Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumInteresting interview w/ NYU Sociologist on the language of class & economic injustice in the primar
This is an excerpt from a long interview. It explains how Hillary and the DNC are cleverly using the lingo of the radical academic left (What the "left" has morphed into; although, actually, in academia, "the left" is by no means monolithic) to marginalize Bernie or to marginalize ANYONE who focuses on economic inequality.
KHALEK: There is a lot of racist ideas underpinning a lot of this thought, but its considered radical and its considered inclusive. Also, how does this relate to what we are seeing in the election right now?
Youve got someone like Hillary Clinton, who is running for the Democratic nomination. This is someone, whos been involved in pushing policies that have been detrimental to poor people, particularly poor people of color. And, right now, shes really remaking herself into a social justice warrior, whos anti-racist and always been anti-racist. She literally used the word intersectionality. Shes using the language of white privilege.
CHIBBER: She must have hired some grad students.
KHALEK: Right. [LAUGHTER] But, on the other end, youve got someone like Bernie Sanders. Obviously, hes not a hardcore Marxist or socialist, but hes popularizing ideas about the economy, about redistribution, that havent been popularized on this massive of a platform in a really long time. And, its fascinating to me to watch the reaction to him and the way to push people away from him is to call him a single-issue candidate and to use this language coming from the radical academic left or, you know, whatever you want to call it. What are your thoughts on that?
CHIBBER: Its deeply dishonest, of course. The entire reaction to Bernie has been bait-and-switch kind of ploy, and its not surprising. What is interesting is, as you say, that she is drawing on this current aspect of intellectual and political culture to justify this kind of dishonest move that shes making. What shes drawing on is, basically what has happened in the past twenty years is what it means to be left-wing or radical has been very successfully redefined by the academy, by professors, and by grad students.
And the way its been redefined is starting with a correct premise, which is that class, peoples economic condition, isnt responsible for everything awful thats happened in their lives. Theres also the purely racialized oppressions that they face and gendered oppressions they face, and thats absolutely true. Starting with that correct premise, it leads to the deeply incorrect conclusion that, therefore, if you talk about peoples economic conditions, you are not addressing the core and most important aspects and liabilities of their lives.
Now, if youre an African-American in this country, its absolutely true that you face all kinds of discrimination. Its absolutely true that you have a much higher likelihood of being incarcerated than a white person in the same class as you. Thats absolutely true. But, how do you expect to address the real plight of African-Americans in this country around their everyday lives without a jobs program, without universal healthcare, without decent and universal public education? To think that these are matters that, by virtue of being economic, are not relevant for people of color is not just wrong. It is fantastically dishonest.
The reason that Hillary is able to get away with this is because the so-called leftand I dont really call it the left anymore. I dont know what to call it because its a diseased formation. The so-called left intelligentsia has succeeded in equating the word class with white guys. And we should look at this as an achievement because its never happened on the left before. It was always understood among the more savvy radical activists that, even though peoples economic conditions dont explain all the liabilities they face, addressing the oppressions that men and women, who are poor are facingAddressing those without addressing their economic conditions is an elite strategy to keep off the table the real concerns of poor, working class black men and women.
It was always understood. Now, it is taken to be the emblem of what it means to be radical, and thats just a sign that the middle class and the upper classes have taken over the discourse of the left, whether theyre professors, whether they work in non-profits, or whether theyre these talking heads for think tanks. Its the same thing, which is the middle class gets to define what it means to be radical.
KHALEK: Thats a really great point. There also seems to be this strain of hatred, looking down on the white working class and poor class, even blaming them for racism.
CHIBBER: A lot of this race talk serves as an acceptable way to express your disdain for poor people. You just cant express it for poor black people because then it becomes racist and in polite circles that is unacceptableand thats a great thing. It shouldnt be, of course. But it is acceptable to talk about poor white trash, or hillbillies, or rednecks. All these are expressions you can continue to use, and people use it with alacrity not because they have a hatred for white racists but there is a general disdain for poor white people. And theyre seen as being born into racism the way they were born into their skin. This is, again, an achievement of very backward and quite conservative intelligentsia now.
