I enjoy reading this Substack Thomas as it deals with many issues on my research agenda but doesn’t use the cheap, inflammatory and unhelpful script that is offered to us by bad faith actors (woke pseudo-religion and so on).
A common complaint from the Left is that social justice ideology is a poor substitute for the politics of class because it is performative, tokenistic, and, for example, often elevates people of colour who are from privileged class backgrounds, without ever troubling the status quo. Critics from the right argue structural inequalities are a woke myth. But they also argue that the white working class suffers from structural disadvantage because woke institutions and corporations discriminate against it. However, rather than advocate for structural upheaval, these critics emphasise the need to reduce or end immigration and give the white working class a more prominent voice in the public sphere. However, they don’t want to hear white working-class voices that advocate for a dismantling of neoliberal capital’s power and wealth structures. How often do they have ‘debates’ about the tax arrangements of hedge-fund managers on GBNews? Particularly the one who is keeping GBNews afloat. Or about the climate denialism that is protecting the interests and profits fossil fuel companies and their investors?
Many of my colleagues would call these causes social justice. So, my question for you Thomas is this: when is the politics of class, which advocates for structural upheaval and emphasizes the life stories of people living in poverty (I am thinking of films like I, Daniel Blake as examples of ‘lived experience’) not part of ‘the social justice ideology’ that the Right are so keen to ignore or discredit?
Thanks Huw, that's very kind of you. I saw your presentation on the programme at EPOP, but couldn't come, as I was giving my own at that time. I agree about GB News, a channel I've criticized on this Substack.
On Daniel Blake, of course one may appeal to 'lived experience' when campaigning for economic justice. Though I agree with certain right-wing critiques of lived experience, I certainly wouldn't critique the economic part of such campaigns (as many on the right would).
When discussing these issues, I always try to concentrate on differences between social justice ideology and liberalism. This paper, written by Cardiff colleagues, even develops a progressive values scale which measures differences between the ideologies: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/01461672221097529
Following the logic of the progressive values scale, I think that one can be left-wing on an economic scale and liberal on an authoritarianism-liberalism scale, yet disagree with social justice ideology.
Does this suggest that lived experience when advocating for economic justice is more acceptable to its critics than lived experience mobilised for racial justice? I am cautious about 'lived experience' as a stand alone methodological or epistemological tool - especially deferring to it above all else - but listening to it can alert to something that other methods don't pick-up. I know a group of Nigerian students, for example, who routinely experience racism so wouldn't be happy if I showed them a YouGov survey telling them that Britain is one of Europe's least racist countries. Your paper looks really useful thanks. It looks like in the above post you are referring to 'Progressive Activists' as agents of the social justice ideology. Are these more likely to be Corbynites, Novara Media viewers? The data you present suggests this is a relatively small minority of the overall population? However, you wouldn't get that impression if you spend much time on X or indeed listening anything the Right has to say. Are these the people changing corporate culture in ways you suggest above? Or are middle managers (etc.) who are liberals adopting the norms and values of Progressive Activists in this context? I'm concerned that there's a lot of mission creep in the backlash against social justice which exploits examples of extreme behaviour of some 'Progressive Activists' to discredit any challenge to the status quo. Moreover, causes such as preventing our planet from cooking, are being drawn into this so that climate activists are routinely dismissed as extremists and mentalists who need to be dealt with robustly by the state.
Agree that this is complex and that the right tend to overestimate support for social justice ideology and fixate on extreme cases. As the Progressive Values Scale in the paper shows (I didn't write it, by the way - my colleagues did), people agree with social justice values to different degrees. Whilst 'progressive activists' may be the keenest advocates of these ideas, I'd say that the support base shifts from issue to issue and includes people who agree with certain points, but not others. For managers, careerism might be an additional motivation.
I enjoy reading this Substack Thomas as it deals with many issues on my research agenda but doesn’t use the cheap, inflammatory and unhelpful script that is offered to us by bad faith actors (woke pseudo-religion and so on).
A common complaint from the Left is that social justice ideology is a poor substitute for the politics of class because it is performative, tokenistic, and, for example, often elevates people of colour who are from privileged class backgrounds, without ever troubling the status quo. Critics from the right argue structural inequalities are a woke myth. But they also argue that the white working class suffers from structural disadvantage because woke institutions and corporations discriminate against it. However, rather than advocate for structural upheaval, these critics emphasise the need to reduce or end immigration and give the white working class a more prominent voice in the public sphere. However, they don’t want to hear white working-class voices that advocate for a dismantling of neoliberal capital’s power and wealth structures. How often do they have ‘debates’ about the tax arrangements of hedge-fund managers on GBNews? Particularly the one who is keeping GBNews afloat. Or about the climate denialism that is protecting the interests and profits fossil fuel companies and their investors?
Many of my colleagues would call these causes social justice. So, my question for you Thomas is this: when is the politics of class, which advocates for structural upheaval and emphasizes the life stories of people living in poverty (I am thinking of films like I, Daniel Blake as examples of ‘lived experience’) not part of ‘the social justice ideology’ that the Right are so keen to ignore or discredit?
Thanks Huw, that's very kind of you. I saw your presentation on the programme at EPOP, but couldn't come, as I was giving my own at that time. I agree about GB News, a channel I've criticized on this Substack.
On Daniel Blake, of course one may appeal to 'lived experience' when campaigning for economic justice. Though I agree with certain right-wing critiques of lived experience, I certainly wouldn't critique the economic part of such campaigns (as many on the right would).
When discussing these issues, I always try to concentrate on differences between social justice ideology and liberalism. This paper, written by Cardiff colleagues, even develops a progressive values scale which measures differences between the ideologies: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/01461672221097529
Following the logic of the progressive values scale, I think that one can be left-wing on an economic scale and liberal on an authoritarianism-liberalism scale, yet disagree with social justice ideology.
Does this suggest that lived experience when advocating for economic justice is more acceptable to its critics than lived experience mobilised for racial justice? I am cautious about 'lived experience' as a stand alone methodological or epistemological tool - especially deferring to it above all else - but listening to it can alert to something that other methods don't pick-up. I know a group of Nigerian students, for example, who routinely experience racism so wouldn't be happy if I showed them a YouGov survey telling them that Britain is one of Europe's least racist countries. Your paper looks really useful thanks. It looks like in the above post you are referring to 'Progressive Activists' as agents of the social justice ideology. Are these more likely to be Corbynites, Novara Media viewers? The data you present suggests this is a relatively small minority of the overall population? However, you wouldn't get that impression if you spend much time on X or indeed listening anything the Right has to say. Are these the people changing corporate culture in ways you suggest above? Or are middle managers (etc.) who are liberals adopting the norms and values of Progressive Activists in this context? I'm concerned that there's a lot of mission creep in the backlash against social justice which exploits examples of extreme behaviour of some 'Progressive Activists' to discredit any challenge to the status quo. Moreover, causes such as preventing our planet from cooking, are being drawn into this so that climate activists are routinely dismissed as extremists and mentalists who need to be dealt with robustly by the state.
Agree that this is complex and that the right tend to overestimate support for social justice ideology and fixate on extreme cases. As the Progressive Values Scale in the paper shows (I didn't write it, by the way - my colleagues did), people agree with social justice values to different degrees. Whilst 'progressive activists' may be the keenest advocates of these ideas, I'd say that the support base shifts from issue to issue and includes people who agree with certain points, but not others. For managers, careerism might be an additional motivation.