Criticism of Maoist Rebel News: “Faggot� isn’t Okay

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Criticism of Maoist Rebel News: "Faggot" isn't Okay (http://www.gonzotimes.com/2013/03/criticism-of-maoist-rebel-news-faggot-isnt-okay/)


Recently, there has been a conflict among socialists over the use of the word “faggot” which emerged after Maoist Rebel News made a Facebook status as the following, where he defends his casual use of the word:

Said "Maoist" sounds more like a bourgeois individualist, at least based on his defense of using certain words.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Marxist-Leninism-Maoism is not Maoist Third-Worldism or Mao Zedong Thought. I have no sympathies for those tendencies in any way shape or form and I just want to reiterate that I and the rest of my comrades have always hated MRN and always will.

[kasama-rl]

This criticism of MRN seems thoughtful and well composed. It doesn't negate him completely, but urges him to criticize his rather ridiculous defense of saying "faggot."

It is a rather strange (even infantile) controversy.... since who could defend using slurs like this?

[L.A.P.]

MaoistRebelNews is a loser and definitely far from well composed

[DasFapital]

Wait? People on here took MRN seriously?:confused:

[The Intransigent Faction]

This is ironic considering his (MRN's) own defense of "hate speech laws" enforced by bourgeois governments.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I haven't seen any of this guy's videos myself since I have heard nothing but negative things about him(thus I didn't bother) so I remained pretty apathetic about him. However, this particular incident pushed me over the edge. I can now say I feel negatively towards this guy. It was because of him I had to spend like 20 minutes explaining to another comrade why it's not ok to use the word "faggot". At least he apologized though, something that MRN here still has yet to do. Instead he just defends his usage of the word, that's even worse imo.

Anyway, he almost makes me want to become a Maoist just so Canada can have a proper representation of Maoism :laugh:.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

It seems like beating a dead-horse but I will probably make a blog entry on this topic sometime just to add to the voices of political correctness. But I am not surprised something like this has happened: as with most revolutionists who employ the linguistically defects of bourgeois society they show their true colors sooner or later; the fact that MRN refuses to self-critcise is all the more proof of his "Tankie" liberalism.

[l'Enfermé]

Yeah we were laughing our assess off over that video he made yesterday on AIM. At one point he invoked dialectics to prove that saying "faggot" is okay. He ended the video with a "get a life!" IIRC, I really burst out laughing at that one.

[DasFapital]

btw here's his video response:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjphvb-3Cl0
:laugh:

[hatzel]

It was because of him I had to spend like 20 minutes explaining to another comrade why it's not ok to use the word "faggot"

Wait wait wait what? Do people across the Pond actually hear about the things he says...? :confused:

[Mass Grave Aesthetics]

Yeah we were laughing our assess off over that video he made yesterday on AIM. At one point he invoked dialectics to prove that saying "faggot" is okay. He ended the video with a "get a life!" IIRC, I really burst out laughing at that one.
MRN is even funnier when you take him seriously!:laugh:

[Goblin]

"Thank you to everyone that exposed their closet liberal, fascist conversation spying and controlling position":laugh::laugh::laugh: Fuck this guy!

[AConfusedSocialDemocrat]

He's a joke, his surreal apologetics for the DPRK, cognitive dissonance when it comes to human rights sources, and his childish swearing and meme spouting (that infamous "come at me bro"), let alone the use of homosexual terms in a pejoritive manner.

Though he's hillarious to watch whilst stoned.

[GerrardWinstanley]

Oh gosh. I know this man is a YouTube nobody, but meltdowns like this are a real treat and don't come along often. Thank you. :grin:

And yes, I'm sorry to say I was subscribed to him for a while (his furious mailbox rants were unmissable... he is so easy to troll). I guess his gay rights cred is now in about the same state as Gilad Atzmon's anti-racist cred.

[Althusser]

He gets too mad. Even when he has solid arguments, he just gets so riled up that they are lost. Also his defense of using the word "faggot" is laughable. I ditched that infantile shit some time ago, and if I was to ever use it in conversation, I would definitely just apologize and do some self-criticism if I was called out on it.

