How have you people managed to have a 70+ post thread about the validity of the

[Monty92]

phrase "cultural Marxism" without anyone pointing out the rather crucial fact that no-one ever - EVER - uses it as a direct, like-for-like comparison? Not to mention the total absense of discussion on the root of all this ****e which is post-modernism?

Anyway, here's some further listening on the subject, from the lovely Jordan, who I now see Sir Charlie has decided to pretend to appreciate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC31WFF9Qzw

[Sir C]

phrase "cultural Marxism" without anyone pointing out the rather crucial fact that no-one ever - EVER - uses it as a direct, like-for-like comparison? Not to mention the total absense of discussion on the root of all this ****e which is post-modernism?

Anyway, here's some further listening on the subject, from the lovely Jordan, who I now see Sir Charlie has decided to pretend to appreciate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC31WFF9Qzw

Other than the bit where I said exactly that?

[Burney]

phrase "cultural Marxism" without anyone pointing out the rather crucial fact that no-one ever - EVER - uses it as a direct, like-for-like comparison? Not to mention the total absense of discussion on the root of all this ****e which is post-modernism?

Anyway, here's some further listening on the subject, from the lovely Jordan, who I now see Sir Charlie has decided to pretend to appreciate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC31WFF9Qzw

I'm pretty sure it was a given that nobody actually thought it was what Karl had in mind, m

[Monty92]

I'm pretty sure it was a given that nobody actually thought it was what Karl had in mind, m

Which makes the entire conversation redundant, shirley?

[Monty92]

Other than the bit where I said exactly that?

Did you? Oh, sorry.

See, a simple sorry, and now you like me again. Being a grown up is cool.

[Burney]

Which makes the entire conversation redundant, shirley?

Sort of. Ash hates the term because he feels the left has been hijacked by those concerned with these identity issues, but I would suggest that proves that the thing the term describes definitely does exist.

[Sir C]

Did you? Oh, sorry.

See, a simple sorry, and now you like me again. Being a grown up is cool.

Now I'm confused and discombobulated.

Do we do the sex now?

[Monty92]

Now I'm confused and discombobulated.

Do we do the sex now?

I'm sure we can come to some mutually agreeable arrangement. How about I help you achieve tumescence for the first time in 20 years and you pay for my children to go to private school?

[Sir C]

I'm sure we can come to some mutually agreeable arrangement. How about I help you achieve tumescence for the first time in 20 years and you pay for my children to go to private school?

Sounds like an interesting proposal.

Let's see how you do with that purdy mouth first.

[Peter]

Sort of. Ash hates the term because he feels the left has been hijacked by those concerned with these identity issues, but I would suggest that proves that the thing the term describes definitely does exist.

It isnt an easy argument either way. One can argue that Marx is the result of industrialisation in the same way that modernism is. If post-modernism is the outcome of modernism then post-marxism (or cultural, or whatever term you wish to use) can be considered to be the equivalent.

The one issue I do take objection to is that this is somehow my fault.

Naturally, I blame Thatcher. If cultural marxism is the result of the defeat of the left then it is surely her fault....

[Sir C]

It isnt an easy argument either way. One can argue that Marx is the result of industrialisation in the same way that modernism is. If post-modernism is the outcome of modernism then post-marxism (or cultural, or whatever term you wish to use) can be considered to be the equivalent.

The one issue I do take objection to is that this is somehow my fault.

Naturally, I blame Thatcher. If cultural marxism is the result of the defeat of the left then it is surely her fault....

Ben Elton. Alexei Sayle. I bet you cheered those fúckers to the rafters.

Your fault, see?

[Peter]

Ben Elton. Alexei Sayle. I bet you cheered those fúckers to the rafters.

Your fault, see?

I liked Blackadder, if that is what you mean. From my recollection the only thing Alexei Sayle ever did was unfunny, two minute sketches in the middle of episodes of the Young Ones.

[Burney]

It isnt an easy argument either way. One can argue that Marx is the result of industrialisation in the same way that modernism is. If post-modernism is the outcome of modernism then post-marxism (or cultural, or whatever term you wish to use) can be considered to be the equivalent.

The one issue I do take objection to is that this is somehow my fault.

Naturally, I blame Thatcher. If cultural marxism is the result of the defeat of the left then it is surely her fault....

No. Post-modernism stems entirely from the academic left. It was a conscious decision to tear down the icons of white, western culture by effectively undermining the concept of intrinsic value in favour of subjective valuation. This was done in no small part to make lesser cultures and thick people feel better - the intellectual equivalent of the school sports day where everyone wins a prize. It also fed the solipsism and narcissism that surrounds us today by telling everyone their opinion is equally valid.

Basically, post-modernism has been a disaster.

