JK Rowling threatening legal action

[TheLashKingOfScotland]

A TRA and Canadian Green Party rep has made libellous comments about JK regarding her position on trans rights and her suitability to be trusted around children.
JK asked her to retract them or they would hear from JK's lawyers. Currently they are digging in. Seemingly unaware that JK has pursued legal cases based on Twitter comments before and that it isn't acceptable to make unfounded statements about people.
It will be interesting to see how it unfolds.
It could have wider reaching consequences if certain sectors see they can't just make unfounded accusations any more.

(Something else for the Baroness to look into perhaps.)

I think a look at the history books might be helpful here.

Comparing the extremes of the Left and the Right doesn't tell us much about where we are now. The comparison should be between the mainstreams of each side. When I look at it in that way I see far more authoritarian tendencies on the Left.

In terms of the mainstream, FloralBunting has it with this:

The danger is always moral superiority. When you believe that your cause is so just, it justifies unjust means.

Maybe the difference is the right being more comfortable with cynicism? You need idealism to create the true believers who'll function as the stormtroopers for whatever idea is being promoted. Which doesn't in any way mean the people pulling the strings are true believers themselves.

Also why American right wing politics are scarier than the British version, because there are lots and lots of true believers who're sure they represent the one true moral authority in the US right wing (though again not necessarily in charge most of the time).

My perspective in this is coloured by my religious experience, of course, but church is fairly obviously, rightly or wrongly, a place where concepts about morality and righteousness are very significant. And I have been part of 'right wing' churches and 'left wing' churches. Both consider themselves to be morally superior. It manifests itself differently, of course, but that tendency for moral superiority to become a cudgel against non-conformists is exactly the same.

I've yet to find a situation in the wider mainstream where these dynamics are not replicated.

Excellent post Floral

I think if you think that the British right wing generally features the same level of, hmm, let's just call it moral righteousness and evangelical zeal that the American right does then you're not very familiar with the American right. I also think that this is why you sometimes see Brits and Americans talking past each other on here.

No, in the UK, you are much more likely to find the evangelical zeal on the left wing, for sure. And I don't disagree that there is a massive cultural difference between the US and UK and the Right wing in the US is a different animal to the UK. The UK right is more reserved, less enthusiastic than the US, but I think this is more to do with the difference in national temperament than the underlying dynamics.

Tbh, I don't think that's a bad thing on the whole.

The danger is always moral superiority. When you believe that your cause is so just, it justifies unjust means.

Yes.

Yeah, my main feeling about the relative lack of evangelic zeal on the British right is relief. It does end up making the British left look a bit insane in comparison though. And then there are the aspects of the current purity politics on the British left that have clearly been imported from the US that are layered on top of the issues within the British left that already existed.

I think that relative level of national reserve and difference in national temperament is why the UK is better placed to be the testing ground for pushback against TRAs.

My friend is a vegetarian except for chicken

And you know what? That's actually OK! Sometimes the word "vegetarian" is just a shortcut for a preference; it's not something written in stone; it's not a rulebook you have to keep under all circumstances.

I know lots of people who stopped eating meat for health reasons, or for environmental reasons, or for animal rights reasons; but they still actually like meat. I'm not going to point fingers at them if they now and again stray. To say "I'm vegetarian" is easier than saying "I don;t eat red meat, I do eat white meat". People get it.

I call myself vegetarian because I actually loathe the taste, smell, look of meat; it makes me retch. But I do like fish and seafood.

It's not a religion, the way transgenderism is.

I call myself vegetarian because I actually loathe the taste, smell, look of meat; it makes me retch. But I do like fish and seafood.

It's like you and me were separated at birth!

The danger is always moral superiority. When you believe that your cause is so just, it justifies unjust means.

Left, right, TRA, MRA, hell, even feminists - we are all susceptible to this, which is the essence of purges and purity spirals ad infinitum.

Very astute point, FloralBunting. These are human traits and weaknesses and any group of people, activists or ideology can succumb to being wrapped up in moral superiority and absolute moral values that they can end up thinking that any means is acceptable to justify the end goal.

I do think it would be nice to find some proper right wing critique of far right ideology.

It's easy for right wing commentators to criticise left wing ideas and for left wing commentators to criticise right wing ideas. Anyone can do that imo.
The true challenge is whether you are able to turn a critical eye towards yourself and those like you, and your deeply cherished ideas and beliefs and examine what flaws they might have which could potentially lead to a more extremist interpretation.