Still subbed though. Even with all the shit, he is capable of making a good video. This is proof enough:
eL6Isdf447I

[AConfusedSocialDemocrat]

Plus this whole affair is even more lulzy, going by his past video about 'combat liberalism, and how it was important to take your friends to task if they used politically incorect language in everyday conversation.

[The Intransigent Faction]

Anyway, he almost makes me want to become a Maoist just so Canada can have a proper representation of Maoism :laugh:.

Lol, google RCP Canada?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

btw here's his video response:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjphvb-3Cl0
:laugh:
It gave me the urge to punch him in his hipster face. :laugh:

[LOLseph Stalin]

Lol, google RCP Canada?

Yep. A member of RCP actually gave me a link to their site.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

I remember months ago when he put his second mailbag out and said faggot in it I criticized him for it and his excuse was "It's Internet slang."

[Sheepy]

Does anyone remember that video he made about DragonBall Z, claiming it had "Marxist implications" and writing it all on a fucking whiteboard like Glenn Beck?

Yup, totally not insane!

[Orange Juche]

From my understanding, the word "faggot" is applied to homosexuals because - in an earlier meaning - a "faggot" is a bundle of sticks. When people were burned at the stake, sometimes homosexuals would be thrown into the fire and become "faggots" of sorts - an association used with cigarettes in some English speaking cultures (a "fag" being a burning stick, i.e. a cigarette).

This being the case, the use of "faggot", publicly or privately, is so absolutely obscene that any attempt to justify it is abhorrent and absurd.

Also he supports the most brutal regime in modern history - North Korea - and justifies it as being supposedly socialist so yeah, that just compounds it.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

The funny part is him saying there's a difference between what you publicly and privately say when he's using the term in both arenas. Unless of course Facebook and YouTube is "private".

[Aurora]

From my understanding, the word "faggot" is applied to homosexuals because - in an earlier meaning - a "faggot" is a bundle of sticks. When people were burned at the stake, sometimes homosexuals would be thrown into the fire and become "faggots" of sorts - an association used with cigarettes in some English speaking cultures (a "fag" being a burning stick, i.e. a cigarette).

This isn't true actually, there are no reported cases of homosexuals being burned at the stake, the use of fag for cigarette and fag for homosexuals evolved independently in the UK and USA respectively. There are other uses too like sticks as you said and there's a food called a faggot.

The more you know :star3:

[MustCrushCapitalism]

The term "faggot" will either completely lose its connotations (as to "gyp" someone or call them a "hooligan") with homosexuality or simply fall out of use as an insult, as homosexuality becomes increasingly accepted by society and LGBT rights improve. Personally, I wince a bit whenever a friend uses the term, knowing that it makes light of discrimination against LGBT people, including myself and numerous friends and colleagues of mine. I do understand, though, that it's not usually intended as such, and don't make a big deal out of it when it's not used in an explicitly homophobic context.

I find use the term in very, very bad taste, but if MRN uses the term in private, then he does, and it's not as big of a deal as some are making it out to be. It'd be out of character for him to use it in a homophobic context and so it's a bit silly to overblow it like this. Obviously this type of thing should be discouraged, but I feel as though the reaction to this isn't sincere, but more that we all want to be offended, if you know what I mean. On a personal level, I think it's necessary to establish the fact that you feel uncomfortable with the use of the term, but there's nothing constructive to do beyond that.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I find use the term in very, very bad taste, but if MRN uses the term in private, then he does, and it's not as big of a deal as some are making it out to be.
Any time a supposed revolutionary leftist demeans oppressed groups, it's a problem. It's a bigger problem when the person refuses to engage in thought about why it's a problem, instead retreating into a childish "you're not the boss of me!" But I guess that shows that he's really a petit-bourgeois liberal hipster pretending to be a Maoist.

