73

In Praise of “Brocialism”

David Lindsay

Corbyn looking cool

Recent events have redefined the political debate, and ongoing events are continuing to redefine it, in terms of economic equality and international peace through the democratic political control of the means to those ends. In the struggle for economic equality, the leading role belongs to the working class, and the leading role within the working class belongs to the trade union and co-operative movements. In the struggle for international peace, the leading role belongs to the working class and to the youth. It is possible to see that latter dimension in the movements around Jeremy Corbyn, Bernie Sanders, and Ron Paul. When seen in that context, then it is only to be expected and applauded that those youth movements are largely male.

The eventual failure of the Ron Paul campaign was in no small measure due to its failure to locate the struggle for international peace within the struggle for economic equality, and vice versa. The Bernie Sanders phenomenon remains constrained by its failure to learn the lesson of Donald Trump’s victory, and of Leave’s victory in Britain: that the workers, and not the liberal bourgeoisie, are now the key swing voters, so that environmental and identity issues are subordinate within that, if they can be, or they are precluded by it, if they cannot be so subordinate.

Enter the Brocialists, if that is what you want to call them, and as they might usefully call themselves. Born in the 1990s or in the twenty-first century, they are hectored by the likes of Harriet Harman, Stella Creasy, Yvette Cooper, Jess Phillips and Laura Pidcock, causing them to wonder, “Well, what the hell did I ever do?” They are stunned at the very existence of all-women shortlists, which are the kind of thing that they have grown up assuming to be illegal, and which have not brought more women into politics, but have simply made it far easier for women to get on by drastically restricting the field. Women now need to be far less accomplished, capable or even promising than men do, and they are routinely wafted into positions for which their male contemporaries would be told that they were far too young.

Those contemporaries fail to see the economically egalitarian gains of the decades since the 1970s. Alongside a collapse in male employment that had in any case largely happened by the time that they came along, the defining experience of their own politics has been to have grown up under Governments, of all three parties, that have harvested young men in wars with a sheer pointlessness that had not been since 1918. Hence their attraction and attachment to a politician who has opposed every single one of those wars.

The very same Governments, of all three parties, have refused as a matter of principle to reindustrialise Britain, have taken pride in presiding over the collapse of parliamentary scrutiny in the House of Commons by ensuring that any and everything has to be nodded through for the sake of school holidays and babies’ bathtimes, have turned fathers into cash machines whom vengeful exes can deny on pain of imprisonment any contact with the children for whom they are rightly still obliged to pay, have empowered women to take men to the cleaners financially after even the briefest of relationships, have dramatically altered the content of arts and humanities courses against male interests (a key element in the prevention or suppression of the radical political action to which mass classical education has always been fundamental), have pumped boys full of Ritalin, have classified young male political engagement and many other normal patterns of male behaviour as autistic spectrum disorders, are now trying to force bare breasts and vaginas into men’s and boys’ communal showers and changing rooms by means of gender self-identification, and have redefined rape as any heterosexual encounter that the female partner chooses to declare to have been so, under cover of anonymity and even decades after the event.

Write it on the doorposts: all of these things have been done by the Governments, of all three parties, whose economic and foreign policies have directly caused the Corbyn phenomenon. Brocialism? Of course it is Brocialism. Not before time


can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

Unlike the Guardian we are NOT funded by Bill & Melinda Gates, or any other NGO or government. So a few coins in our jar to help us keep going are always appreciated.

