2024/11/17

Eat The New Shit, Same As The Old Shit

Critical Theory, Crashes And Burns

Years ago, when Critical Theory started creeping into everything, academics were the first  roll over like pet dogs for this stuff. Even in universities, the students were probably more incredulous about Critical Theory than the tutors who were busy buying into this stuff, hoping to advance their careers. In my case, I was a little fortunate in two ways. One was that this stuff came to me first via my band mate Pharmakeus who was already an Arts Faculty grad, and so passingly well-versed in the argumentation of these Pos-t-Modern thinkers from France. The second dose came via my time spent playing hooky from med School and hanging out with my old school chum who allowed me to witness the absurdity of Derrida-added 'deconstruction' being applied to architecture where the main purpose is to construction. 

As the 1980s gave way to the 1990s and my bent towards the Arts deepened, I found myself at Film School and being force-fed a lot of this kind of French thinker branded argumentation in screen analysis classes. The problem of course is there's a great gap between what can be read from a  text and how to go about staging something for the camera. The accepted wisdom of those espousing Critical Theory was  the ultimate authority over the text resided wit the reader, even if they were misreading it, and authorial intent was no more than a delusion of just one view point amongst a multitude. 

I won't argue with people who want this to be true, but if you want to direct a film - any film - you're going to have to carry intent on to set and aim to achieve something in the camera. You have to exercise a tremendous level of focus, and determination to bring this about because film making as it were, has a multitude of ways of going wrong. And when it goes wrong, you can't count on the audience to misread your text in your favour. That's just not how this shit goes. Contrary to all the screen analysis classes we got, film-making is a decidedly Modernist enterprise. 

That said, it's good to know what critics think and how they go a bout their job of manufacturing public opinion. Let me remind you, the average critic sucks for this reason, and the more they lean into critical Theory to come up with value judgements that seem to defy common sense, you come to realise how bankrupt this business of Critical Theory can get. But that's just my experience. Most people would have experienced this as one year we're making homophobic jokes and bullying trans people, and then we're the ones being bullied around by the notion of political correctness.  

Don't look now but I think the majority of Americans just voted to end that shit. Except, they're just replacing that shit with another load of fresh shit of a different animal. 

Incels Go Political

It goes without saying a candidate like Kamala Harris is unlikely to draw the Incel vote. So by default Trump harvested their votes. This is peculiar when you think about. For the first time in modern history, a political statement was made and turned an election on the basis of men not getting laid. I don't think there has ever been an American election like this where a sizeable part of demographic consisted of men who made it a political cause that they were un-fuckable - and somehow this wasn't their fault. It was society's fault. In future, democratic strategists in America are going to have to reckon with this demographic and ask themselves how they make inroads into these men. 

The natural instinct is to say, no, we will not pander to such lowly sentiment and aspirations. Yet they have to go to the drawing board with something for this constituency. The Democrats can't just leave the un-fuckable Incel men to be automatically set to vote for the Trumpists. 

Arguably the big jump to the right in all constituencies was fuelled by new Gen Z male voters coming of age, and whaddaya know? They're bigger assholes than we thought - they voted overwhelmingly for Trump. I'm sure they have their reasons... They're not commendable reasons if they lead you to abandon principles and vote for Trump. Pardon the pun, this is going to be a hard nut to crack. 

Plight of Masculinity

Still, one of the themes coming out of the Trumpets victory is that somehow this outcome is the upshot of the crisis of masculinity that has been bulling for, say 20-odd years. In reality American masculinity probably has benign some kind of crisis for at least 50 years if Susan Faludi's book 'Stiffed' is any indication. The stories she managed to collect for that tome were on the whole soul-destroying and devastating. Her conclusion  at the end of the book made the pithy self-serving point that men might find a way through all this mess if the embraced feminism and emancipated themselves from traditional gender roles set out for men. Of course a feminist would say that. 

