BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Political Correctness - collation and discussion

 
  

Page: 12345(6)

 
 
sdv (non-human)
14:25 / 13.04.06
Hummm,

points 1, 2, 3 aren't very carnivalesque are they ?

Most of the comments and understandings held within barbelith are normal and are repeated ad nauseum by the rest of the spectacle. Which rather contradicts the Mordants argument...
 
 
matthew.
14:39 / 13.04.06
I don't follow your point, sdv. Care to clarify?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:42 / 13.04.06
sdv: Could you read back over, and have a think about the relationship of Mordant's point to the comment by DEDI to which it was responding, before commenting further? It will hopefully minimise threadrot.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
09:58 / 17.04.06
I don't understand quite why SDV's bringing Bakhtin's theory of carnival into this.
 
 
sdv (non-human)
14:18 / 22.04.06
Humm...ok... and to be serious rather than as a joke...

I raised the spectre of Bakhtin's carnival (amongst others) because I'm beginning to wonder if the spectre of PC is reacted to so strongly by liberals and conservatives because of a fear of the transgressive nature of political correctness. PC remains transgressive and consequently carnivalesque because of the extraordinary way in which they (liberals/conservatives) respond to the ideas of equality and equivalence. It appears that there really is nothing so transgressive to a liberal and/or conservative than the idea that no human culture, no human person has any greater worth than any other. It is after all this radical conscept of equality that PC developed out of, (not the phrase but the concept, the idea that you are not to denigrate someone merely because that are different from you... for reasons of class, gender, sexual orientation and so on...)

Bakhtin's use of the carnival is always transgressive, whilst containing "...the atmosphere of joyful relativity characteristic of a carnival sense of the world, this element is fundamentally changed: there is a weakening of it's one-sided rhetorical seriousness, its rationality, its singular meaning, its dogmatism...." (Bahktin). The normal tendency is for people to imagine that it is the anti-PC who are being transgressive through their expressed desire to refuse equality and equivilance, whereas the reality is that there is nothing transgressive or joyful about this at all.

PC (a concept which I think should be understood as positive rather than negative) is carnivalesque because of the way in which it refuses the liberal and conservative notion that X is potentially better than Y. That this is acceptable and this isn't, PC is carnivalesque because it can never know that X is better than Y and consequently has to refuses the notion of absolute judgement... Such judgements that have passed away recently contain things such as homosexuality compared to heterosexuality and so on. PC is carnivalesque in it's utter joyful indifference to such things...
 
 
All Acting Regiment
18:10 / 22.04.06
Aye, I see. Stuff about how (to paraphrase crudely) we go from beleiving in the illusion of our own individual egotistical bodies (me-in-my-house-go-away)to an awareness of the universal body (all-people-everywhere) and so on.

Those who are self identified "anti-PC" will claim to be degrading the current mores/power structure...they're not, they're reinforcing it.

Then you've got the idea of scatology- which is supposed to bring everyone down to the same level, and this is where I wonder if it might be worth starting a new thread on the meaning of the word "offence".

I mean, clearly there's a difference between, on the one hand, that joke, I forgot which comedian it was, where she says "If I wanted to laugh and come at the same time I'd toss myself off with a glove puppet", and on the other hand, an able bodied person making wheelchair jokes- but both these things could be described as "offensive"- although there's obviously osmething very different going on in each.
 
 
sdv (non-human)
08:54 / 24.04.06
sure, that's right. The difference between the two narratives that you produce is, it seems to me, the difference between two events. The first raises and contains the spectre of the pain of her condition, and the latter raises the spectre of the oppression of the other. The first is of course PC and the latter is not...

This is not incidentally to go along with the false-truth of the identity political position which suggests that only the comedian can comment or understand her position, her existance. (That way leads inexorably towards the recognition that the current neo-fascisms are perfectly valid entries into the line of identity politics) But rather that given that she is implicitly supporting the universal of equality (universal-body) her PC position remains true... Whereas the latter can (generally) never be anything but an oppressive act.