Our Bitcoin JTR code is: 1JR1whUa3G24wXpDyqMKpieckMGGW2u2VX

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
73 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
BigB
BigB
Nov 23, 2018 3:21 PM

Zizek also condemns Peterson and Pinker’s pseudo-science. According to him, Peterson’s “pseudo-scientific references; he cannot talk about women and marriage without mentioning lobsters, apes or whatever”. 🙂

https://www.rt.com/uk/444717-zizek-jordan-peterson-pinker/

BigB
BigB
Nov 20, 2018 11:59 PM

WD In answer to your criticism, here and below, you seem to be able to discern the ‘creeping totalitarianisms’ that somehow relate me to Peterson, but maybe miss the latent censorship in your own comment. Or maybe you did not notice that you took on an omniscience of your own, answering for anyone and everyone (the readers) who might ever comment here? The indeterminancy of translation distorts, doesn’t it? But let’s not go down that slippery slope fallacy that is becoming ubiquitous when people do not want to engage with a POV. Not every difference of opinion ends in the… Read more »

BigB
BigB
Nov 21, 2018 12:04 AM
Reply to  BigB

This was in reply to wardropper further down. Roll on the Beta roll out!

Eric Blair
Eric Blair
Nov 19, 2018 4:02 AM

Sorry, anyone who thinks Ron Paul stands for economic equality and working class solidarity has a fundamental problem with reality comprehension and can’t be taken seriously. The rest of this embarrassingly bad rant confirms that the author, in addition to being shockingly ignorant of basic political concepts, has a massive chip on his shoulder. Using the bad politics of a few Labour MPs, who happen to be female, to launch into a rant about putting women “back in their place” is pretty cringeworthy stuff.

What on earth possessed OG to run this piece in the first place?

harry stotle
harry stotle
Nov 19, 2018 9:17 AM
Reply to  Eric Blair

“anyone who thinks Ron Paul stands for economic equality and working class solidarity has a fundamental problem with reality comprehension and can’t be taken seriously.” – exactly the same could be said of anyone who believes Harriet Harman, Stella Creasy, Yvette Cooper, or Jess Phillips (to which could be added Liz Kendall and certainly Margaret Hodge) have anything to do with socialism. As I see it they are all part of the same post-Blair legacy which includes more than its fair share of male counterparts (Chuka the centerist, Owen ‘BigPharma’ Smith, Kinnock jnr. Tristram Hunt, etc). Corbyn may have failings… Read more »

Frankly Speaking
Frankly Speaking
Nov 19, 2018 11:06 AM
Reply to  harry stotle

I wish I could give you multiple upvotes Harry, spot on.

milosevic
milosevic
Nov 19, 2018 3:23 PM
Reply to  harry stotle

neoliberals, many who add insult to injury by promoting a ghastly form of identity politics that in the main demonises men

wardropper
wardropper
Nov 20, 2018 12:01 PM
Reply to  Eric Blair

Too much rubbish in both the article and in this comment to be able to take either of them seriously. Ron Paul was, like Bernie Sanders, stopped by the sheer weight of wealth-powered media mendacity, as well as by the Clinton machine. They all had as easy a time in demolishing him as “too old”, “too extreme” etc. etc. as the equivalent machinery in the UK had in painting Corbyn as an anti-semite. Although certainly getting on in years, as a doctor, Paul represented intelligent, humane debate on the crucial issues of our time, and that is what set him… Read more »

wardropper
wardropper
Nov 20, 2018 12:20 PM
Reply to  wardropper

I must add that there was a lot in the second part of Eric Blair’s comment that I DID agree with. My main gripe is with the implication that Ron Paul should have been more of a socialist, when my view is that his intelligence actually cut through party political lines pretty effectively. You don’t have to be a socialist, or any other kind of “ist” in order to have something important to say, after all. Just think of the state we are now in, politically speaking: Would the people vote for Noam Chomsky, Jordan Peterson, or any other highly… Read more »

David Lindsay
David Lindsay
Nov 18, 2018 9:53 PM

Labour was already a party so male in its membership, and especially in its activist base, that it had largely had to be forced to select women as candidates (whereas the mostly female activist base of the Conservative Party overwhelmingly selects men of its own accord), and that it had never placed a woman above a man in a Leadership Election. But now, beyond even that, it is being taken over at the activist level by very young men who have been highly politicised by the effects of deindustrialisation, and by pointless wars that people born since 1990 regard as… Read more »

Antonym
Antonym
Nov 19, 2018 2:14 AM
Reply to  David Lindsay

Why can’t people in the UK form a party called: “Off-Tories” ? The could win easily reading this blog.