[#FF0000]

hipster

lmfao

What surprises me about this whole thing is how seriously people take MRN in the first place. For me, I heard about it and thought "Oh what a surprise, MRN is a hypocrite and a know-nothing", but instead people are honestly talking about this like he's anything else but a titanic embarrassment.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

The term "faggot" will either completely lose its connotations (as to "gyp" someone or call them a "hooligan") with homosexuality or simply fall out of use as an insult, as homosexuality becomes increasingly accepted by society and LGBT rights improve. Personally, I wince a bit whenever a friend uses the term, knowing that it makes light of discrimination against LGBT people, including myself and numerous friends and colleagues of mine. I do understand, though, that it's not usually intended as such, and don't make a big deal out of it when it's not used in an explicitly homophobic context.

I find use the term in very, very bad taste, but if MRN uses the term in private, then he does, and it's not as big of a deal as some are making it out to be. It'd be out of character for him to use it in a homophobic context and so it's a bit silly to overblow it like this. Obviously this type of thing should be discouraged, but I feel as though the reaction to this isn't sincere, but more that we all want to be offended, if you know what I mean. On a personal level, I think it's necessary to establish the fact that you feel uncomfortable with the use of the term, but there's nothing constructive to do beyond that.
Like I said, he uses the term in public both on Facebook(which is why this started, some FB friends were getting angry with its usage) and in his YouTube videos which is why anybody knows him in the first place.

Like #FF0000 said, it's funny how seriously people are taking this as if MRN is a respectable leader or whatever. Whether he's a homophobe or not he's just a joke I can laugh at once in a while as he dresses up in military uniforms saluting the camera while the Soviet national anthem plays. His use of the word goes way back as I pointed out, nobody should be surprised.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Like I said, he uses the term in public both on Facebook(which is why this started, some FB friends were getting angry with its usage) and in his YouTube videos which is why anybody knows him in the first place.

Like #FF0000 said, it's funny how seriously people are taking this as if MRN is a respectable leader or whatever. Whether he's a homophobe or not he's just a joke I can laugh at once in a while as he dresses up in military uniforms saluting the camera while the Soviet national anthem plays. His use of the word goes way back as I pointed out, nobody should be surprised.

Does MRN have much of a following? He seems to have a few loyal idiots on the youtube, I guess, but...

Whenever I see him speak, I feel this profound embarrassment and I cannot watch for long, for the more he says, the more awkward I feel, the more bizarre gets his ideological contractions. Or... convulsions.

[Orange Juche]

Whenever I see him speak, I feel this profound embarrassment and I cannot watch for long, for the more he says, the more awkward I feel, the more bizarre gets his ideological contractions.

I have a feeling in like ten years he's going to look back on all this and facepalm at himself.

[#FF0000]

I have a feeling in like ten years he's going to look back on all this and facepalm at himself.

If he doesn't have that sort of self-awareness at this point in his life, I doubt he'll ever develop it.


Does MRN have much of a following? He seems to have a few loyal idiots on the youtube, I guess, but...

I used to think this as well, but lol, apparently he does. Even people who I sort of respected watch his videos or are friends with him on facebook.

[hatzel]

friends with him on facebook

That's probably when you know you've crossed a serious line and aren't coming back any time soon...

Every post in this thread just makes my jaw drop a little lower, because I'd always just assumed he was nothing but some jokey RevLeft meme and then I find out real people actually care and I'm FLABBERGASTED that's definitely the right word to use in this situation :unsure:

[Foxtrotsky]

I think MRN might be a troll YouTube channel. I've watched a few of his videos, and he's either completely insane or trolling. I can't tell.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

What surprises me about this whole thing is how seriously people take MRN in the first place. For me, I heard about it and thought "Oh what a surprise, MRN is a hypocrite and a know-nothing", but instead people are honestly talking about this like he's anything else but a titanic embarrassment.
Honestly, I'd only vaguely heard of him before this, so really had no idea who he was or whether he had a following.