[Peter]

No. Post-modernism stems entirely from the academic left. It was a conscious decision to tear down the icons of white, western culture by effectively undermining the concept of intrinsic value in favour of subjective valuation. This was done in no small part to make lesser cultures and thick people feel better - the intellectual equivalent of the school sports day where everyone wins a prize. It also fed the solipsism and narcissism that surrounds us today by telling everyone their opinion is equally valid.

Basically, post-modernism has been a disaster.

Its one of those things I have never fully understood. Over the years I have come to learn that when I dont understand something it is usually because it is total *******s. I am left to simply look at the people who purport it, or claim to understand it and make a judgement.

In the instance of post-modernism, everyone I have ever seen use the word has been a ****, and the sort of **** who would fit your description (some combination of words that would include academic and left).

I therefore deduce that postmodernism doesnt exist, means virtually nothing and is the preserve of ****ers.

I am good friends with a very prominent and well-published sociologist. He never uses the term and believes it to be meaningless bull****. Case closed (although he does also support Spurs).

[Burney]

Its one of those things I have never fully understood. Over the years I have come to learn that when I dont understand something it is usually because it is total *******s. I am left to simply look at the people who purport it, or claim to understand it and make a judgement.

In the instance of post-modernism, everyone I have ever seen use the word has been a ****, and the sort of **** who would fit your description (some combination of words that would include academic and left).

I therefore deduce that postmodernism doesnt exist, means virtually nothing and is the preserve of ****ers.

I am good friends with a very prominent and well-published sociologist. He never uses the term and believes it to be meaningless bull****. Case closed (although he does also support Spurs).

I was at university studying English when it was all the rage. Derrida, literary theory and all that crap. 'The canon' (i.e. good books written by white Europeans) had become a term of abuse and we were having all sorts of post-colonial crap shoved in our direction under the pretence that it was just as good (it wasn't). And if you dared to point out that this was all rubbish and motivated not by a desire to broaden understanding of literature, but by an iconoclastic political movement, you were shouted down.

That was the early 90s. I imagine it's much, much worse now.

[Peter]

I was at university studying English when it was all the rage. Derrida, literary theory and all that crap. 'The canon' (i.e. good books written by white Europeans) had become a term of abuse and we were having all sorts of post-colonial crap shoved in our direction under the pretence that it was just as good (it wasn't). And if you dared to point out that this was all rubbish and motivated not by a desire to broaden understanding of literature, but by an iconoclastic political movement, you were shouted down.

That was the early 90s. I imagine it's much, much worse now.

I was studying history at the time. Aside from a host of lecturers trying to convince me that Taylor's view of the second world war was an appalling work of nazi sympathy I had lesbians telling me that red phone boxes were post-modern.

I didnt help myself.....when the resident professor (an arrogant arsehole of a man with the appearance of a poor man's Roy Hattersley) told us specifically not to read Dangerfield's excellent book on the death of liberal england I went straight for the library, read the whole thing in a night and based my entire essay on supporting it.

A presentation I did 'came dangerously close to endorsing the worst of british foreign policy'.......

I assumed they didnt like me because I was a ****. Now I know it is just that I wasnt post modern enough for them.

[Monty92]

I was at university studying English when it was all the rage. Derrida, literary theory and all that crap. 'The canon' (i.e. good books written by white Europeans) had become a term of abuse and we were having all sorts of post-colonial crap shoved in our direction under the pretence that it was just as good (it wasn't). And if you dared to point out that this was all rubbish and motivated not by a desire to broaden understanding of literature, but by an iconoclastic political movement, you were shouted down.

That was the early 90s. I imagine it's much, much worse now.

I recently had an online chat with a husband and wife that I know who are both academics and asked them about claims of a lack of diversity of thought/perspective in universities nowadays. Their responses:

"There can only be a diversity of opinion if the research and teaching staff reflect a diversity of experience. Academia overwhelmingly places white, middle-class men in positions of power, and they replicate that when they make appointments. There’s a massive amount of work being done to improve diversity in the academy, but a long, long way to go."

And when asking specifically about left wing bias...

"I'm not sure there is a left wing bias. On the one hand, sure, in our discipline maybe those who teach are predominantly left wing (like school teachers) but institutionally, universities use zero-hour contracts, appoint in their own image, cost-cut at the expense of students and staff, and validate huge disparities in earning. That's not really left wing."

"I think ‘left wing bias’ is an oversimplified way of looking at it - it’s an easy catchphrase for an anti-intellectual media to throw around. That’s why I prefer to talk about needing a diversity of experience informing teaching and research."

"Suppose it depends on what you think has greater force: what an English Lit student discusses in class or the economic structures around them at uni that affect how they see their position or potential in the world.

"Bottom line is sex, race and class still matter hugely everywhere."

[Burney]

I recently had an online chat with a husband and wife that I know who are both academics and asked them about claims of a lack of diversity of thought/perspective in universities nowadays. Their responses:

"There can only be a diversity of opinion if the research and teaching staff reflect a diversity of experience. Academia overwhelmingly places white, middle-class men in positions of power, and they replicate that when they make appointments. There’s a massive amount of work being done to improve diversity in the academy, but a long, long way to go."