Badger Down
Badger Down
Nov 21, 2018 5:12 AM
Reply to  Antonym

Kill them?! I say, that’s a bit extreme!

Thomas Prentice
Thomas Prentice
Nov 18, 2018 4:57 PM

I disagree that environmental issues should be subordinate in this era of Global Heating Climate Emergency and Species Extinction. Petty environmental issues should clearly be subordinate or be eliminated completely from the calculus: like recycling (a big feel-good lie) and light bulbs (why bother saving the power only to have new increased demand like,uh, STREAMING?) Same with identity politics which is vastly different from both Constitutional Rights and Human Rights. Identity politics — the political correctness police and the women-erasing and womens issues-erasing transgender blitzkrieg — should be removed from the calculus. Identity issues that are not clear constititutional issues… Read more »

Mulga Mumblebrain
Mulga Mumblebrain
Nov 18, 2018 8:48 PM

Too late.

Chris
Chris
Nov 18, 2018 9:56 PM

‘Global Heating Climate Emergency’? Yeah right! That would be the one bought to you by the totally discredited IPCC? Look into the long term climate modelling of those scientist excluded from the global warming hoax. The next ice age is overdue. As for FDR – read Diana West, American Betrayal (And M Stanton Evan Blacklisted By History while you are at it). And if you’ve already succumbed to the tsunami of ad hominen hate against her analysis from the usual orthodox suspects, read her rebuttal of these also available in book form.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Mulga Mumblebrain
Nov 19, 2018 9:44 PM
Reply to  Chris

The IPCC is discredited-for downplaying the catastrophe through pressure for ‘consensus’ with rogue states like Sordid Barbaria and Austfailia. The rest is bog standard genocidal denialist garbage, ALWAYS welcome at OffGuardian.

Stonky
Stonky
Nov 18, 2018 3:14 PM

BigB is there any chance that you could teach yourself to write in intelligible English? This, for example: Living systems are emergent from the balanced complementarity and unity of opposition of their binary (sexual) progenitors (Yin and Yang). There is no implied contradistinction; no imposed dualism; no separation from environment within self-generating, self-maintaining (autopoietic) living systems… If you were writing about quantum physics there might be an excuse for your language being impenetrable to ordinary, reasonably intelligent individuals, but you are in fact writing about people and society FFS. When I was at university in the 1970s there was a… Read more »

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Nov 18, 2018 5:44 PM
Reply to  Stonky

Lol. Comprehension of a text should not be that difficult to attain in this web world. You can easily highlight a word and look it up.

In fact you will learn more then the very exact concept expressed in that statement, which may get blurred by none exact ‘simple english’ and no doubt much longer sentence; you learn new words!

English may have most words for the same concept, but many are most apt for the specific context, that is the great thing about a pliable language.

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Nov 19, 2018 1:48 PM
Reply to  DunGroanin

Thanks for the down votes! I tried to explain simply in plain english in a short post.
Well you are asking for it so here is the BigB to serve it to you, enjoy, dottards!

Badger Down
Badger Down
Nov 21, 2018 5:15 AM
Reply to  DunGroanin

“old decaying trees”? What are you corking about?

wardropper
wardropper
Nov 20, 2018 12:44 PM
Reply to  DunGroanin

Most people here are bright enough to be able to look up a word or two. But what we are talking about here is writing language which is so unnecessarily dense that it interrupts the flow of normal comprehension. There are of course many beautiful words in the English language, and many technically apposite ones too, but a comments section is neither the time nor place for a doctoral thesis on words and their meanings. For the reader here, the issues at stake are simply not that complicated. If Shakespeare could manage beautiful language at the same time as getting… Read more »