Surely both can be considered offensive, but just look at the way people are STILL being offended by the idea that feminism is required. Which leads to a confirmation of the thought that the transgressive nature of PC is a good way of understanding PC...

Perhaps it has to be that because we need something to be transgressive. For example: where once we would have read Bataille's carnivalesque/pornographic monster 'Story of the Eye' - as trangressive but which these days is reduced to banality because it's all to easily reinvented as anti-PC.... (alas poor George)...
 
 
*
23:42 / 13.11.06
I found this a well-written explanation of the main idea of this thread, one that people who are still confused about the argument would do well to read.

Simply put, the great "PC" cliché, as commonly deployed in mainstream discourse, is cultural propaganda designed to befuddle and misdirect while defending the current power structure. All politics deal with power relations, and in the debate over America's alleged climate of "political correctness", there's a stark asymmetry of power between the defiant megaphone-wielders who complain of being constrained by humorless hypersensitivity from below, and the under-represented people of color, women, LGBT, handicapped, poor, and otherwise marginalized or dispossessed people who have no choice but to absorb the linguistic, cultural, and physical barbs of the ruling class. The former feel psycho-emotionally oppressed by their inability to crack puerile ethnic jokes without criticism; the latter simply are oppressed.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
08:49 / 14.11.06
Interesting that this thread has been bumped today - listening to the Today programme - for the Americans, this is a morning programme on BBC Radio 4 which keeps track of the state of the British hedgerows and any misuses of English grammar in parliament, I overheard an interview with John Bird, founder of the Big Issue - for the Americans, the Big Issue is a British magazine sold by the homeless - although these days I get mine ordered from Sainsburys. He was explaining that many people selling the Big Issue had been raised in care after their parents had proved unable to cope with them, and having been ejected by the are system had nowhere to go and nothing to do but live on the streets. He stressed the importance of parents looking after their children, talking to them and spending time with them, and worried that in a generation's time this generation's children will become alienated and alienating parents.

To which the interviewer responded "But aren't you worried about being accused of politically correct parenting?"

Of all the concerns raised - children in care, children being abandoned, children being put on the conveyor belt to homelessness almost at birth, the interviewer felt that what John Bird should really be worried about is that he might be called politically correct.

Bird's response, quite sensibly, was "I don't care". Clearly, however, others do.
 
 
illmatic
14:15 / 15.11.06
That link seems to not be working, Mr D.
 
 
*
14:54 / 15.11.06
Pegs, if you're talking to me/about my link (I am not Mr D, although I'm flattered by the comparison), you're not the only one who's told me that. But it works fine for me. Can anyone else figure out what's going on here?
 
 
HCE
15:29 / 15.11.06
The link works for me.
 
 
illmatic
16:04 / 15.11.06
Sorry for the error, working fine on my home PC.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
03:06 / 11.07.07
This company makes "Politically Incorrect" guides to various topics, a read of the site probably proving beyond all reasonable doubt that the phrase "Political Correctness" and its attendant ideology has no redeeming qualities.
 
 
Evil Scientist
05:19 / 11.07.07
Me am look at sight, can me scrub eyes clean with brillo-pad now please?
 
 
Hieronymus
14:30 / 11.07.07
Regnery Publishing has a notorious record of floating the shittiest conservative hackery known to man. As I recall, they were the publishers of the Swift Boat Vet book Unfit For Command, the moronic book about Clinton's involvement in Vince Foster's suicide and god knows what else.

Nitwits all.
 
 
Evil Scientist
10:43 / 14.09.11
Bump
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
21:26 / 14.09.11
Good call.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
12:03 / 25.02.13
Afterwit: Recently came across absolutely the perfect descriptor for the whole PC-gone-maaaad thing, a good half-decade to late. Ah well.

Thought-terminating cliché.
 
  

Page: 12345(6)

 
  
Add Your Reply