Except in the years since that book came out, the route back to traditional masculinity was also blown up, and nobody actually addressed how men should be. That space, unattended to by the Left got taken up by the Right in figures like Andrew Tate and Joe Rogan and Jordan Petersen. Their comic book level, asinine depiction of masculinity was all Gen Z had to go on, and now that they've come of age they've become assholes. And we're surprised this happened at all? 

Nobody on the Left likes the outcome of the US Elections. But Trump beating a woman candidate has happened twice now and this time with younger voter participation, the result was even more pronounced. There's a clear problem with what the Left is perceived to be saying and how the Left judges those who disagree with them. The conversation has gone just so far to the point these Gen Z men will lie to pollsters they would vote for Kamala because that plays better for them individually, but they know full well it hurts the Left to vote for Trump, and that's why they do. It's no longer about discourse, it's about existential action. 

Susan Faludi would tell you this is Backlash on a huge, generational scale. I love her book 'Stiffed' but I have to say this is the election Feminism worked on 50 years to lose. I know the Leftist women are hurting the world all over. But they must reckon with the fact they've lost support of the next generation of men.   

The Gaze of the Left-ist Parties

All of that led me to wonder how any party views anybody. Trump and his campaign looked at Incels and thought "now that's a demographic we need to go after." That made me wonder how say, the Australian Labour Party views my vote. What would people like Albo and Richard Marles and Penny Wong think of me and my vote? If we're being honest, they don't know I exist, and to the extent that I'm generally centre-left in my views, my vote would be something they take for granted. Equally, the Liberal Party would look at my vote as something they could not turn, so they would not necessarily work the policies to bid for my vote. 

Look, this is just a thought experiment. If we're always going to charge people with their gaze being filtered through identity, it's fair to ask just how one is being decoded by my own side of politics. That is to say, you can take overt discrimination from the Right because you just know that's how they roll. How do you know that your own side isn't discriminating against you but hiding it really well? It's not paranoid to ask this for the simple reason that I'm not convinced my stance to various issues are necessarily being reflected in the discourse. Worse still, I feel like I'm being ignored by the people on my own side of politics. If I'm asking this about the ALP in Australia, how can we be surprised if old grassroots Democrat voters of past elections revised their views on the Democratic Party? 

Is the left actually representing what it purports to represent? There are signs we're being played everywhere. 

I'll be honest. I think Albo's going to lose to Peter Dutton at the next Federal election. The signs are there. the combination of the rapid inflation unleashed by Putin's war and the cost of living crisis brought about by the Property Bubble and rapid rise in interest rates has pretty much taken away the argument that Albo and the ALP have managed the economy well. The ship has sailed (and hit an iceberg). If the US elections are anything to go by, the Leftist incumbent government won't be able to marshal the crucial, swinging votes. If their election gets turned into a circus about abortion and transgender people going into women's toilets, and about woke-ism, they're going to be skewered at the ballot box. 


2024/11/11

Trump's Triumphant Return

The Dust Settles, The Poo Still Stinks

Where do we start with all this? I think first of all, we have yet another election where the polls told a completely different story to how people actually voted. I'm sure the pollsters were working very hard to be as precise as possible but polls are vulnerable to people lying. And when you think about people voting for Donald Trump, there is something shameful about it in exactly the same way that voting for Kamala Harris would be virtuous. This is exactly the bias that Trumpets object to, as they denounce the Left. They lie to pollsters and cast their votes to a convicted felon. 

I imagine the Democrats are in intellectual disarray. Let's face it, they have been found out to be phonies by their own side. The working class voting block they used to count on decamped from the Dems and voted Trump. If Democrats and disaffected Republicans chased out from their own party by the Trumpists, together cannot beat the Trumpets in number, we've turned a corner in history. Things are desperate in middle America, and they really wanted to poke the 'woke' people in the eye with a sharp pencil. And I have to say as somebody somewhere sitting on the Centre Left, I do appreciate that sentiment. If Kamala Harris candidacy can be reduced to 'woke', it means she's the candidate for transgender women who are born men, turning up in women's toilets. Compared to that, maybe leaning into fascism is penny ante stuff?

