Sheree Waks commented on 2018-12-07 21:31
I spent last night reading your 3 articles and watching the videos within - a challenging but worthwhile endeavour. While I don't quibble with much of what you say in the latest article, there are a (article 626889-11482)
Link back to comment


I spent last night reading your 3 articles and watching the videos within - a challenging but worthwhile endeavour. While I don't quibble with much of what you say in the latest article, there are a few issues I would like to raise.

Like you, I am horrified by the scenes of angry mobs of students on US campuses determined to shut down fair debate on important issues. When we were students, most protests were about vital issues like the Vietnam War, and PROTECTION of civil liberties - not the kind of blanket opposition to free speech and legitimate discussion of ideas we see here.

However, I am puzzled by your use of the term "social justice warriors" as a pejorative, in the section "Ideology over consequences". I have no problem with critiquing the extremes of political correctness and identity politics etc, but the somewhat generalised attack on those fighting for social justice seems a step too far, somewhat reminiscent of Paul Keating's dismissal of progressive activists in the inner city decades ago (of which you were of course one!) as "Balmain basket weavers". Yes you tempered it with "I don’t suggest that this mentality infects everyone engaged in the activist movements I will be discussing below" but still I am somewhat uneasy...

Re "Black Lives Matter" and your assertion "by far the most significant contributor to black deaths in inner-cities is gang violence" - while not disagreeing with that statistic, nevertheless I believe "Black Lives Matter" has highlighted widespread systemic racism in the US, especially in the areas of incarceration levels, unequal treatment of blacks by police and the justice system, racial profiling etc.

Of course there are legitimate criticisms to be made of some within the movement, and some of its actions, but I don't think that justifies total denigration or dismissal of it. President Obama bought into the debate between Black Lives Matter and All Lives Matter, stating "I think that the reason that the organisers used the phrase Black Lives Matter was not because they were suggesting that no one else's lives matter... rather what they were suggesting was there is a specific problem that is happening in the African American community that's not happening in other communities. That is a legitimate issue that we've got to address".

I can't see a problem with that explanation. Also, surely much of the gang violence has its roots in other issues that unfairly impacted on blacks and Latinos eg closure of factories and other job providers leading to high unemployment, poverty, a decaying urban environment, post GFC mortgage foreclosures, gun culture, lack of police/community relationship building etc.

I do agree with the importance of addressing the outrageous levels of family violence in the Aboriginal community, and that activists like the three courageous women in the press club video are often subjected to disgraceful personal attacks eg Prof Larissa Behrendt's twitter attack on Bess Price (mother of Jacinta Price) "I watched a show where a guy had sex with a horse and I'm sure it was less offensive than Bess Price", rather than answering their arguments.

This is a problem we all have to face - just recently I was involved in an argument where someone posted an article from AIJAC (Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council) discussing Sheikh Omran and radical Islam: https://aijac.org.au/fresh-air/sheikh-omran-and-aswj-tied-to-terror-again/
whereupon another reader accused the article of being "Islamophobic and hateful" (which I did not find it to be) and accused AIJAC of being "a purveyor of hate and half truths" thereby dismissing the article and by default ALL material from AIJAC merely because AIJAC was the source, without any analysis whatsoever.

On another occasion I had to defend the Centre for Independent Studies (sponsors of the talk by the three Aboriginal women at the NPC featured in your article) from claims that it was just a far-right propaganda network that couldn't possibly be contributing to any debate in a meaningful way! These are troubling times indeed for those of us who want to hear arguments and discussion from across the entire spectrum in order to try and reach a better understanding of the complex issues facing our world. Thank you for playing an important role in that.
CONTEXT(Help)
-
J'Accuse Identity Politics »J'Accuse Identity Politics
Identity politics harms the oppressed »Identity politics harms the oppressed
Sheree Waks commented on 2018-12-07 21:31
Peter Baldwin commented on 2018-12-10 09:28 »Peter Baldwin commented on 2018-12-10 09:28
+Comments (0)
+Citations (1)
+About