BigB
BigB
Nov 18, 2018 6:56 PM
Reply to  Stonky

Stonky Thanks for the feedback: suggestion noted. What you might find hard to believe, is that it is my goal. The problem is not me: blame the language. Language dichotomises, personalises, and polarises. It’s something I am acutely aware of. I would quite like to start the dialogue about the communication of communication. The first step of the dialogue – is the dialogue about the dialogue. Words have many more than two meanings. Terms, frames of reference, metaphoric concepts and definitions are all contestable. Language and logic are binary and separational. Binaries are hierarchical. Discourse is conflict based. If you… Read more »

Badger Down
Badger Down
Nov 19, 2018 12:47 AM
Reply to  BigB

You may begin by deleting the word “quite” from your dictionary and spellchecker. It has become completely useless since the Brits mean either 100% (entirely), about 30% (rather, somewhat), or a bit less than that (a little bit). And the poor, confused USAmericans mean either 100% or about 75% (very). Quit “quite”; you KNOW it makes sense.

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Nov 19, 2018 1:53 PM
Reply to  BigB

Like it BB – mansplainin’ (that’ll get ’em jumping)

Frankly Speaking
Frankly Speaking
Nov 18, 2018 2:15 PM

When we see age-old feminists like Greer, who rightly fought for equal rights for women and won, de-platformed we can be sure this is no longer about feminism at all.

Identify politics is extremely divisive and vile. We are all equal but IP takes that away from us. It’s dangerous, neo-Bolshevik, totalitarian, manoeuvres and they must be as forcefully rejected as their propaganda and policies are pushed upon us.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Mulga Mumblebrain
Nov 18, 2018 8:52 PM

Identity Politics is a classic Divide and Rule tactic. The parasite rulers must be chuckling into their Bollinger. To impose a vicious, genocidal, infinitely corrupt thug like Clinton onto the Democrat Party as Presidential nominee, by cheating and fraud and election theft, in the name of female empowerment, worked a treat. It gave the Bosses Trump, one of their own, as Thug-in-Chief.

BigB
BigB
Nov 18, 2018 12:40 PM

I can’t really read this other than a misogynistic retrosexual rant. With a dangerous misanthropic twist: “men will be men again – when Jeremy gets in!”. Please: has the Cult of Corbyn gone mad and absorbed retrograde alt-right emasculated male memes? Apart from conflating real resurgence in international and grassroots politics with an overt misogyny: this rant takes gender politics back to pre-Suffrage days …when women were women: perceived as too stupid to vote, let alone actually be involved in political debate. Now, the surviving bastion of political masculinity has to be dumbed down to accommodate them. I’m a man,… Read more »

milosevic
milosevic
Nov 18, 2018 1:03 PM
Reply to  BigB

Heteronormative misanthropic behaviour patterns are wilfully destructive, but also they entail (as auto-generative) the kind of radicalised feminist response to centuries of de-legitimisation of the Female Archetype. Women need to be noticed and heard.

— radicalised feminist women like Margaret Thatcher and Hillary Clinton, for example.

vexarb
vexarb
Nov 19, 2018 6:48 PM
Reply to  milosevic

@Milosevic; “Women need to be noticed and heard.”

So true. I remember this dialogue from my teenage years:

“Lifeguard!”

“Yes, Miss?”

“That young man has been annoying me all morning”

“But he hasn’t even looked at you”.

“Yes, and its soooo annoying”

Portonchok
Portonchok
Nov 18, 2018 1:57 PM
Reply to  BigB

A misandrist would say that wouldn’t they?

BigB
BigB
Nov 18, 2018 2:45 PM
Reply to  Portonchok

The culturally inherited, some might say inculcated, sexual and gender stereotypes are neither male, female, or any gender in between. They are monstrous anthropomorhisations of sex and gender: that are mutating and materialising of cultural entropy. Read Judith Butler on the iteration of norms and power affecting gender. Is Hillary or Thatcher a feminist, or a vicious distortion of femininity? Are those that follow in their career footsteps advancing feminist principles: or conforming to the structural masculinisation and distortion of feminist principles? What is a misandrist: a self-hating male? A lover of an androgynous principle who transcends their binary prison?… Read more »

Portonchock
Portonchock
Nov 18, 2018 2:57 PM
Reply to  BigB

Misandry is the hatred of, contempt for, or prejudice against men or boys. Have you looked in your mirror?

BigB
BigB
Nov 18, 2018 3:29 PM
Reply to  Portonchock

Oh well, let’s not talk of principles or archetypes, or raise any issues that this one sided distortion of an article avoids. There are real issues of the dismorphism, of not just gender, but of humanity, that capitalistic cultural hegemony raises. Feel threatened as a male as capitalism tries to commoditise feminism to re-invent itself? We’ll ignore that, and keep it at a base level …one you can understand.

Pass me a red pill.

BigB
BigB
Nov 18, 2018 7:02 PM
Reply to  BigB

Anyway, I’m not that clever. What’s ‘dismorphism’? I dunno! 😀

milosevic
milosevic
Nov 19, 2018 2:20 PM
Reply to  BigB

Pass me a red pill.

Congratulations on the occasion of your coming out, as a neoliberal Identity Politics disinfo shill.

Tom
Tom
Nov 18, 2018 3:38 PM
Reply to  BigB

Someone who hates men.

Baron
Baron
Nov 18, 2018 5:02 PM
Reply to  BigB

For BigB:

Que?

John2o2o
John2o2o
Nov 18, 2018 10:03 PM
Reply to  BigB

BigB, your comment is longer than the article. And I don’t have a dictionary to hand to look up every language brain twister that you have peppered your comment with. What in God’s name is “intra-gender fracture”? (Seriously, I really don’t want to know).

And furthermore, your comment is not nearly as amusing as the article.

As for myself, I liked it. If you have no sense of humour, well that’s your problem.

(BTW, I rarely revisit my comments so no reply required.)

Badger Down
Badger Down
Nov 21, 2018 5:23 AM
Reply to  John2o2o

The reiteration of Norm Chompsky and powder affecting generic medicine. Take the green pill, for all I dare. Dysmorphism or dimorphism: that is the question; and it aint someone who hates men.

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Nov 18, 2018 11:51 AM

The female politicians identified are as much ‘boys’ in the bots club they service. They are just as lethal and work for the same bankers and military industrialists. Most are friends of Israel! How can we trust our politicians who proudly proclaim their unqualified support of a foreign nation? Some even have dual citizenships! Hillary the neocon con artist most high profile of all. Hespel the hands-on waterboarding torturer is not the only woman in the highest seats of power and oppression – lets not forget our SIS sisters – Stella RIMMINGton, lizzie MANningham-BULLer, cressida DICK – onviously they had… Read more »

harry stotle
harry stotle
Nov 18, 2018 10:12 AM

I know its not a binary choice but socialism has delivered far more than 4th wave feminists. One of the reasons for Britains low paid, low skill economy is a direct consequence of the endless class war against trade unions so that membership has fallen (as manufacturing collapsed) from 70% of the workforce during the ’70’s to around 20% today. Harriet Harman, Stella Creasy, Yvette Cooper, and Jess Phillips are all strongly pro-censorship and mostly concerned about pay parity for women in elite professions (I’m prepared to give Laura Pidcock the benefit of the doubt). In particular when Jess Phillips… Read more »

BigB
BigB
Nov 18, 2018 2:06 PM
Reply to  harry stotle

Harry Peterson addresses gender myths by saying identity politics is rooted in Marxism? Or is it in the myth of cultural Marxism that Peterson, Pinker, Hicks counterfeit to parse Marxism from the political and academic debate? In favour of laissez-faire capitalism (and peace-bombing democracy)? After all, equality and free speech are authoritarian traits that end in the Gulag. If you acquire his pretzel-logic. Peterson’s cod-psychologism and lobster-hierarchism (we need to live under hierarchical rule because we were related to lobsters 23mn years ago, or so) will lead us into an uber-competitive-assertion of capitalism over humanity. His psychological model is based… Read more »

Frankly Speaking
Frankly Speaking
Nov 18, 2018 2:21 PM
Reply to  BigB

Your fundamental mistake, or is it sleight of hand, is to claim that identity politics is anything to do with equality; it’s not. My other post above elaborates a bit further on my viewpoint.

