Working on the principle that it is better to light one candle that to support the darkness, I would like to share this statement by the ACTU which IMHO represents something like the sort of position that old-fashioned universalist leftists ought to support.
Yup. The whole thing is unimaginably dismaying. The nephew of an academic I know was killed in the initial attack. I don't want anyone to be killed in such a way. It's just heartbreaking.
I disagree strongly with this one too. First, it is just irrelevant to the ACTU, far better that they say nothing at all.
More substantively, but relatedly, calling for a ceasefire really just looks like antisemitism. Why should Israel consider a ceasefire now, when their people are still held hostage and the savages that just perpetrated one of the most horrific attacks of the last few decades are still free? By this logic, if I ever become PM and abolish FWA and make public sector unions illegal (sorry dear host, that includes the NTEU unless you can convince me otherwise), the ACTU should respect a truce and not strike.
Secondarily, why should the ACTU call on Israel to implement a ceasefire at all? Was it not important for Turkey to stop bombing Syrian civilians? Why is Azerbaijani ethnic cleansing somehow OK? What did the Houthis do, they are literally also Iran proxies, but somehow disposable ones? The Ouighurs are even muslim, and a bit dark (relative to Han at least), and if you think they are dark, you should see the Chechens!
In all, as in every single one, of these cases which have happened or continue to happen under exactly the same leadership of the ACTU, considerably more people have died. One could go further and consider the Yazhidi, the Dinka, Sahrawi.
Not one of those words has any hits on the ACTU website though.
Yes, as I say - I think it's better to say nothing. There's this idea that *everything* is political and you must express opinions on everything. Sometimes, I think it's better to hold your peace.
The NTEU national leadership has put out this statement which in my view is not as good as the ACTU statement but is certainly better than the University of Melbourne Branch statement.
In relation to footnote one, I have certainly encountered individuals in left-wing circles who display the Dark Triad characteristics. Fortunately they are not numerous but, even such few as they are, they succeed in causing a lot of trouble.
US teacher here with a similar working class pro-union heritage who's been furious at the left wing takeover of the teachers unions for several years now. Problem is, older women have effectively had our tongues cut out (an ancient practice in a new guise) by social shaming and cancelation. I imagine explaining this to my grandmother who didn't get the vote as a woman until she was in her 30s and who worked in a factory her whole life so we could have it better: "But Granny we can't say anything because they will call us Karens or TERFs!" Granny's response would be unprintable, I know, and I am ashamed. I want to push back in a collective and effective way, but the leftist zealots have us in a terrible bind. Women risk losing their teen or adult children who often cancel them as "toxic" for stepping out of line or causing their family grief by being associated with them. Not to mention loss of friends, career, livelihood and home. I live not far from where the Salem witch trials took place and the echoes of hysterical conformity are unmistakable. Thank you for bringing these issues forward. May we find our voices again somehow.
Seriously - I keep thinking - have these people never read 'The Crucible'? It is terrifying how many people don't seem to recognise the dangerous dynamics at play here...
Oct 27, 2023·edited Oct 27, 2023Liked by Katy Barnett
I can't believe you included footnote one. It would be more interesting to see if belief in the contemporary version of social justice was compatible with healthy personality traits. I am going to go out on a limb here and say that recent evidence suggests strongly otherwise.
I don't think you're going out on a limb - severely personality disordered individuals seem to be running the show right now. I went and found those articles because I wanted to know whether there was any empirical evidence for my hunch that they cloaked their behaviour in social justice (< spot the academic who will research just about anything if she gets a bee in her bonnet). Turns out - yes.
One thing I recall is that two activists I came across at uni had been bullies at school (in my and my sister's year respectively). It was really that which made me think - hang on - they are just bullying in a socially acceptable way now, able to say that they are "good." One of them made the comment which made the scales fall from my eyes: "I don't know any Aboriginal people, but what I think should happen is..."
I was so gobsmacked I couldn't speak. The reason I was involved with the cause was because I'd spoken to all my Indigenous students and gotten their views. How else was I to know what they wanted me to campaign for? It would be patronising and potentially really dangerous to think that I knew what was right for them without speaking to them. They were not activist types either - they were grass roots types - their view of activists in their community also really shaped my views. "They say they're helping us, but they make everything worse," said one student, mentioning a prominent activist and detailing how this person had screwed up his community.
