The Rise of the Far Right

[Hook]

I don’t know the full story here, only that students protested about a far-right hate-speech propaganda movie being shown. This is absolutely nothing new, students have protested against such things throughout time and student unions have defined their own policy. My generation’s targets were South African apartheid, Thatcher etc (not that I was ever a student, though I very much moved in the same circles). I think it is fine. The university can sort it out and I view it 100% as their decision, just how what I platform here is mine.

A venue deciding to show something or not, responding to protest etc is never ‘banning’. A ban can only be done at nation or state level, e.g. DeSantis banning books in Florida. That is banning. This is not the same at all, it is end-user pressure. It is just people expressing a view on hateful material. The film is still legal. Protest should always be legal too.

Never suggested that students shouldn’t be allowed to peacefully protest. Unfortunately, it was the threat of violence that caused the university to delay the showing.

Using a threat of violence to suppress a different point of view - no matter how repugnant - is not a good look, even for "student politics".

I hear what you are saying about platforming, but I see a huge difference between social media sites like yours and most university campuses, especially those that are state funded. I support any site owner's right to platform whatever they want. Colleges, however, are supposed to serve the public good by exposing mature young adults to a wide plethora of views. I am not comfortable with one group of students deciding what another can learn about. I saw this as a clumsy attempt to get the university to ban the movie, but from that article, it appears all they did was delay its showing and, in the worst case, they've managed to give it a bunch of unmerited publicity.

 

[Hook]

I've only ever seen clips but I'm well aware of the content - not exactly Griffiths' finest hour!

Is watching a silent film (now well over 100 years old!) quite the same thing though? It's already history itself so you're viewing it in that context.

Adult Human Female was made last year. Would you support the screening of, say, a current neo-nazi film that was Islamophobic? Or a film promoting Islamic terrorism?

My point is I'm in favour of academic discussion and freedom of speech but we all have things that we find beyond the pale. Lines that shouldn't be crossed.

First of all, what is the point of studying history if not to inform our choices about the present and future? The leap from that silent movie to today's issues with race relations is not long.

Again, my answer to your questions is yes. The academic world is supposed to be about understanding our world, and not just the pretty parts of it. I don't want to see the ugly stuff buried, or even front-ended by trigger warnings. Real life doesn’t come with trigger warnings! If I had kids in college, I'd want them to go through a mental toughening up process to best prepare them for life.

IMO, a true commitment to diversity and inclusion means learning to understand why people have different (and often quite shocking and ugly) ideas. Hard to do if you're not exposed to them.

 

[Tony L]

Have you watched it? Has anyone here watched it? (I haven't)

No, and I wouldn’t want to, though I certainly know Kellie-Jay Keen(“Posie Parker”)’s work and close links to the far-right and US fundamentalist Christian funding as I follow many very articulate voices in the trans community. This is all part of the fascism sweeping the west at present. Tomato soup is the appropriate response.

PS I’ll relink to This recent Contrapoints video:

Everything one needs to know about KJK is covered in the last 30 minutes or so, but I highly recommend the whole thing as it is a very good overview of what is happening right now and a little history of human rights. Sadly so much is out of view of older people who still rely on terrestrial TV news and mainstream press. I honestly can’t recommend this one enough. If everyone watched it I’m sure a lot of views would change. It is very funny too.

 

[Ted-M]

No, and I wouldn’t want to, though I certainly know Kellie-Jay Keen(“Posie Parker”)’s work and close links to the far-right and US fundamentalist Christian funding as I follow many very articulate voices in the trans community. This is all part of the fascism sweeping the west at present. Tomato soup is the appropriate response.

PS I’ll relink to This recent Contrapoints video:

Everything one needs to know about KJK is covered in the last 30 minutes or so, but I highly recommend the whole thing as it is a very good overview of what is happening right now and a little history of human rights. Sadly so much is out of view of older people who still rely on terrestrial TV news and mainstream press. I honestly can’t recommend this one enough. If everyone watched it I’m sure a lot of views would change. It is very funny too.

How do you know that it's a "far-right hate-speech propaganda movie" if you haven't seen it, refuse to watch it, and don't know what's in it?


I watched this Contrapoints video when you linked it previously, and have watched a couple of others too. I thought it was fairly entertaining and raised some interesting points, some of which I agree with and some not. Have you listened to the original Witch Trials podcast? I thought it was an interesting piece of work with a genuine intent and certainly worth a listen.

 

[Tony L]

Never suggested that students shouldn’t be allowed to peacefully protest. Unfortunately, it was the threat of violence that caused the university to delay the showing.