BigB
BigB
Nov 18, 2018 3:11 PM

What, this comment? “Identify politics is extremely divisive and vile. We are all equal but IP takes that away from us. It’s dangerous, neo-Bolshevik, totalitarian, manoeuvres and they must be as forcefully rejected as their propaganda and policies are pushed upon us.” My response is on point. Peterson’s POV is a gross distortion and manipulation of free speech rights and IP into and anti-Marxist defence of the status quo ante. Lobsters = hierarchy because they have serotonin in their CNS. So does every other creature, it is a near universal neuro-transmitter. When a ‘psychologist’ does not know this, and talks… Read more »

Portonchok
Portonchok
Nov 18, 2018 5:04 PM
Reply to  BigB

“Peterson’s POV is a gross distortion and manipulation of free speech rights”

Now I understand you even better, you and your neo-Bolsheviks believe that you are the bestowers of our rights, and that you are the arbiters of our conformance to them. Well done for outing yourself. Now scuttle off back to the Ministry Of Truth.

BigB
BigB
Nov 18, 2018 8:13 PM
Reply to  Portonchok

LOL! No one bestows rights, it’s a cruel bastardisation of our humanity to think that rights and privileges are bestowable, or even alienable. Inflicted conformance (including self-censoring inflicted conformance) to illegitimate norms and rules is the first step to a dictatorship. One that is well formed as we speak. Why do you think that humanity has remained infantalised for so long? Hierarchical domination by a perverse autocratic psychologism such as Peterson’s, perhaps? Weaning us off the authoritarian personalities and debased voluntary servitude we have become culturally habituated to may take a while …now I have outed myself as a wannabe… Read more »

harry stotle
harry stotle
Nov 18, 2018 3:23 PM
Reply to  BigB

Hi BB – I was not offering Peterson as an exemplar of an idealised world view just as a means of setting out a few interesting arguments which challenge the anti-male narratives inherent in 4th wave feminism. As usual I actually agree with a great deal of what you say but if I had to quibble I would argue that it will be a cold day in hell before the sort of idealism you describe translates into a political system that comes remotely close to sharing the same ideals. I think the broad point in the OP stands: i.e. social… Read more »

BigB
BigB
Nov 19, 2018 9:48 AM
Reply to  harry stotle

Well Harry, I live for that cold day in hell. Just because I happen to be reading Arne Naess: first rule of ecosophical fight club – anything can happen. We form our views from the current cultural milieu, but we should not be limited to current cultural restraints. That way something unique may happen if we reach a bifurcation point. I totally agree about communitarian activism: only, as you ask, where has it gone? Thatcher did for a lot of it, bringing in a cult of individualism on a wave of North Sea Oil. But what has happened now that… Read more »

harry stotle
harry stotle
Nov 19, 2018 10:11 AM
Reply to  BigB

Outstanding BB – love this post – thanks for putting it so beautifully.

Not even Stonky can moan about the language in this one!

wardropper
wardropper
Nov 20, 2018 12:54 PM
Reply to  BigB

I think an honest overview of Peterson’s politics would show that you have more in common with him than you think, BigB. I am certain that he understands very well how “capitalism is a creeping totalitarianism”, as you aptly put it. But that doesn’t mean that creeping totalitarianism is not also to be found elsewhere.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Mulga Mumblebrain
Nov 18, 2018 8:57 PM
Reply to  harry stotle

‘DESTROYS’-the vicious thug lingo is such a giveaway.