DEI - Disenfranchisement, Exclusion, and Inequality

The working class stiffs in the Rust Belt did not stick with the Democrats. They went back to Trump. That is to say, in 2020 they voted out Trump because of his incompetence and generally ramshackle style of government which created chaos everywhere. They came back for the Dems to vote in Biden-Harris. If this vote is any kind verdict, it's a resounding denunciation of the Democratic Party.  

One way to look at it is that even though the US Democrats are ostensibly a Centre-Left party, they clearly are not one. Their economic policies are not really as left-leaning as you would think by the way the Republicans demonise them. You would think they were communist-adjacent but in reality they are more Republican-adjacent, and they only look left to Trumpist Republicans because Trumpists are fascists. The democrats by their very nature can only make gestures towards the working class vote. It can't deliver a whole bunch for them; things like socialised medicine and universal healthcare as Bernie Sanders bangs on, are actually not really on offer. 

If you thought their health policy was unambitious, their position on taxation in general is decidedly capitalist if we're being polite. They don't dislike capitalist exploitation any less than the Republicans - they like it quite a lot.  

Because the Dems are not properly of the Left, their claim on being the part of the worker has to go back 100 years to Franklin Delano Roosevelt to find any proof. The Dems have had long ties to unions, and the illusion that they are a kind of Labor/Labour Party equivalent in the American context, but the reality of their policy making and governance has shown time and time again this is a delusion. The working class in America have taken note, and they have become massive swing voters in the Rust Belt exactly because the Democrats have very little credibility left as the working man's party. The working class in the Rust Belt have been alienated and disenfranchised. They have been excluded from the prosperity enjoyed by coastal elites, and the inequality is flat-out killing them. 

It's understandable they vote Trump.

Baby Boomers Continue Their Reign

It's getting weird how American politics is stuck in this gear. We go all the way back to 1992 with Bill Clinton, and all of the Presidents have been Boomers since. Even if Kamala Harris had won, she too was a young Boomer. If Trump dies in office, they jump straight to Millennials with JD Vance. That would even be okay if Vance himself weren't such a crypto-fascist, liar, and all-round-hatable schmuck. Maybe Trump will be the last Boomer President. It's hard to see how the Democrats are going to jump with their next candidate in 2028. I'm betting they will choose yet another Boomer. 

There were attempts to cast Kamala Harris as a Gen-X type. She was born in late 1964, so she's close enough! Maybe that's so for some people. Did anybody believe for a moment that Harris spent the 1990s listening to Nirvana and Red Hot Chilli Peppers? Yeah me neither.   

What Kind of White Woman Votes Trump?

This was the same question back in 2016. The hard to thing to fathom back then was the white woman demographic. This time around, 90% of black women voted Harris; 60% of hispanic women voted Harris, but only 45% of white women voted Harris. This echos the same voting pattern as the women who voted for Trump and Clinton back in 2016. Black women overwhelmingly voted for Hillary Clinton back then too, which contrasted greatly with the underwhelming support Clinton got from white women. 

Back then, the question was "how can these women be (stupidly) voting against their own interests?" 

Turns out, they were voting for their disenfranchised sons - and they turned out much stronger in that vector this time around. So much for all the talk about this election being about women's bodies and choices. These women looked at all these university-educated women going on about women's rights and thought about the zero-sum game of the gender war. To open space for women, men have to lose space. For women to climb, a man has to lose a spot to her and step down. So not-for-first-time, they decided to vote against a woman who would take the top job from a man. 

I don't know what the Democrats can do about this gender war schema. When it gets boiled down, their agenda is such that they have to rob from Peter and Paul to pay Mary. If Peter and Paul don't want to vote for that arrangement, they've got a tough sell. I personally don't think having a female POTUS is any kind of issue, but twice now, the US electorate has given that notion a big thumbs down. It begs the question, what the hell will the Dems do about that electoral reality? 

 


  

Blog Archive