Yes those utterly toxic people exist, they are a strong argument against free university and non-work-linked welfare!
Most activists I know however are "good" (maybe I mean "nice" or "kind"?) people, they just have very broken models of the world.
I grew up with (and still have!) a very diverse group of friends which I think is a big element of what makes me very sceptical of any plan to help other people, since too often those other people were my friends.
You and I are very similar, then. I've got a very diverse group of friends - politics, religion, class, ethnicity, sexuality, you name it - and I always have had, since I was very young. This has taught me that I can't mistake my preferences for the preferences of others. I think also that being disabled has been a reality check. I can't do anything. That's fine. But I am wary of schemes which purport to allow everyone to do what they want, be what they want.
I also agree with you that most activists are nice and kind and really mean well. I meant well when I got involved, and I was very earnest about it. I am now a lot more cynical. In retrospect, I don't know that I did much good. I did good by helping and educating my Aboriginal students and giving them skills to argue what they needed.
One of my Indigenous students died in 2021. I taught her back in 1997. I kept in touch with her over all those years, and I still cry when I think of her. I couldn't see her because we were in lockdown. She used to call me "darling girl". She was convinced I had Aboriginal ancestry, and that it must be from a people close to her own. As it turns out, she was right. When she died, I was the only person the police could find at first who knew her well. She'd always believed the ancestors sent me to look after her. The policeman said, "Maybe they did." I think that's more important - to be there to direct the police to her family.
That's a very sweet story! And yes "activism" that involves spending time with people and helping them by giving them things they want (skills, administrative help, companionship, food, whatever) is a very different beast to the performative shite that most "activists" seem to massively prefer.
Working on the principle that it is better to light one candle that to support the darkness, I would like to share this statement by the ACTU which IMHO represents something like the sort of position that old-fashioned universalist leftists ought to support.
https://beta.actu.org.au/media-release/actu-calls-for-an-urgent-ceasefire-in-israel-and-palestine/
Yup. The whole thing is unimaginably dismaying. The nephew of an academic I know was killed in the initial attack. I don't want anyone to be killed in such a way. It's just heartbreaking.
Oh no, now after I read that statement I'm crying. Yes, that is the kind of statement I would have supported.
I disagree strongly with this one too. First, it is just irrelevant to the ACTU, far better that they say nothing at all.
More substantively, but relatedly, calling for a ceasefire really just looks like antisemitism. Why should Israel consider a ceasefire now, when their people are still held hostage and the savages that just perpetrated one of the most horrific attacks of the last few decades are still free? By this logic, if I ever become PM and abolish FWA and make public sector unions illegal (sorry dear host, that includes the NTEU unless you can convince me otherwise), the ACTU should respect a truce and not strike.
Secondarily, why should the ACTU call on Israel to implement a ceasefire at all? Was it not important for Turkey to stop bombing Syrian civilians? Why is Azerbaijani ethnic cleansing somehow OK? What did the Houthis do, they are literally also Iran proxies, but somehow disposable ones? The Ouighurs are even muslim, and a bit dark (relative to Han at least), and if you think they are dark, you should see the Chechens!
In all, as in every single one, of these cases which have happened or continue to happen under exactly the same leadership of the ACTU, considerably more people have died. One could go further and consider the Yazhidi, the Dinka, Sahrawi.
Not one of those words has any hits on the ACTU website though.
Yes, as I say - I think it's better to say nothing. There's this idea that *everything* is political and you must express opinions on everything. Sometimes, I think it's better to hold your peace.
The NTEU national leadership has put out this statement which in my view is not as good as the ACTU statement but is certainly better than the University of Melbourne Branch statement.
https://www.nteu.au/News_Articles/National/NTEU_Statement_on_Israel_and_Palestine.aspx
Also agree - better statement than the branch one. Still prefer they said something more like the ACTU one.
In relation to footnote one, I have certainly encountered individuals in left-wing circles who display the Dark Triad characteristics. Fortunately they are not numerous but, even such few as they are, they succeed in causing a lot of trouble.
