Sexism and “dude-bro irony”

Robyn Kenealy

Some of you will be familiar with British comedian Stewart Lee’s routine about motoring review show Top Gear. In the routine, Lee describes acts of horrible violence befalling the Top Gear presentation team, breaking off periodically to shout “it’s just a joke, like on Top Gear!” before pausing for a moment, and then adding “but coincidentally, it is actually what I wish had happened.”[1]

It’s a great routine. Lee uses, as he explains, “the rhetoric and implied values of Top Gear to satirize the rhetoric and implied values of Top Gear.” Top Gear which is, to quote Steve Coogan of Alan Partridge and Saxondale fame, “three rich, middle-aged men… [who] have this strange notion that if they are being offensive it bestows on them a kind of anti-establishment aura of coolness; in fact, like their leather jackets and jeans, it is uber-conservative.” [2]

I have a reason for bringing up British comedians making criticisms of Top Gear, I promise. Particularly, it’s that those criticisms, Lee’s and Coogan’s, seem to me to also apply to what I call Dudebro Irony (I doubt the term is original with me). Dudebro Irony is when people – when men – say overtly sexist things, either in conversation or in art works, with the assumption that everyone will understand that they are not intending to be sexist. That it’s just a joke. Like on Top Gear.

Top Gear’s values are overtly conservative, whereas Dudebro Irony’s values are liberal or even leftist, but I would – and in fact will – argue that a similar machinery is at work. Rather than a conservative attack against the “PC police” which all leftists may by now easily denounce when they watch Top Gear, Dudebro Irony is done by young, liberal or leftist men, who ironically perform sexism (this is the literal sense of the word irony: their words have the opposite meaning to their intention) as part of a statement that they are not only not sexist, but so profoundly not sexist that the very idea of their issuing a sexist statement is so impossible as to be laughable. This performance has a relationship to Hipster Racism, which Lindy West writing for Jezebel examples as “introducing your black friend as “my black friend”—as a joke!!!—to show everybody how totally not preoccupied you are with your black friend’s blackness.”[3] While not directly analogous, Dudebro Irony often appears in the same contexts and does come from a similar root: the assumption that everybody now lives in a gloriously post-isms world, and therefore any overt display of –ism is automatically ironic. [Read more…]

Review: Marx in Soho

Written by: Howard Zinn
Preformed by: Brian Jones
Venue: University of Melbourne Student Union
Reviewed by: Joel Cosgrove

“Don’t you wonder why it is necessary to declare me dead again and again?” asks Brian Jones in his performance as Karl Marx in Marx In Soho, a part of the Marxism Conference at Melbourne University.

The premise of the play is that Marx has been granted an hour to return to earth from heaven to argue his case and clear his name against over one hundred and fifty years of confusion and bastardization of his ideas by both supporters and opponents of his ideas. The twist being that instead of returning to Soho, London, he ends up in Soho, New York. With as much reflection on the 21st century as much as the 19th century that Marx inhabited.

Sitting on the sparse (but smartly laid out) stage, Marx reflects from his desk “Is there anything more boring than reading political economy? Writing it.” And proceeds to give an exposition of his ideas and his life. Drawing on being deported across Europe stating: “It seems the police develop an international consciousness long before the working class” as he ends up in London.”

Living in poverty, in part a result of Marx’s focus on writing (apart from occasional journalism assignments the only job Marx ever had was as a rail clerk, but he wasn’t offered the job when it became apparent that his handwriting was illegible.). Jones as Marx details the struggles his family went through, the deaths of a number of his children, the anguish and pain is something felt dearly from the stage.

This is a play that on one hand has a dense yet accessible account of Marx’s politics, but the heart of the play is a personal humanizing reflection on the relationship between Marx and his wife Jenny. Jenny Marx is someone who is often left out of discussions of Marx and Engels. Yet here figuratively she takes centre stage. Jones as Marx rages at their arguments, lauds her for her piercing intellect and studious work transcribing his illegible notes and is honest about his flaws and the struggles that he put her through. A key aspect of the play that makes it so enjoyable is the strongly feminist aspect, an almost defence of the role of Jenny played, subtly but clearly critiquing what is often labeled on the internet as ‘brocialism’.

The two aspects of the play which come together so beautifully are Howard Zinn’s excellent script and Brian Jones’ consummate performance. Zinn, a prolific radical writer and educator, best know for his bestselling work A People’s History of the United States produced in 1999 what is a deep and intelligent portrayal of Marx the political theorist and Marx as an individual, that gets across a dense amount of information in a surprisingly accessible and absorbable manner. Like the best theatre (or episode of Sesame Street), it teaches and informs without the audience realizing necessarily realizing. Primarily it is funny and entertaining.

In an interview speaking about his experience performing the play, Jones had the following to say:
“The secret: Zinn has a deep respect for his audience, and they know it. You feel it instantly when you meet him. He speaks and writes not to impress, but to stimulate. He never talks down to you, never writes in language you can’t understand to make him seem smarter. Making complicated ideas clear as glass, rescuing socialism from Stalin, and, yes, giving us a vision of Karl Marx that actually makes us laugh…these are the products of Zinn’s excellent method.”