David Lindsay
David Lindsay
Nov 18, 2018 10:01 PM
Reply to  harry stotle

Jordan Peterson is a children’s entertainer.

harry stotle
harry stotle
Nov 18, 2018 10:46 PM
Reply to  David Lindsay

At least on Off-G Peterson ad hominems fall short of the kind of hominems one usually reads BTL at the Graun (including tedious references to the alt-right) – but its still a poor show if you can’t actually engage with any of the substantive arguments being made. I assume not everyone can be arsed to watch the clip – fair enough the first 4 issues discussed are; Is it Ok to criminalise jokes if they are made in bad taste. (no according to the childrens entertainer) Should Tommy Robinson be in jail (for disrupting the sex crimes trial) – no… Read more »

BigB
BigB
Nov 18, 2018 11:18 PM
Reply to  harry stotle

Serious question, Harry: did you ‘copy URL at current time’? Because what I watched was teed up about two thirds through. Hence I responded accordingly. Modern feminism isn’t feminism: it’s capitalism …or a capitalist recuperation of feminism. A real psychologist should ascertain that, unless he wanted to denigrate radical cultural Marxism …and exonerate capitalism. Peterson has just such an agenda. I’ll watch the full thing tomorrow: but yes, the patriarchy trope really does stand up …as an archetypal principle. Actual women and actual men make no difference to the vicious archetypal masculinity of capitalism. Peterson trivialises the externalised motifs in… Read more »

harry stotle
harry stotle
Nov 19, 2018 9:30 AM
Reply to  BigB

We are slightly at cross-purposes here BB – I am not promoting Peterson’s world view rather linking to a short clip to illustrate the mess we have got ourselves into when gender conflict is analysed by the intelligentsia (because Peterson, despite certain failing is not afraid to speak out). In my opinion feminism was pretty much on par with socialism as a framework for social good but increasingly the feminist movement has alienated women and men alike because of the narrow focus on working conditions for women across the elite professions, and a counter productive obession with identity politics. The… Read more »

milosevic
milosevic
Nov 19, 2018 2:54 PM
Reply to  harry stotle

I linked to the clip more because of the critique of modern feminism but obviously the mere mention of the name is a red flag for some commentators.

You might have done better to link to the original interview, rather than some right-wing troll’s edited version of it.

wardropper
wardropper
Nov 20, 2018 12:55 PM
Reply to  David Lindsay

Well that’s some child he’s trying to entertain…

wardropper
wardropper
Nov 20, 2018 12:57 PM
Reply to  David Lindsay

Plato was one too, David.

Badger Down
Badger Down
Nov 19, 2018 1:13 AM
Reply to  harry stotle

The man in the video repeatedly interrupts the woman.

Fair dinkum
Fair dinkum
Nov 18, 2018 10:01 AM

The pendulum had swung way too far for a long, long time.
It’s gonna take a while to find equilibrium.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Mulga Mumblebrain
Nov 18, 2018 9:00 PM
Reply to  Fair dinkum

The ‘equilibrium’ of the grave. Who in their right mind foresees any human future after the next few decades, perhaps mere years? Evil is on the rampage everywhere, as the ecological Holocaust rapidly intensifies.

Savorywill
Savorywill
Nov 18, 2018 6:14 AM

Interesting post. Took me a while to figure out what “brocialism” was, though, at first. Then, I got it. “Bro”, meaning brothers, or men! It is strange how gender identity has become so strongly politicized, but I suspect that perhaps it is a way of population control (not that it is necessarily needed). But, men do need to be more sensitive, that is a given, and less aggressive in their assertiveness in expressing sexuality. However, I still don’t understand how a woman can rape a man, something I have heard come up. A man needs to be aroused to be… Read more »

Badger Down
Badger Down
Nov 18, 2018 11:08 AM
Reply to  Savorywill

You seem to be saying that it’s impossible for a man to have a hard-on and at the same time not want to have sex with a particular woman. I disagree.