KHALEK: I dont know if this is the wrong parallel to make, but Edward Said had this idea of the European mind being inherently incapable.
CHIBBER: Orientalist.
KHALEK: Exactly, so it kind of reminds me of that a little bit, where its projected these inherent qualities on to poor white people. But, then also this is all very helpful to elites because the idea of fixing racism ends up not fixing the material concerns of poor people, working class people, whether white or of color.
CHIBBER: Lets do a thought experiment. Imagine for a second that Hillary Clinton gets into office and she has a thorough reform of the prison system so that blacks and whites are incarcerated at the same rates. Thats a great thing. Now, it will improve the lives of a lot of young black men. Whatll it do to their job prospects? Whats it going to do for the quality of the schools? Whats it going to do to the infant mortality rate in places like Washington, D.C., which rivals that of a third world country?
So, the idea that youre not really anti-racist until you only and exclusively talk about prisons is a ploy. It is something that the Democratic Party loves to do because its a way to push off the table what really threatens not just the white establishment but the black establishment as well.
KHALEK: The idea of fixing racism just becomes fixing hearts and minds and getting people to use the right language, like these really superficial things. Its good to change peoples ideas
CHIBBER: Theyre limited, but it also keeps in placeOne of the things thats not talked about is Hillary is not doing this on her own. She has a small army of black politicos and intellectuals that are working with her. Now, why are they doing this? Its quite simple. Over the past thirty years or so, one of the side effects of the neo-liberal turn has been the creation of a kind of intermediate class of brokers, real estate agents, sometimes small capitalists, and political officials, who are black. And, for them, the prospect of having a real, deep structural reform of the economy is quite threatening. Maybe not as threatening as to the larger elements of capital in this country, but it would mean they lose their position and all the patronage and largesse that comes their way. So, they work very, very hard....
Youve got someone like Hillary Clinton, who is running for the Democratic nomination. This is someone, whos been involved in pushing policies that have been detrimental to poor people, particularly poor people of color. And, right now, shes really remaking herself into a social justice warrior, whos anti-racist and always been anti-racist. She literally used the word intersectionality. Shes using the language of white privilege.
CHIBBER: She must have hired some grad students.
KHALEK: Right. [LAUGHTER] But, on the other end, youve got someone like Bernie Sanders. Obviously, hes not a hardcore Marxist or socialist, but hes popularizing ideas about the economy, about redistribution, that havent been popularized on this massive of a platform in a really long time. And, its fascinating to me to watch the reaction to him and the way to push people away from him is to call him a single-issue candidate and to use this language coming from the radical academic left or, you know, whatever you want to call it. What are your thoughts on that?
CHIBBER: Its deeply dishonest, of course. The entire reaction to Bernie has been bait-and-switch kind of ploy, and its not surprising. What is interesting is, as you say, that she is drawing on this current aspect of intellectual and political culture to justify this kind of dishonest move that shes making. What shes drawing on is, basically what has happened in the past twenty years is what it means to be left-wing or radical has been very successfully redefined by the academy, by professors, and by grad students.
And the way its been redefined is starting with a correct premise, which is that class, peoples economic condition, isnt responsible for everything awful thats happened in their lives. Theres also the purely racialized oppressions that they face and gendered oppressions they face, and thats absolutely true. Starting with that correct premise, it leads to the deeply incorrect conclusion that, therefore, if you talk about peoples economic conditions, you are not addressing the core and most important aspects and liabilities of their lives.
Now, if youre an African-American in this country, its absolutely true that you face all kinds of discrimination. Its absolutely true that you have a much higher likelihood of being incarcerated than a white person in the same class as you. Thats absolutely true. But, how do you expect to address the real plight of African-Americans in this country around their everyday lives without a jobs program, without universal healthcare, without decent and universal public education? To think that these are matters that, by virtue of being economic, are not relevant for people of color is not just wrong. It is fantastically dishonest.