[Althusser]

JMP of MLM Mayhem wrote this criticism of the whole bourgeois individualist "faggot" fiasco:
http://moufawad-paul.blogspot.com/2013/03/liberalism-and-internet-leftism.html


Liberalism and Internet Leftism: the meltdown of "Maoish" Rebel News

Although much has already been made of Maoist Rebel News' [MRN] public youtube meltdown, and indeed a very good blow-by-blow analysis of everything leading up to this meltdown has been written, I still believe it is worth examining here. Not to internet "ambulance chase" (in this case, I'm not even sure what that would accomplish) but because the MRN meltdown is significant insofar as it can teach us something about correct communist practice.


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_4VfBXvSz00/UUvjorwskJI/AAAAAAAABaE/lNeEuv5crAQ/s1600/url.png


For those unaware of MRN and what I am speaking of, here is a quick summary of what happened: Jason Unruhe, the person responsible for MRN (a youtube channel that promotes a "maoish" analysis of public events) was challenged on his use of homophobic language; he refused to recognize the criticism and attacked his accuser, going so far as to imply she was a pseudo-feminist simply because she dared to mention gender; he released a youtube video defending his right to privacy and use anti-queer language, arguing that the use of this language did not make him homophobic and that anyone who attacked him was a liberal (something that was, it must be said, rather ironic since his rant was, in many ways, a perfect expression of liberal behaviour); he equivocated between right-wing critiques of maoism and critiques of his behaviour (thus poisoning the well so as to claim that anyone who critiqued him must be either a liberal or reactionary); he mocked the woman who critiqued him while appealing to his feminist credentials.

But the reason I take this public meltdown seriously is because MRN is an internet presence that presume to represent a maoist ideology (as is this blog), the author lives in the same country as myself and seems to identify publicly as a maoist, he mentions the PCR-RCP in his rant for some odd reason (at least he was clear that he was not affiliated with them in any way), and the way in which he defended himself––along with the responses to his behaviour––can teach us something about the practical issues of being communists.

The most obvious problems outside of Unruhe's desire to defend his liberal right to use chauvinist words without censure have already been pointed out by others including the aforelinked analysis: the rejection of criticism/self-criticism (a hallmark of maoist ideology); the promotion of a bourgeois notion of the private sphere; a defense of rugged individuality that led Unruhe to almost proudly declare his lack of affiliation with any revolutionary party. So the initial chauvinism of MRN––his desire to have the right to use certain words just because he likes them––is contingent on a concrete [mis]understanding of communist praxis. So we should learn something about praxis through the MRN meltdown; even if this public display of personal arrogance had been about something else, it would still be necessitated by this fundamental and material problem: a complete rejection of communist practice that can only lead to liberal behaviour.

Most importantly, the meltdown was about defending the right of an individual to remain immune from comradely criticism; it was a defense of liberalism and yet, in the moment of its defense, was wont to call all of its critics "liberal" simply because Unruhe appears to assume that any criticism of his position, which in this case was simply his private right to use a certain word that had offended others, is essentially revolutionary simply because he believes it to be so. Not only was this an obvious rejection of criticism/self-criticism––an unwillingness to be even marginally self-reflective––but it was also defended by Unruhe's bizarrely proud claim that he did not belong to a party. Indeed, he even went so far as to claim there could be no real maoists in North America, appealing perhaps to an understanding of third worldism that, at least I would assume, even most third worldists would find cringe inducing.

But someone who claims to be a maoist should recognize that one is only a communist if s/he: understands the importance of being part of a revolutionary organization and aspires to be involved, in some way, with a revolutionary party; desires to serve the people rather than hirself; accepts the need to be held to account by the party and the masses. One is not a maoist simply by dressing in communist drag and confining hir activities to a youtube channel (or blog for that matter), and this is simply an historical fact: collective life, for the historical communist movement, has always been treated as far more significant than individualistic life. Willful isolation can only lead to an atrophied politics where one is trapped in hir private echo chamber, consistently validated by the repetition of untested and disconnected ideas.

