Mau-Mauing

Andrew Fox discusses the principal political weapon of the Western Left, and its mobilization against political incorrectness in science fiction:

Coincidentally, the same years which have witnessed the emergency of speech codes on many campuses have also witnessed an accelerated symbiosis between the pro SF community and academia (in that greater numbers of SF/fantasy writers have as day jobs teaching at the post-high school level, and SF literature and film has become an increasingly respectable and popular subject of university courses). … For many individuals under the age of forty who have been through the university system, mau-mauing may seem normative, or at least unremarkable. They have seen it at work through divestment campaigns of various kinds (divestment from Israeli companies or U.S. companies which provide goods to Israel which might be used in security operations against Palestinians, or from companies involved in fossil fuel production, or from companies connected to certain figures active on the Right, such as the Koch brothers) and through shout-downs and other disruptions of speakers invited to campus whose backgrounds or viewpoints are contrary to those favored by student activists. (via)

It’s deeply disturbing, as pretty much everything is these days. (Those who know anything about China’s Cultural Revolution will find their pattern recognition centers sparking up.)

ADDED: Mau-Mauing is the perfect illustration of the fact that political ‘voice’ and ‘freedom of speech’, far from being near synonyms, are closer to antonyms.

June 22, 2013admin 12 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Uncategorized

TAGGED WITH : ,

12 Responses to this entry

  • Nick B. Steves Says:

    Mau-Mauing is the perfect illustration of the fact that political ‘voice’ and ‘freedom of speech’, far from being near synonyms, are closer to antonyms.

    I realize this was left as an exercise to the reader, but some readers are a little slow. So which one, “voice” or “freedom of speech” is the Orwellian euphemism?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    That wasn’t deliberately cryptic, but more of a paleo-liberal tic. I had simply assumed free speech to be desirable and — less questionably — political voice despicable (at least out here).

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Okay, that makes sense:

    Voice≡freedom of speech for me, not for you.

    Freedom of Speech≡freedom of speech.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 23rd, 2013 at 12:39 pm Reply | Quote
  • j. ont. Says:

    And for those of us who know nothing (or very little) about China’s Cultural Revolution… what should we read?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Mao’s Last Revolution, Roderick Macfarquhar and Michael Schoenhals is the best thing I’ve seen, but there are plenty of less hefty accounts that will communicate the basic idea.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 23rd, 2013 at 10:31 pm Reply | Quote
  • Gom Jabbar Says:

    Another example: http://www.penny-arcade.com/2013/06/21/well-that-escalated-quickly

    This is someone (if you’re not familiar with PA) who has to the best of my knowledge never stepped down from anything… That’s how bad things are getting.

    Also as long as I’m commenting. A question, where does this end? When the two minutes of hate has grown to the 24 hours of hate? Is this on a singularity track by itself?

    I forget where I read it, but progressives have to keep progressing to a new set of victims. It should be obvious that at this point they’re really scrapping the bottom of the barrel. What happens when the barrel is dry?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Isn’t this Jim’s Left Singularity model, from a slightly different angle? The mau-mauing moves steadily leftwards, as the cultural revolution devours its own, until nothing but psychotic fanaticism remains, then it implodes.

    [Reply]

    Gom Jabbar Reply:

    That must obviously be where I read it. I guess my big question is does mau-mauing implode on a different schedule than the Keynesian delusion (or other elements of the left singularity), and if so what impact does it have? Does the former hasten the latter?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Those questions deserve better than a knee-jerk response — because you’re right that there are several parallel models of runaway leftist collapse on the table, and their inter-relations need thrashing through.

    Thales Reply:

    Well, I certainly won’t pass on this opportunity to make a hasty, knee-jerk response.

    My guess: Keynesianism is on the bow of this Titanic and thus sinks first. As in the USSR, the illusion continues until they cannot pay the bills. Culture continues long after its relevancy. Facts on the ground lead.

    The contrary argument, that the culture changes first, is that of the optimistic neo-reactionary: what James Donald calls a “soft landing.”

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    The collapse of the Keynesian illusion, would I think engender the softest of all possible landings.

    Posted on June 24th, 2013 at 12:04 am Reply | Quote
  • underground-man Says:

    Only tangentially relevant, but have you ever seen the movie La chinoise by Godard? If not, check it our right away. A perfect illustration of the ridiculousness of students’ politics.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 28th, 2013 at 3:34 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment