.

And by a prudent flight and cunning save A life which valour could not, from the grave. A better buckler I can soon regain, But who can get another life again? Archilochus

Monday, June 18, 2018

Outvictiming Victimhood


Slavoj Zizek, "A Case of the Deadlock of Political Correctness"
On a US campus, an incident took place recently: a group of young Latino workers were restoring the façade of a house on a plateau that overlooked a nearby swimming pool where a group of young women were sunbathing in bikinis, and the workers started to throw at them flirtatious comments (what in Latin America they call piropo). Predictably, the girls felt harassed and complained, and the solution imposed by the authorities was no less predictable: they separated the house from the pool area by a plastic wall, and they also constructed a special plastic tunnel through which the workers had to approach their workplace without a view of the pool area – a perfect example of the ‘politically correct’ way of dealing with sexism which just fixates the lines separating groups of people.

From the girls’ standpoint, what happened was a clear-cut case of male-chauvinist harassment, “objectivizing” women as sexual prey, while from the workers’ standpoint, their exclusion was a no less clear-cut case of maintaining a class distinction, of protecting the white middle class from the contact with ordinary workers. Is it then feminist struggle versus class struggle, with the long-term solution to somehow cut unite the two and convincing both sides that their respective struggles are moments of the same universal struggle for emancipation? It’s not as simple as that since it is the class struggle itself which over-determines the tension between the two struggles: the workers’ piropo was obviously so disturbing to the girls because it came from lower class boys unworthy of their attention, and the boys were aware of this dimension when they were reprimanded. Feminism can also play a class game, implying that lower classes are vulgar, male-chauvinist, not ‘politically correct’, so that the fear of being “harassed” reveals itself to be the fear of lower class vulgarity; this, however, in no way means that we should say to the girls in our case – “Endure the harassment on account of the solidarity with the working class (and remember they are Latino foreigners who have their way of life)!” – at this level of the direct confrontation of the two views, the conflict cannot be resolved, and this irresolvable deadlock IS the reality of class struggle.

The over-determining role of class struggle does not amount to the standard “essentialist”-Marxist claim that sexuality gets violent due to class struggle but remains in itself non-violent – class struggle co-opts the immanent violence and deadlocks that pertain to sexuality as such. In the same way, other particular struggles obey their own immanent antagonist logic: different ethnic-religious “ways of life” are immanently out-of-sync due to the different mode of regulating collective jouissance, human industry affects our environment in potentially dangerous ways independently of specific modes of production, etc. – class struggle does not introduce antagonism into them but over-determines their immanent antagonisms. More precisely, class antagonism is doubly inscribed, it encounters itself in its oppositional determination, among the struggles whose totality it over-determines. Back to our example, class struggle is represented by the resistance towards Mexican workers by the bathing girls (in contrast to their feminist claims), plus it over-determines the very articulation of these particular struggles. The actuality of the class struggle is the tension between the two emancipatory struggles – but, again, not in the sense that the workers stand for the proletariat and the girls for the bourgeoisie. If one were to decide to which side one should give priority in the conflict, there are strong arguments that the bathing girls effectively were harassed and should be somehow protected. The overall dynamics of class struggle is the over-determining factor of the conflict and, consequently, that which makes the conflict irresolvable in its own terms (even if we give the priority to the harassed girls, there is a shadow of injustice in this choice).

8 comments:

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

Imagine what would have happened if we lived in a universe where leftists are capable of rational thought.

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

* the sunbathing women would sunbathe without harrassment

* the Latino workers would be back in Latinostan

* Slavoj Zizek Who?

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

* A Miss America pageant would feature a swimsuit competition...

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

* still have tan M&Ms

FreeThinke said...

If they were capable of rational thought, they wouldn't BE leftists.

It's as simple as that.

Leftist Thought is an amalgam of Wishful Thinking supported and promoted by a sour, cynical, innately vicious form of fanatical ICONOCLASM.

In reality Leftist thought is wholly DESTRUCTIVE, and therefore EVIL.

That does not mean, however, that the armies of deceived souls who've bought into this Evil Ideology are bad people. I know too many ;leftists, personally, who are sincere, well-meanin.g, kind-hearted, generous and decent. I see them s VICTIMS more than ViCTIMIZERS.

After all how many have the wisdom, knowledge of history, and strength of character to resist the "Pied Piper "when he comes to town?

jez said...

"If they were capable of rational thought, they wouldn't BE leftists."

is the admission of a man who has given up on empathy. I see it in all directions, each political faction is largely convinced proponents of the others must be stupid and cruel. It is boring, and it limits us as a species. I get a lot out of learning how to argue in favour of ideas I oppose.

And as for rational thought, I wish I could see more evidence of it in the posts you make online. I see plenty that is reactionary, emotional, hostile to change, aesthetical (none of these is meant as admonition) but precious little rationality.

FreeThinke said...

I hate you too, Jez –– passionately. };^)>

Why can't we just leave it at that.

You are not my kind of guy, and I am not yours.

Your persistent insolence cancels out any redeeming qualities you may have –– quakities I, personally have never been able to discern.

In short you are a crashing bore, and I'll thank you not to address me in furure, unless you can mange to be civil, which you most certainly are NOT.

jez said...

This is not a private conversation, and replies to your posts need not be interpreted as replies to you personally. Clearly, neither of us is prioritising civility here.