Using a threat of violence to suppress a different point of view - no matter how repugnant - is not a good look, even for "student politics".

I didn’t realise there had been a threat of violence. I’m not condoning that, though I’ll be very surprised if this was true. Violence in the UK is almost always something done by police or fascists to protestors. Very seldom the other way, though our right-wing media does allow people who no one wants to platform cry-whinge that they’ve been “cancelled” e.g. the likes of Farage, Clarkson etc who parade their “cancellation” across their highly paid columns of the major tabloids, GB News etc. A “cancellation” that reaches millions. The protestors have little beyond Twitter, and that is getting harder now it is owned and heavily moderated by a far-right bigot.

 

[Tony L]

How do you know that it's a "far-right hate-speech propaganda movie" if you haven't seen it, refuse to watch it, and don't know what's in it?

Research. I’ve never read Mein Kampf either, or sat through Yaxley Lennon in full swing, but I know the “arguments”. Life is short. Far too short to waste 90 minutes of my life watching anti-trans-rights propaganda. I know all the GC tropes already, and I understand how they are framed. This is a film about ‘women's rights’ vs. ‘trans ideology’. Note the framing. The clue is right there. I’ve read several reviews and that is enough for me.

PS Again for clarity no one is banning this film. It is freely available on YouTube. I won’t link to it as I don’t want my site aligned with such things. It is out there if you want it, but I’d read the reviews before wasting 90 minutes on it.

 

[Hook]

I didn’t realise there had been a threat of violence. I’m not condoning that, though I’ll be very surprised if this was true. Violence in the UK is almost always something done by police or fascists to protestors. Very seldom the other way, though our right-wing media does allow people who no one wants to platform cry-whinge that they’ve been “cancelled” e.g. the likes of Farage, Clarkson etc who parade their “cancellation” across their highly paid columns of the major tabloids, GB News etc. A “cancellation” that reaches millions. The protestors have little beyond Twitter, and that is getting harder now it is owned and heavily moderated by a far-right bigot.

As far as the threat of violence, I'm only going by what the article said.

"The rearranged screening had been due to take place at the university’s Gordon Aikman lecture theatre at 6pm on Wednesday, evening but several hours earlier, its doorways were blocked by masked protesters.

University security staff refused to intervene because of the risk of physical confrontations with the protesters – who described themselves as an ad hoc group of direct-action activists – and opted instead to cancel the screening.

There was one minor scuffle outside the theatre after two audience members tried to push through to the entrance, but were held back by security staff."

https://www.theguardian.com/society...els-film-screening-after-trans-rights-protest

 

[Ted-M]

No, and I wouldn’t want to, though I certainly know Kellie-Jay Keen(“Posie Parker”)’s work.

Posie Parker isn't in it, and isn't mentioned once. It's not her film.

Having now watched it in full, it lays out issues regarding sex & gender from (mostly) women's perspective. Perfectly discussable & understandable. Some of the comments on the last few pages of this thread are baffling.

 

[Tony L]

Posie Parker isn't in it, and isn't mentioned once. It's not her film.

Having now watched it in full, it lays out issues regarding sex & gender from (mostly) women's perspective. Perfectly discussable & understandable. Some of the comments on the last few pages of this thread are baffling.

It is all part of the same picture, the title a slogan “Parker” has weaponised and made infamous the world over. Here are a couple of reviews of the film; RS21, Counterfire. It is hard to find high-profile reviews as it is culture war bigotry and no one wants to go near it.

Your framing is noted.

“This is the first UK documentary feature to look at the clash between women’s rights and trans ideology.”

Not my framing. I quoted directly from the film information as published officially on YouTube. This is how it is sold and I’m staggered you can’t see the loading in that sentence.

PS How many trans people were interviewed?

 

[tuga]

Have been thinking about the rise of fascism and the belief in free speech, and wondering if the former can be fought without totally trashing the latter (and especially in academic environments).

In the past, I have tried to express my support of the Trans community. I hate bullying in all its forms. But there’s something about the attempt to ban that repugnant, anti-Trans movie in Scotland that concerns me.

First of all, unless there is clear evidence of hate speech that incites violence, I prefer to see all views expressed on campus regardless of how demented or crazy. Only by listening, studying and understanding can an effective defense against bigotry be developed. Campuses are where we are supposed develop a new generation of leaders. I don’t see how limiting what can be studied helps with that mission. I guess my point is that banning can be bad, regardless of who does it.

I do not believe that showing that movie on campus would have recruited any new followers. Anyone who wants to can self-radicalize online. I think it would have been much better to provide adequate security and show it. Would much rather see that crap in full daylight, where it can be effectively ridiculed and, hopefully, the minds of supporters changed.