It is Brian Jones who takes Zinn’s script and completes it as a live performance. It is Jones, 25 when he first started performing the play (he has been performing it since Zinn wrote it with him in mind in 1999), an African-American who so deeply embodies the eccentricities and humanism of the German revolutionary Marx.

The audience was the perfect one for this play. Densely layered with jokes and asides about Marx, Marxism and the wider history that Marx’s ideas inhabit. You don’t need to know all these intricacies, but it definitely helped on the night!

Iceland: There are no peaceful revolutions (a reply to Jessica Ward)

memes such as this distort the realities on the ground

memes such as this distort the realities on the ground

This article, by Fightback member Ian Anderson, is a reply to Jessica Ward’s article Iceland: Become Part of the Heard (here).

This article is not a criticism of the people of Iceland, it’s a criticism of the way their story has been told. Globally circulated articles and memes have made extraordinary and only partially true claims; that Iceland’s constitution was rewritten by the people, that they have deposed their government, that they’re undergoing a total economic revolution.

For example, Jessica’s article claims that “members of parliament as well as the bank directors are being tried for their crimes against the people.” While it is true that some bankers have been jailed, members of parliament were cleared of charges.

In his speaking tour, Hordur Torfason conceded that parliamentary capitalist order had largely been restored in Iceland. However, he said that the movement had raised “awareness.” While awareness is important, critical thought is necessary to developing revolutionary consciousness and activity.

While the people have won concessions, the capitalist government of Iceland remains intact. As explained in an earlier Fightback article, (Iceland’s “peaceful revolution” – myth and reality, http://tinyurl.com/cu694hy) parliament was restored to power and is now directing the constitutional process. The right-wing parties have regained influence and may win in 2013, according to supporters of the constitutional process (http://tinyurl.com/cjkwm6x).

Narratives of a “peaceful revolution” prevail. Torfason underlines that movement leaders intervened to stop protestors from clashing with police. However, police have inflicted violence on protestors. There is no such thing as a peaceful revolution.

The capitalist state in Iceland retains a monopoly on violence. The police, and the army, hold the arms and enforce capitalist domination. When previous revolutions have not addressed the capitalist state’s monopoly on violence, they have been drowned in blood.

In Chile 1971, Salvador Allende was the first Marxist to be elected to national presidency in a capitalist state. Chile saw sweeping nationalisations and social programs, under the slogan “The Chilean way to socialism.”

In Chile 1973 however, a military coup led by Augusto Pinochet, and backed by the West, restored full state power to the capitalist class. Over the following years Pinochet’s government killed and disappeared thousands of dissidents. This is why Venezuela’s Chavez said of the Chilean revolution: “Like Allende, we’re pacifists and democrats. Unlike Allende, we’re armed.”

Right now throughout most of the Western world, non-violent civil disobedience makes tactical sense. In Aotearoa/NZ, we are nowhere near seizing power for the people; the Icelandic people may have come closer to this goal, but they have not achieved it. We must not lie to ourselves. If there is any chance of the masses holding democratic socialist power, this will mean overthrowing the capitalist state.

Iceland: Become Part of the Heard

This article by Jessica Ward was submitted to Fightback, in response to an article published in the April issue (Iceland’s “peaceful revolution” – myth and reality, http://tinyurl.com/cu694hy). A reply to Jessica’s article can be found here.

In today’s world it is easy to become disillusioned. It is too easy to concede to the idea we are incapable of changing the world, to give into the apathy that plagues our generation. We are not the flower children of the 60s, we misguidedly believe that unlike days gone by noone else is angry, noone else is enraged by the disparity of wealth and incensed by politics, economics and the injustices of society. We are alone. We are all alone. Aren’t we?

Today I had the opportunity of listening to Hordur Torfason at the Dunedin School of Art. It may seem a strange place for and activist and leader of the Icelandic Revolution to give a talk but all becomes clear when listening to the ideas and attitudes of this artist. Torfason stressed in his talk the need for creative solutions, the importance of art as a way of activating people and bringing them together and of protest as a form of performance, as a way of intriguing an audience of public and media.

Torfason believes that it is the role of the artist to criticize society and remember the importance of the unseen forces that dictate us, our feelings. Art has the ability to move us, to affect us, in the words of Torfason to activate us.

We live in the age of the internet: a tool to both communicate and organize. We are the 99% and we have a way of communicating, coming together and organizing action. In a world where the media is a tool owned by the 1% to systematically ensure their wealth the internet is our tool to counter it. In the age of information there is no excuse to not have a voice (given you have access to the internet of course). Communication is also highly important in the organization of revolution or protest. It is important to ask the people what they want and to listen. [Read more…]

Wellington conference: Fightback 2013

fightback 2013 poster red

A weekend of discussion and planning for struggle, solidarity and socialism.
Queens Birthday Weekend, (May 31st-June 2nd)
Newtown Community & Cultural Centre, Wellington

[Schedule]

Facebook events:
[fundraising gig]
[conference]