I don't think I have been able to come across those on the political right who talk openly and frankly about such things. They might briefly admit that of course there are those on the right or far right who have awful views, but then quickly change the subject without going into any further analysis.

@FloralBunting

The danger is always moral superiority. When you believe that your cause is so just, it justifies unjust means.

Left, right, TRA, MRA, hell, even feminists - we are all susceptible to this, which is the essence of purges and purity spirals ad infinitum.

The minute you lose sight of the fact that your opinion could be wrong and that you are no more inherently righteous than anyone else, when you base your life on ideologies rather than material, provable reality, you become a mark for the next totalitarian wave.

In this context, humility and a strong commitment to scrutinizing your conclusions is vital if you want to avoid that. It's one of the reasons there are a number of threads here where women ask 'Do you ever think you got this wrong?' and why I welcome that - because we're asking ourselves hard questions, revisiting the foundations to see if they still hold. Once we stop doing that and begin parroting slogans without connection to the factual realities that underpin them, we've lost our footing.

Thank you, Floral, so eloquently put and so important.

It strikes me that there's a parallel here with regards to how safeguarding works - nobody can be put in a place that's outwith scrutiny or beyond reproach or critique. We always need to be able to question and I think Tony Benn's 5 questions are a very good place to start:

'those in positions of economic, social and political power should always be asked five questions:

“What power have you got?”

“Where did you get it from?”

“In whose interests do you use it?”

“To whom are you accountable?”

“How do we get rid of you?” '

I’d have seen Malfoy as a closeted homosexual if I’d have been looking for that but at the time I wasn’t

I saw both Harry ad Malfoy as gay from quite early on. But this might have something to do with me being exposed to 'slash' after watching a couple of the movies...that was an..interesting rabbit hole!

Funny I never read it as a sexual or romantic relationship. I read it as dumbledore nearly being seduced by power and elitism. Like the temptation in the desert. It was his dabble with the darkness and the test he passed through which embedded him into the light without denial of his shadow self.

Thats how I saw that too. He walked the line between good and bad..

Oh god and dobby dying.

Yeah, all the people who died, and I still find the elfs death the saddest. Its the only part in the films (and pretty much any film, am not a cryer, at all) that made me fill up :(

Going to end up having to bloody watch them all again now, likely followed by reading my book set is te stepson hasn't lost them yet..might just let him keep them and order more actually.

I just don’t think they see themselves, or need to see themselves as a tribe. They’re a very broad church hence left wing are shocked that working class people vote Tory or people of colour.

Some of the core of what the right is eg don’t interfere too much with individual rights and freedoms, the right to be left in peace by the state and ideology so long as you are obeying the core law make total sense to me. Where I struggle is their lack of compassion and provision for the poor and al the faux meritocracy crap.

The left are poor at selling what they stand for other than being nice and giving more to the poor. And they’re very poor at selling to people who aren’t struggling why supporting the poor and and more taxation would benefit even them.

It ends up as a pantomime if goodies and baddies and that might well appeal to the young and ideologically driven but not so much to older and more dispassionate voters.

We basically have really immature politics these days. Just tribalism and hyperbole which understandably is a massive turn off for many

I also have never read animal farm

Something thats to be rectified shortly, as it seems am pretty much the only adult who hasn't..will look this afternoon

BatShite, I'll join you on the Animal Farm outsider camp. I've read Big Brother, BNW and 'We', but missing an important one in the dystopian section, I think!

Thank god I am not the only one, its lonely on the outside looking in! ha.

I haven't even read the 1984 one either, so will order that too. My dads been going on about that for years now.

I'd suggest reading Animal Farm first, then 1984.

In between you could read about the relevant historical context of Animal Farm. You don't need to go mad, there are some relatively concise summaries out there.

Will do, thanks. Its been one of those things I have been meaning to do for years now but just keep forgetting about almost as soon as I think about it! But it seems to be brought up much much more these days, so would like to understand where people are coming from!

The style of 1984 is very bare, it's stripped right down I feel. There's no beauty to the prose. It works for the subject matter, obviously, but it's not an enjoyable read.

I sobbed my heart out when Boxer was taken away. I think I was about 7 or 8 the first time I read it (older brother was doing it at school and I pinched it). The political allegory flew way over my head!

It’s a long time since I read it but I seem to remember 1984 being more about an individuals struggle with the bleakness of a life and the mental landscape of a crushing system or that’s the impression it left on me. A human in a system that deprives them of the essence of being human.

I need to reread it.