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant.

 

[Hook]

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant.

There is some truth in that, but intolerance is a slippery slope. Would hate to see us fight fascism only by becoming more authoritarian and insular.

Let’s try a hypothetical. What do we do if the GOP nominates a real, dyed-in-the-wool Neo-Nazi for President in 2024? Do we allow the election to play out, and hope for the Nazi to lose? Or do we declare martial law, and cancel future elections?

 

[DonQuixote99]

There is some truth in that, but intolerance is a slippery slope. Would hate to see us fight fascism only by becoming more authoritarian and insular.

Let’s try a hypothetical. What do we do if the GOP nominates a real, dyed-in-the-wool Neo-Nazi for President in 2024? Do we allow the election to play out, and hope for the Nazi to lose? Or do we declare martial law, and cancel future elections?

I'd say something like the second course would have to be considered. I would not rule it out. A died-in-the-wool Neo-Nazi that close to power is really really bad. (That 'cancel future elections' part sounds like overkill though....)

Basically, we're talking about averting a scenario where I'd regard the government as so illegitimate that I would favor violent revolution to topple it, so yes.

 

[Ted-M]

It is all part of the same picture, the title a slogan “Parker” has weaponised and made infamous the world over. The framing of ‘woman’s rights’ vs. ‘trans ideology’ is really all one needs to know. That is the film’s strap-line. Here are a couple of reviews; RS21, Counterfire.

From the review you linked >

"As one of the student organisers tweeted, ‘a screening of a transphobic film was to be held at Edinburgh Uni, we decided that wasn’t happening. You don’t get to spread hatred and expect to be unchallenged.'
It is remarkable on actually watching the film how little there is here to deserve anything like this response.

No platform for fascists is a specific tactic which is useful and appropriate against far-right speakers and organisations who are trying to make their arguments respectable by being included on the platform. In the same way, we attempt to stop fascists marching because their marches are deliberately designed to intimidate the communities they are marching through. No platform is not a tactic we should use simply to express our moral disdain for people with whose views we disagree. Standing against women trying to have a film showing is no way to have a political argument.

Organisations of the left which have colluded with this should be very clear about the damage that they are doing. They may wish to consider whether an atmosphere of frenzied denunciation has ever been beneficial for working people, or indeed protected anyone against oppression. Everyone else could do worse than watch the film."

Seems reasonable.

And of course there are some reasonable arguments and points made in the film by many of the women. And if you disagree then fine, but trying to paint the whole thing as a far-right nazi propaganda film worthy of Mein Kampf is frankly ludicrous, in my opinion.

 

[Hook]

I'd say something like the second course would have to be considered. I would not rule it out. A dyed-in-the-wool Neo-Nazi that close to power is really really bad. (That 'cancel future elections' part sounds like overkill though....)

I assumed that if they were evil enough to do it once, then they would just keep doing so.

My point was that, in either case, democracy is ruined, and it’s just of question of who becomes dictator. We could hope for a benevolent dictator, and a return to elections someday, but that could take a long time.

Not saying I have an answer. Both approaches seem very problematic.

 

[Tony L]

And of course there are some reasonable arguments and points made in the film by many of the women. And if you disagree then fine, but trying to paint the whole thing as a far-right nazi propaganda film worthy of Mein Kampf is frankly ludicrous.

You need to place it in the context of what is currently an existential threat to one of the smallest and most vulnerable minority groups in society. Ask yourself the larger question as to why this totally harmless group is being demonised and having their basic rights to exist removed by increasingly right-wing governments here and in the USA. A group routinely murdered in many Islamist states just for existing.

Most of us will never even meet a trans person in our lives. I’m 59 years old, spent many, many years on the more outsider fringes of the art scene, and even then I think I’ve only met three. Ask yourself what the motivation of this film is? Who is it protecting? Who’s rights is it trying to remove? It may be gently worded and have a veneer of acceptability, but the underlying premise is to increase ‘trans-panic’ and erode basic human rights from an exceptionally vulnerable and tiny minority group.

PS The question I’d really like to see an answer to is who exactly paid for it? I think I can guess, but it would be interesting to know.

 

[tuga]

I'd say something like the second course would have to be considered. I would not rule it out. A died-in-the-wool Neo-Nazi that close to power is really really bad. (That 'cancel future elections' part sounds like overkill though....)

Basically, we're talking about averting a scenario where I'd regard the government as so illegitimate that I would favor violent revolution to topple it, so yes.