And when asking specifically about left wing bias...

"I'm not sure there is a left wing bias. On the one hand, sure, in our discipline maybe those who teach are predominantly left wing (like school teachers) but institutionally, universities use zero-hour contracts, appoint in their own image, cost-cut at the expense of students and staff, and validate huge disparities in earning. That's not really left wing."

"I think ‘left wing bias’ is an oversimplified way of looking at it - it’s an easy catchphrase for an anti-intellectual media to throw around. That’s why I prefer to talk about needing a diversity of experience informing teaching and research."

"Suppose it depends on what you think has greater force: what an English Lit student discusses in class or the economic structures around them at uni that affect how they see their position or potential in the world.

"Bottom line is sex, race and class still matter hugely everywhere."

It's always hilarious when people convince themselves that an overwhelming left wing bias among senior staff won't translate into an overwhelming left-wing bias in terms of how those staff do their jobs and the institution itself. After all, these are the same people who readily accepted that the police force was 'institutionally racist' because it employed a few racists. Why would they not apply the same logic to their own institutions and conclude that they are institutionally left wing because they overwhelmingly employ left wing people?

It's an extraordinary form of cognitive dissonance and one that can only be based on a presumed sense of intellectual superiority that means they are above such things.

[Peter]

I recently had an online chat with a husband and wife that I know who are both academics and asked them about claims of a lack of diversity of thought/perspective in universities nowadays. Their responses:

"There can only be a diversity of opinion if the research and teaching staff reflect a diversity of experience. Academia overwhelmingly places white, middle-class men in positions of power, and they replicate that when they make appointments. There’s a massive amount of work being done to improve diversity in the academy, but a long, long way to go."

And when asking specifically about left wing bias...

"I'm not sure there is a left wing bias. On the one hand, sure, in our discipline maybe those who teach are predominantly left wing (like school teachers) but institutionally, universities use zero-hour contracts, appoint in their own image, cost-cut at the expense of students and staff, and validate huge disparities in earning. That's not really left wing."

"I think ‘left wing bias’ is an oversimplified way of looking at it - it’s an easy catchphrase for an anti-intellectual media to throw around. That’s why I prefer to talk about needing a diversity of experience informing teaching and research."

"Suppose it depends on what you think has greater force: what an English Lit student discusses in class or the economic structures around them at uni that affect how they see their position or potential in the world.

"Bottom line is sex, race and class still matter hugely everywhere."

THey are largely correct. There is certainly nothing left wing, radical or progressive about how universities act as a corporation. I would take huge issue with their assertion that the lack of diversity includes a lack of women. That is complete and utter ****. In terms of ethnicity, yes, it is terrible, particularly when mirroring the diversity of staff and students.

The left wing bias in terms fo teaching is largely restricted to the social sciences. You wouldn't find it in the technical faculties, health, business or law.

[Monty92]

It's always hilarious when people convince themselves that an overwhelming left wing bias among senior staff won't translate into an overwhelming left-wing bias in terms of how those staff do their jobs and the institution itself. After all, these are the same people who readily accepted that the police force was 'institutionally racist' because it employed a few racists. Why would they not apply the same logic to their own institutions and conclude that they are institutionally left wing because they overwhelmingly employ left wing people?

It's an extraordinary form of cognitive dissonance and one that can only be based on a presumed sense of intellectual superiority that means they are above such things.

Of course. What they want to say in response to these claims, but they are just about clever enough not to, is that being institutionally left wing is an inherently, objectively good thing.

[Luis Anaconda]

I recently had an online chat with a husband and wife that I know who are both academics and asked them about claims of a lack of diversity of thought/perspective in universities nowadays. Their responses:

"There can only be a diversity of opinion if the research and teaching staff reflect a diversity of experience. Academia overwhelmingly places white, middle-class men in positions of power, and they replicate that when they make appointments. There’s a massive amount of work being done to improve diversity in the academy, but a long, long way to go."

And when asking specifically about left wing bias...

"I'm not sure there is a left wing bias. On the one hand, sure, in our discipline maybe those who teach are predominantly left wing (like school teachers) but institutionally, universities use zero-hour contracts, appoint in their own image, cost-cut at the expense of students and staff, and validate huge disparities in earning. That's not really left wing."

"I think ‘left wing bias’ is an oversimplified way of looking at it - it’s an easy catchphrase for an anti-intellectual media to throw around. That’s why I prefer to talk about needing a diversity of experience informing teaching and research."

"Suppose it depends on what you think has greater force: what an English Lit student discusses in class or the economic structures around them at uni that affect how they see their position or potential in the world.

"Bottom line is sex, race and class still matter hugely everywhere."

Can we just establish that this was on a swingers' site?