The reason that Hillary is able to get away with this is because the so-called leftand I dont really call it the left anymore. I dont know what to call it because its a diseased formation. The so-called left intelligentsia has succeeded in equating the word class with white guys. And we should look at this as an achievement because its never happened on the left before. It was always understood among the more savvy radical activists that, even though peoples economic conditions dont explain all the liabilities they face, addressing the oppressions that men and women, who are poor are facingAddressing those without addressing their economic conditions is an elite strategy to keep off the table the real concerns of poor, working class black men and women.
It was always understood. Now, it is taken to be the emblem of what it means to be radical, and thats just a sign that the middle class and the upper classes have taken over the discourse of the left, whether theyre professors, whether they work in non-profits, or whether theyre these talking heads for think tanks. Its the same thing, which is the middle class gets to define what it means to be radical.
KHALEK: Thats a really great point. There also seems to be this strain of hatred, looking down on the white working class and poor class, even blaming them for racism.
CHIBBER: A lot of this race talk serves as an acceptable way to express your disdain for poor people. You just cant express it for poor black people because then it becomes racist and in polite circles that is unacceptableand thats a great thing. It shouldnt be, of course. But it is acceptable to talk about poor white trash, or hillbillies, or rednecks. All these are expressions you can continue to use, and people use it with alacrity not because they have a hatred for white racists but there is a general disdain for poor white people. And theyre seen as being born into racism the way they were born into their skin. This is, again, an achievement of very backward and quite conservative intelligentsia now.
KHALEK: I dont know if this is the wrong parallel to make, but Edward Said had this idea of the European mind being inherently incapable.
CHIBBER: Orientalist.
KHALEK: Exactly, so it kind of reminds me of that a little bit, where its projected these inherent qualities on to poor white people. But, then also this is all very helpful to elites because the idea of fixing racism ends up not fixing the material concerns of poor people, working class people, whether white or of color.
CHIBBER: Lets do a thought experiment. Imagine for a second that Hillary Clinton gets into office and she has a thorough reform of the prison system so that blacks and whites are incarcerated at the same rates. Thats a great thing. Now, it will improve the lives of a lot of young black men. Whatll it do to their job prospects? Whats it going to do for the quality of the schools? Whats it going to do to the infant mortality rate in places like Washington, D.C., which rivals that of a third world country?
So, the idea that youre not really anti-racist until you only and exclusively talk about prisons is a ploy. It is something that the Democratic Party loves to do because its a way to push off the table what really threatens not just the white establishment but the black establishment as well.
KHALEK: The idea of fixing racism just becomes fixing hearts and minds and getting people to use the right language, like these really superficial things. Its good to change peoples ideas
CHIBBER: Theyre limited, but it also keeps in placeOne of the things thats not talked about is Hillary is not doing this on her own. She has a small army of black politicos and intellectuals that are working with her. Now, why are they doing this? Its quite simple. Over the past thirty years or so, one of the side effects of the neo-liberal turn has been the creation of a kind of intermediate class of brokers, real estate agents, sometimes small capitalists, and political officials, who are black. And, for them, the prospect of having a real, deep structural reform of the economy is quite threatening. Maybe not as threatening as to the larger elements of capital in this country, but it would mean they lose their position and all the patronage and largesse that comes their way. So, they work very, very hard....
https://shadowproof.com/2016/02/28/clinton-intersectionality-language-interview/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 987 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (19)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Interesting interview w/ NYU Sociologist on the language of class & economic injustice in the primar (Original Post)
amborin
Mar 2016
OP
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)1. bookmarked for later, thanks
stranger81
(2,345 posts)2. This article might be the best description I've seen so far of the real split between the two camps.
New Left vs. Post-New Left.
Highly recommended.
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)3. Or it might not be. nt
amborin
(16,631 posts)5. agree, and thanks
MisterP
(23,730 posts)4. like when they said making Kenny G jokes was cisheteronormativity