Yes. They cloak everything in an appearance of righteousness, but they're the eye of the storm: everything starts to collapse around them.
US teacher here with a similar working class pro-union heritage who's been furious at the left wing takeover of the teachers unions for several years now. Problem is, older women have effectively had our tongues cut out (an ancient practice in a new guise) by social shaming and cancelation. I imagine explaining this to my grandmother who didn't get the vote as a woman until she was in her 30s and who worked in a factory her whole life so we could have it better: "But Granny we can't say anything because they will call us Karens or TERFs!" Granny's response would be unprintable, I know, and I am ashamed. I want to push back in a collective and effective way, but the leftist zealots have us in a terrible bind. Women risk losing their teen or adult children who often cancel them as "toxic" for stepping out of line or causing their family grief by being associated with them. Not to mention loss of friends, career, livelihood and home. I live not far from where the Salem witch trials took place and the echoes of hysterical conformity are unmistakable. Thank you for bringing these issues forward. May we find our voices again somehow.
Seriously - I keep thinking - have these people never read 'The Crucible'? It is terrifying how many people don't seem to recognise the dangerous dynamics at play here...
I can't believe you included footnote one. It would be more interesting to see if belief in the contemporary version of social justice was compatible with healthy personality traits. I am going to go out on a limb here and say that recent evidence suggests strongly otherwise.
I don't think you're going out on a limb - severely personality disordered individuals seem to be running the show right now. I went and found those articles because I wanted to know whether there was any empirical evidence for my hunch that they cloaked their behaviour in social justice (< spot the academic who will research just about anything if she gets a bee in her bonnet). Turns out - yes.
One thing I recall is that two activists I came across at uni had been bullies at school (in my and my sister's year respectively). It was really that which made me think - hang on - they are just bullying in a socially acceptable way now, able to say that they are "good." One of them made the comment which made the scales fall from my eyes: "I don't know any Aboriginal people, but what I think should happen is..."
I was so gobsmacked I couldn't speak. The reason I was involved with the cause was because I'd spoken to all my Indigenous students and gotten their views. How else was I to know what they wanted me to campaign for? It would be patronising and potentially really dangerous to think that I knew what was right for them without speaking to them. They were not activist types either - they were grass roots types - their view of activists in their community also really shaped my views. "They say they're helping us, but they make everything worse," said one student, mentioning a prominent activist and detailing how this person had screwed up his community.
Yes those utterly toxic people exist, they are a strong argument against free university and non-work-linked welfare!
Most activists I know however are "good" (maybe I mean "nice" or "kind"?) people, they just have very broken models of the world.
I grew up with (and still have!) a very diverse group of friends which I think is a big element of what makes me very sceptical of any plan to help other people, since too often those other people were my friends.
You and I are very similar, then. I've got a very diverse group of friends - politics, religion, class, ethnicity, sexuality, you name it - and I always have had, since I was very young. This has taught me that I can't mistake my preferences for the preferences of others. I think also that being disabled has been a reality check. I can't do anything. That's fine. But I am wary of schemes which purport to allow everyone to do what they want, be what they want.
I also agree with you that most activists are nice and kind and really mean well. I meant well when I got involved, and I was very earnest about it. I am now a lot more cynical. In retrospect, I don't know that I did much good. I did good by helping and educating my Aboriginal students and giving them skills to argue what they needed.
One of my Indigenous students died in 2021. I taught her back in 1997. I kept in touch with her over all those years, and I still cry when I think of her. I couldn't see her because we were in lockdown. She used to call me "darling girl". She was convinced I had Aboriginal ancestry, and that it must be from a people close to her own. As it turns out, she was right. When she died, I was the only person the police could find at first who knew her well. She'd always believed the ancestors sent me to look after her. The policeman said, "Maybe they did." I think that's more important - to be there to direct the police to her family.
That's a very sweet story! And yes "activism" that involves spending time with people and helping them by giving them things they want (skills, administrative help, companionship, food, whatever) is a very different beast to the performative shite that most "activists" seem to massively prefer.
Excellent thoughts very well expressed, Katy.