Right and lapped up by some on the Left
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/10/liberals-right-ide...
If you use the term term, you've been duped
by rmrd0000 on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 11:42am
It's disappointing that the only thing you guys seem to have taken from this interesting book review (which doesn't even mention the 2016 election) is ammunition for the same tiresome debate you've been having for nearly two years.
by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 11:45am
Enlighten us.
by rmrd0000 on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 11:51am
I don't think that's his job and maybe above his paygrade. But yeah, maybe enough "tastes great/less filling" rejoinders. There's nothing new under the sun, but no need to rub it in.
by PeraclesPlease on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 11:55am
this interchange reminds me for some reason of this recent WaPo story that elaborates on the meme that herding cats is impossible: they like hopping into boxes
by artappraiser on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 12:03pm
I prefer yarn.
by rmrd0000 on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 12:16pm
by artappraiser on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 12:18pm
I truly wasn't rubbing it in. I wanted to get his perspective.
by rmrd0000 on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 12:06pm
I just meant "make it painfully obvious there's nothing new under the sun"
by PeraclesPlease on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 12:33pm
Yes - highly disappointing debate here. Does nobody have a hot take on the orb?
by Obey on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 12:24pm
i luv it, Obey. Beats everything at the art fairs this month by a mile.
by artappraiser on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 1:26pm
I don't have a lot to add, but I was struck by his perspective on why OWS fell apart--not because it was too disorganized or idealistic but because it was too insular.
Recall how the Republican Party and conservative institutions inserted themselves into the Tea Party protests. Unlike OWS, Tea Party leaders welcomed the support and worked with the GOP in pursuit of common interests. Smuckers seems to be advocating a similar approach for progressive organizers--creating an independent movement but working with the Democratic Party and progressive institutions to build momentum for political change.
by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 12:44pm
PS I don't think that Smuckers is using "group identity" in the sense of identity politics. The insular OWS group he's referring to was defined by ideology and association, not race or gender. For instance, anyone with the taint of corporate or institutional power was excluded.
by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 12:49pm
certainly that happened with OWS! It started with a huge number of people of all walks chiming in all across the country, then slowly disintegrated into only the *correct* kinda anarchist need apply! (took a lot of work to understand all the true rules of the new anarchy! exhausting!)
by artappraiser on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 1:32pm
During OWS, I was doing my daily 3-hour radio show. As I can best recall, I was one of the few, if only, progressive hosts who discussed Occupy Wall Street, participated in protests, and interviewed as many leaders as I could. I specifically remember asking Marisa Holmes (she was one of the protesters who was injured by a cop when he roughly arrested her on or near the Brooklyn Bridge) and Dr. Margaret Flowers, who was involved in a parallel DC protest, about the possibility of working with progressive democrats. They both told me the same thing. They'd love to join forces with well-connected allies but they never saw any. Where were these powerful Democratic friends they asked me?
It's true that I saw Representatives Keith Ellison and Barbara Lee at Occupy McPherson Square, DC. They were walking around talking to some of the occupiers. When I identified myself as a progressive talk show host from California and asked if I could interview them, they both quickly walked away from the park. I chatted with a few of the people to whom the representatives had spoken. I was told they wanted to know what the occupation was about and what the protesters wanted.
My sense then was that the Democratic party had no intention to modify its positions to suit the protesters just as it continues to pay lip service to economic progressives but to comply with the wishes of the rich and powerful.
by HSG on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 5:14pm
If Barbara Lee and Keith Ellison aren't pure enough, I don't know what you want. Cornel West was on Bill Mahrer on Friday. When confronted with the fact that 24 million people may lose health care under Trump, West still could not see voting for Hillary.
by rmrd0000 on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 5:37pm
We were prepared to work with Democrats. With very few exceptions - Barbara Lee is one - they weren't prepared to work with us.
by HSG on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 6:10pm
The idea of cooperation with political parties is not the memory many people are of OWS
edit to add:
https://mobilizingideas.wordpress.com/2016/09/29/bernie-sanders-and-the-...
by rmrd0000 on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 7:15pm
Criticizing OWS for failing to reach out or fostering a sense of insularity betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what the movement was about. It's odd that Smucker makes such a mistake since he was apparently very involved in Occupy. In any case, the group was incredibly open-armed and never evinced the slightest concern about identity. Homeless people, city slickers, country bumpkins, trust fund kids, seniors, middle-aged folks, blacks, whites, Asians, and Latinos all rubbed shoulders and elbows.
During a march I joined from Zuccotti Square to Washington Square, we received a wholly reasonable demand from police officers to remain in one lane on the uptown side of 6th Avenue. Not only were there no recriminating words but as we passed the line of blue shirts, the occupiers as one chanted and pointed to the cops at the appropriate times "we are the 99 percent, YOU are the 99 percent. It was beautiful!
The problems that did Occupy in were not, in my view, a misplaced insistence on purity or a limiting enforcement of an insider-outsider dichotomy. Instead, the various groups were too suspicious of concentrated power to rally behind any leaders - even homegrown ones. Thus, the endless and incredibly boring assemblies where hours were spent in vain attempts to reach consensus and the refusal to try to engage in partisan politics in any systematic way.
by HSG on Mon, 05/22/2017 - 6:06pm
OWS was racially and demographically inclusive, but I don't think that's what he's getting at. In his experience, many of the organizers shunned institutional support they saw as tainted. I didn't spend enough time there to confirm that, but the organizers I interacted with certainly tried to avoid anything corporate-related. For instance, people weren't supposed to use Microsoft products for OWS work.
I suppose we'd have to read Smucker's book for the details, but here is an earlier essay that offers a little more insight into his perspective: http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2012/4/26/1086534/-A-Practical-Guide-to-...
That said, I agree with you that lack of leadership (which was deliberate) was also part of the problem.
by Michael Wolraich on Tue, 05/23/2017 - 9:54am