Julie Bindel no platformed at Durham University

[BovaryX]

Julie Bindel gives the Spectator a withering account of having her invitation to speak at Durham rescinded. Serious debate and freedom of speech are being severely hampered in the very institutions which should promote and protect both. Her account of this contains some hilariously robust language. Her conclusion about the upshot of these policies resonates...

Phoenix had recently been speaking out about being de-platformed by Essex University for the simple reason that she is appalled at the anti-intellectual and anti-academic ethos within universities, as well as the rise of academic populism. I have no idea whether she will still attend the Durham debate, but I do know one thing: Treating invited speakers like dangerous retrogrades – in particular those who give their time to encourage critical thinking amongst the student population – will result in graduates with narrow, closed minds and no ability to form opinions of their own

I do worry that having these people speaking genuinely causes a surge in harassment.

I don't know that I think that is particularly common. From my vantage point, the current up-swing in different variations of racism and nationalism comes out of these other political movements we've been discussing. Identity politics, and also the current economic stresses, mass movement of people and the climate change spectre. But in the west also the denigration of "white" cultural identities and what I guess you might call the anti-colonialist narrative. And geographic economic, educational, and demographic disparities as well.

If anything I think no platforming contributes to these other stresses and deepens them.

Most university lecturers are Marxists

The first Marxist I even met was a university lecturer, and an entirely lovely man. But most of them being Marxists seems rather far fetched.

ever met, not even!

Most of mine were deffo Trots, Militant Tendancy and other leftie allsorts. (It was a Poly in the 80s so this was compulsory.) And they were mostly lovely, and very keen on rightwing historians who they made us read at great length.

@Tanith.
Post-colonialism and gender/race theory which is the norm in campus studies is all rooted in Marxism. On a positive note, the younger generation are concerned about the environment, reducing plastic/food waste, human rights and more equality.

I did a healthcare degree relatively recently. Quite a lot of degrees these days are relatively low in overarching theoretical content. I would be surprised if any of my lecturers were even political party members, never mind Marxists.

Most university lecturers are Marxists.

I have worked in four different universities over the past 30 years, so I can confidently inform you that this is nonsense.

MsSafina
Yep. The Marxist underpinnings of identity politics is analyzed by Douglas Murray. It is no coincidence that this ideology emerged from the debris of the Berlin Wall. Since the working class has always been a great disappointment to Marxists, a new victim hierarchy was most attractive. The left is currently engaged in an reductive circle jerk which is alienating millions of voters. Identity politics is a cul de sac.

Since the working class has always been a great disappointment to Marxists, a new victim hierarchy was most attractive.

I find that slightly surprising, BovaryX, because Marx himself saw the struggle between the classes as the great moving force in history and would have had absolutely no time for identity politics. If present-day Marxists believe identity politics is the way forward, then they've completely misunderstood Marx.

because Marx himself saw the struggle between the classes as the great moving force in history and would have had absolutely no time for identity politics

But the working class failed to conform to Marxist predictions. Millions of working class voters put Thatcher in Downing street in 1979. Even as the Berlin Wall collapsed, Marxist academics were still defending the the authoritarian regimes of the USSR and its satellites. There was a vacuum and identity politics slotted right in

@BovaryX
I remember a discussion with some Marxists who were convinced that even if Communism fell behind the Iron Curtain, the proletariat would not become "mere consumers" as their consciousness had been raised by years of Marxism. Of course, just the opposite occurred. Having an interest in the subject I've visited quite a few former Communist countries where they have set up museums documenting the iniquities and vicious cruelty of those regimes. The one in Albania was particularly ferocious. It makes you wonder why this ideology persists in our institutions.

When someone says they're a Marxist, I want to respond, "Oh yes, a well-fed Marxist."

@MoltenLasagne I’m Durham Class of ‘08 too, and between this and the Angelos Sofocleous debacle I’m becoming increasingly embarrassed by that fact.

But the working class failed to conform to Marxist predictions.

I think that's difficult to assert. Marx didn't really give a timeline. He suggested certain conditions and stages had to appear, and quite arguably they haven't. The countries that had Marxist revolutions, they were agrarian peasant societies, according to Marx they weren't at all in the right stage of development to form a properly communist society.

In any case, while I think it's true that there are elements of Marxist analysis that began to appear in other contexts, that kind of osmosis happens all the time in political and philosophical movements. It doesn't mean that a bunch of Marxists got tired of waiting for the revolution and decided to change their focus from the working classes to women or minorities etc in hopes of getting more traction.

“ Most university lecturers are Marxists”

Depends what course you do

It doesn't mean that a bunch of Marxists got tired of waiting for the revolution and decided to change their focus from the working classes to women or minorities etc in hopes of getting more traction

The queer theory/intersectional/ identity politics academics have emerged from the left wing. The authoritarian tendencies of many left wing acolytes are explicit. Freedom of speech is not a value they uphold. And the key distinction between Conservatives and left wingers is the former prioritize freedom over equality The current morass is precisely where you end up when freedom as a philosophical principle has been chucked under the bus even by the political party which is supposed to be defined by it.

Marx predicted the immient collapse of 19th century capitalism. He got it wrong.

Lenin picked up the baton and suggested that revolution could come in undeveloped economies like Russia. The revolution duly came.

"Well Comrade, I can see all the broken eggs. Now where's the omlette?"

The queer theory/intersectional/ identity politics academics have emerged from the left wing. The authoritarian tendencies of many left wing acolytes are explicit. Freedom of speech is not a value they uphold. And the key distinction between Conservatives and left wingers is the former prioritize freedom over equality The current morass is precisely where you end up when freedom as a philosophical principle has been chucked under the bus even by the political party which is supposed to be defined by it.

It's pretty naive to think that the right wing doesn't produce authoritarianism - and I would not put love of freedom as the centre of conservatism, I think that's a gross misreading of conservatism TBH - you are mistaken libertarianism, which is a form of liberalism, for conservatism, a tendency that has come from the Americans.

The conclusions you are making here are just a little too sloppy. The fact that the current id politics comes from the left wing does not tell us that they are are or were Marxists.

It's pretty naive to think that the right wing doesn't produce authoritarianism

I didn't say that. I said that the primary difference between Conservative and left wing philosophy is freedom versus equality That's not naive, it's an accurate assessment. The current authoritarian zealotry which threatens freedom of speech, academic freedom and public debate is not coming from the right wing. It is coming from the left wing That is explicit on both sides of the Atlantic

You've just said the same thing again. Right wing thinking can and does also produce real authoritarianism. Even a cursory glance at history shows this. This in itself shows that freedom isn't at the heart of right wing thinking.

It certainly isn't at the heart of conservatism, and again, even a brief look at the history of conservatism will show that.

That's not a criticism of either, btw, why should freedom be at the heart of either of them? It's a limited value.

What is happening "right now" is not enough to make the sorts of conclusions you are making.

You are repeatedly conflating right wing and Conservative. They are not synonymous It's quite irritating. If you are denying that the difference between the left and the Conservative political side can be summarized as freedom versus equality? I suggest you take a look at policy. Do you think it's accidental that left wing parties want to increase taxation to redistribute wealth? Freedom has never been a priority for the left wing They believe in a big state and some aspects of a command economy. The current existential threat to freedom of expression is coming almost exclusively from the left. If you are unable to acknowledge that? So be it

..* 'The first generation not allowed to play outside'...

Priceless!

Justhadathought
I'm often up around the university where I live.....and I see young people leaving their lecture and walking along the street; crossing the road and arriving at their end destination without ever looking up from their screen. They often have ear phones on too; completely oblivious to the world around them; to the people, the traffic, the sights and sounds......

They badly need a Phantom Tollbooth each.

Voltaire didn't say what is quoted as having been written by him:
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it," was his attitude now.
was his biographer, Evelyn Hall, writing as Stephen G. Tallentyre.

What he did say, in his Essay on Tolerance, was "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too." (He said it in French, which explains the syntax.) I wish more people lived by that one.

And Dr Johnson said, "Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth, and every other man has a right to knock him down for it. Martyrdom is the test."

He didn't say how disputes between women should be handled. Possibly not a thing he'd ever take seriously, let alone a dispute between women and men.