I was born at the end of a 40 year long fascist dictatorship. They’re notoriously difficult to topple…

 

[paulfromcamden]

In other news Kiss* guitarist Paul Stanley has posted a a weird transphobic Won't Somebody Think Of The Children rant and Steve Albini continues to go up in my estimation.

Sigh. Yes the same Kiss who sang in Christine Sixteen "She's been around, but she's young and clean, I've got to have her, can't live without her, whoa no"

 

[Nick_G]

You need to place it in the context of what is currently an existential threat to one of the smallest and most vulnerable minority groups in society. Ask yourself the larger question as to why this totally harmless group is being demonised and having their basic rights to exist removed by increasingly right-wing governments here and in the USA. A group routinely murdered in many Islamist states just for existing.

Most of us will never even meet a trans person in our lives. I’m 59 years old, spent many, many years on the more extreme fringes of the art scene, and even then I think I’ve only met three. Ask yourself what the motivation of this film is? Who is it protecting? Who’s rights is it trying to remove? Why is it doing that? It may be gently worded and have a veneer of acceptability, but the underlying premise is to increase ‘trans-panic’ and erode basic human rights from an exceptionally vulnerable and tiny minority group.

PS The question I’d really like to see an answer to is who exactly paid for it? I think I can guess, but it would be interesting to know.

Plus transphobia is an easy way for the far-right & neo-Nazis to influence mainstream opinion. It's terrifying and extremely dangerous.

 

[Seanm]

Have been thinking about the rise of fascism and the belief in free speech, and wondering if the former can be fought without totally trashing the latter (and especially in academic environments).

In the past, I have tried to express my support of the Trans community. I hate bullying in all its forms. But there’s something about the attempt to ban that repugnant, anti-Trans movie in Scotland that concerns me.

First of all, unless there is clear evidence of hate speech that incites violence, I prefer to see all views expressed on campus regardless of how demented or crazy. Only by listening, studying and understanding can an effective defense against bigotry be developed. Campuses are where we are supposed develop a new generation of leaders. I don’t see how limiting what can be studied helps with that mission. I guess my point is that banning can be bad, regardless of who does it.

I do not believe that showing that movie on campus would have recruited any new followers. Anyone who wants to can self-radicalize online. I think it would have been much better to provide adequate security and show it. Would much rather see that crap in full daylight, where it can be effectively ridiculed and, hopefully, the minds of supporters changed.

I think it’s helpful to see a university as several different kinds of spaces, operating according to different logics and standards. “Freedom of speech” is often invoked in relation to all of them but doesn’t necessarily capture the logics at work in any of them.

The seminar/lecture room is one kind of space, and this is where “listening, studying and understanding” is an unambiguous priority. But in reality freedom of speech isn’t a very meaningful concept here for that very reason. What matters is what constitutes a nourishing learning environment, including what kind of materials and ideas are discussed. Academic freedom is the order of the day here: educators get to decide what’s admitted and excluded, not the government, not (even) students, not “gender critical” political activists or any other kind. There is absolutely no obligation for educators to expose students to any old shit that comes up just because it’s there and in the news. If they do choose to let that material in they’re under no obligation to take it seriously. A chemistry lecturer doesn’t teach phlogiston theory as a legitimate account of oxidation and leave it up to students to decide what theory they prefer, although they might mine it for educational value. Likewise a cultural theory based on the idea that one race is superior to another would be treated as evidence of intellectual retrogression if it cropped up in a responsibly-led seminar. “Gender critical” feminism too, at least as far as I’m concerned.

Anyway my main point is that there are other spaces on campus where learning etc is not necessarily the priority, especially not the agonistic kind you seem to be talking about. Students don’t necessarily need to be confronted with challenging material in student counselling, for instance. Or the student bar, or the film club, or even the debating society. All of these spaces have their own logics for determining what is taken up, what’s left out and so on, and nobody has a god-given right to pitch up and insist on being taken seriously or given a “platform”.

As I understand it the film in question was being shown in one such space not as part of a curriculum: nobody’s freedom of speech has been shut down (because that’s not really a relevant operating principle here) nor anyone’s academic freedom compromised. Someone made a decision to show an intellectually regressive film that attracts aggressive, small-minded and often violent people onto campus, and feeds the misogyny, homophobia and transphobia that are already a significant part of campus life in most universities; other students protested and succeeded in reversing the decision. All part of the give-and-take of managing these spaces, it seems to me, and about as far away from a loss to learning as I can easily imagine. Very teachable moment I’d have thought. Proud of these students.

 

[claire.foxx]

There is no such thing as “Trans Ideology”
What the fucc do some of you think we are. The Borg?