So this is a problem that goes far beyond MRN. Internet leftism is hampered by this dilemma since so many online communists are writing and debating from the isolation of home [and in my case really late at night], fiercely devoted to our often unquestioned positions that we only assume are critical. We often do not have a chance to experience line struggle and criticism/self-criticism which can only happen in a full and thorough sense outside of the online world in an organization that is trying to embed itself in the masses. After all, our arrogance online does not belong in a healthy organization or amongst the masses; organizations that treat people with arrogance and disdain are organizations that degenerate and sometimes collapse. In the online world, even after public meltdowns, we can still keep our arrogance: we do not always know the people who critique us, our responsibility is dispersed, we can easily get rid of one unpopular identity and replace it with another, and our politics can remain abstract. The fact that Unruhe seems to reject the possibility of participating in a communist organization in his social context might indicate that he wants to remain beyond organizational criticism by eschewing collective life. That is, by eschewing communism.

At the same time, however, there is a tendency to self-righteously denounce those who make errors and treat them as beyond rectification. This is the legacy of identity politics that, regardless of its initial aims, has begun to devolve into a praxis of denouncing people who use the wrong words and do not behave according to politically correct standards. In this context some people are generally treated as if their essential privilege places them beyond rectification. In this context the use of problematic words are treated as a meter of political worth; we often forget that this language idealism obscures a very real politics: sometimes people who lack a certain access to a privileged language, due to their class position, will say fucked up things even if they do not believe the politics these words often express; sometimes people who know all the right words will actually have fucked up politics that they are able to hide, due to their class privilege, with the correct language. If we actually plan to involve ourselves with the masses then we can't complain when they speak in the wrong way and don't understand the politically correct rules of speech––what should be most important for us is whether or not they understand why the material circumstances that produced these problematic patterns of speech are wrong and must be smashed.

So the fact that the MRN meltdown was initiated by criticism he received for the use of a problematic word is not the problem; the problem was his incorrect behaviour where, instead of trying to make sense of the criticism, he decided to publicly advertise his right to exist beyond criticism and that this right is somehow properly maoist. In a word: liberalism. Unruhe rejected all criticism, the basic principles of collective life, and defended his "right" to be erroneous. He made proud proclamations that he was not part of a party, demanding to be exempt from critique, and reified the bourgeois private sphere. Then he tried to argue that it was liberal to point out his liberalism, which is really quite laughable but maybe understandable considering his apparently willful isolation.

Of course, it needs to be said that self-righteous chastement of MRN may also be part of the same problem: imagining that we are also incapable of errors, and that the rectification of those who "cross the line" is impossible, means that we have placed ourselves beyond critique. I know that I have often made errors and, though it is sometimes very difficult for me to admit this fact, I am certain that if I did not possess some level of a collective life that held me to account, I would also be in danger of vanishing into the false certainty of an echo chamber.

Is it possible for Unruhe's behaviour to be rectified? Yes: no one is beyond rectification. But this would require self-criticism, a willingness to deal with his behaviour, and most probably an organization capable of demanding that he be held to account––something he would also demand in return. So if he wants to be a communist in practice rather than simply in theory, then he should try involving himself in a revolutionary organization in his social context rather than making the typical LLCO excuse to do nothing. But this should also apply to all of us who define as communist.

[MP5]

It gave me the urge to punch him in his hipster face. :laugh:

You and me both. I seriously want to go up to Quebec and punch the neckbeard right in his ugly. unwashed, suburbanite yuppie face. I wish i had known about him when i was up in Ottawa the other year as i could have driven over to Montreal and kicked the living shit out of him and filmed it and put it on youtube. Then he could ***** about Anarchist bullies beating up on third world Maoists :laugh:. Once he could talk again that is :grin:

[bcbm]

seriously who cares about this guy at all?


Although much has already been made

that seems like a vast overstatement

[MP5]

Too bad that the video of his meltdown was taken down. I'm sorry i didn't get to see that shit :(