There’s another way for a woman to rape a man. Male homosexual rape seems to be an increasing problem in the USA. Is it possible that some women are taking a leaf out of the homos’ book?

Savorywill
Savorywill
Nov 18, 2018 11:52 AM
Reply to  Badger Down

It may not be impossible but it is not that common, I suspect. I used to have some friends in Australia (long ago) who were ex-army guys and extremely homophobic. I reminded them that when you masturbate (they were male), you are actually having sex with a man, as a man (yourself). They replied, but it depends on what you are thinking about, if they are thinking about a woman when masturbating, then that is not homosexual. But, I said, a man is still having sex with a man, right? Anyway, of course, this conversation went nowhere. However, you state… Read more »

Thomas Prentice
Thomas Prentice
Nov 18, 2018 5:05 PM
Reply to  Badger Down

Source for male homosexual rape an increasing problem (only) in the USA? Source, si vous plait?

milosevic
milosevic
Nov 18, 2018 1:11 PM
Reply to  Savorywill

I still don’t understand how a woman can rape a man, something I have heard come up.

Perhaps it’s similar to the feminist-certified process whereby a man can rape a woman who believes herself to be consenting at the time, and only later comes to understand that she hadn’t really consented after all, and retrospectively refuses.

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Nov 18, 2018 1:43 PM
Reply to  Savorywill

You are naive, male rape exists; seduction exists; getting pissed up and waking up in a ‘wouldn’t have touched with a barge pole’ exists.

Oh and as for hard ons – you can buy any number of pills – including from vending machines!

Seamus Padraig
Seamus Padraig
Nov 18, 2018 7:55 PM
Reply to  Savorywill

My fave definition of ‘brocialism’ is to be found at the Urban Dictionary:

Brocialism is a brocial and broconomic system characterized by brocial ownership of the means of broduction and co-operative management of the broconomy as well as a brolitical theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system. “Brocial ownership” may refer to cooperative enterprises (ragers, keggers, hospital visits, etc), common ownership (brotein powder, pizza, weights), or any combinajtion of these. There are many varieties of brocialism and there is no single definition encapsulating the boundlessness nature of brociety.

vexarb
vexarb
Nov 18, 2018 5:59 AM

“The eventual failure of the Ron Paul campaign was in no small measure due to its failure to locate the struggle for international peace within the struggle for economic equality, and vice versa. The Bernie Sanders phenomenon remains constrained by its failure to learn the lesson of Donald Trump’s victory, and of Leave’s victory in Britain: that the workers, and not the liberal bourgeoisie, are now the key swing voters…..” Good one.Up the workers! That’s why I posted about Dr.Assad talking to Trade Unions. Although Syrian Baath is the only explicitly Socialist Party among the Allies, the victory of Syria,… Read more »

Starac
Starac
Nov 18, 2018 5:27 AM

There are two points which should be viewed here from separate vantage points.
One, structure of our society, what we want from it, purpose, goals, responsibility, efficiency…
Two, nature and natural behaviour of a male and female of our species, adaptation of us to live in the group, identification of differences and reasons for it, as well as equalities… in respectful manner…
Once when we have clear picture of both of them, he will be ready for discussion, ready for progress.
Before that, it is just noise, mess, chaos, often deliberately created to draw us into bickering, mud throwing.

Badger Down
Badger Down
Nov 18, 2018 5:00 AM

“it is only to be […] applauded that those youth movements are largely male”
I wonder why he said that.

Blackie
Blackie
Nov 18, 2018 9:25 AM
Reply to  Badger Down

Probably because he, like many of us, feels that males have been emasculated for far too long by an increasingly aggressive feminist propaganda.

Badger Down
Badger Down
Nov 21, 2018 5:29 AM
Reply to  Blackie

emasculated ! That is SO antisemitic!