Mohawks reply to Lafrenière statement
The Kahnawake Mohawks have responded to Ian Lafrenière with a statement: “Opinionated commentary that challenge and discredit our presence are not only insulting, they are taken as displaced attacks on our existence.”
Raymond Lutz 07:13 on 2021-10-22 Permalink
Can someone help me? I’m trying to keep up with our spiraling world but can’t quit grasp some expressions… Seriously, I’m old, francophone and politics neither social sciences are my academic field, quantum physics… (joking).
“Identity politics”, “Cancel culture”, “Wokism”, what are they? Are they bad? Do they even exist? At least I know Jordan B Peterson decried “cultural marxism” doesn’t 🙂 Three words sentences please.
Azrhey 09:33 on 2021-10-22 Permalink
First, « cultural marxism » is dog whistle for antisemitism.
Second, it’s only cancel culture if it comes from the Cancèl region of France. Everything else is just sparkling consequences!
Identity politics et wokism, ben c’est l’opposé de « ça me concerne pas personnellement fait que je vois pas pourquoi la société dépense du temps et de l’argent avec ça” exemple depuis ce printemps on nous a demandé de mettre nos pronoms dans notre signature au travail, Ben depuis avril j’ai eu au moins 4 personnes qui m’ont écrit des mails très désagréables pcq mon employeur est devenu trop woke et c’est pour ça que le monde va mal (je travaille en prévention du suicide) . Mais j’ai aussi eu plusieurs personnes qui m’ont partage d’emblée être trans pcq elles se sentaient en sécurité. So I guess I’m woke now? Whatever…
Identity politics c’est aussi le MSSS qui met une page informative on Portugal dans le journal local pour inciter le monde à se faire vacciner, Ben oui on parle français au Québec, mais tenir compte des minorités qui parfois sont isolées et parlent pas bien le français ça coûte pas grand chose et ça aide.
Wokeisme c’est une collegue avoir un blâme immédiat pour “bon l’autre a**ardé a encore pas vide le lave-vaisselle” (on emploi une personne avec des troubles de développement pour faire du petit entretien au bureau) puis finalement se faire renvoyée pcq elle a répondu par “je peux l’appeler comme je veux, il comprend pas quand on parle de lui!” quand on lui a remarqué que le R Word c’est pas bien.
And finally, identity politics c’est quand on trouve ça aberrant que les rasoirs (surtout pour les personnes a barbe) sont taxés plus bas pcq produit essentiel, mais que les produits menstruelles sont taxés full pinne (c’est pas dans la liste des produits essentiels???)
In conclusion, le wokism c’est quand les trous duc subissent des conséquences pour leur attitude rétrograde.
Pcq oui “avant” ta secrétaire elle aimait déjà pas ça se faire mettre la main aux fesses… mais elle pouvait pas se plaindre…
Meezly 10:17 on 2021-10-22 Permalink
“Identity politics” – people having a voice who were marginalized in past and present.
“Cancel culture” – accountability for those who would’ve gotten away with shit in the past.
“Wokeism” – it used to mean something until it got coopted by the status quo and by militants.
However, these terms have nothing to do with land acknowledgement, which is, at heart, a gesture to the First Nations demonstrating respect and mindfulness of our colonial history.
The CAQ is in the wrong here and showing appalling ignorance and disrespect – AND they started it. If anyone is contributing to this spiraling world, it’s them.
Kevin 10:41 on 2021-10-22 Permalink
@Azrhey
Excellent mon chef! Je RIS
nau 15:01 on 2021-10-22 Permalink
@Raymond
I might regret this but I’ll give it a stab. Disclaimer: I’m also old and white. Azrhey explains how these terms are used by people here in Quebec who are okay with the status quo and want to criticize progressive change, and Meezly’s summary is probably more condensed an explanation than you might like, so I’ll try to give more of a general idea where these terms originated on the left before being adopted by the right to attack the left. This is of course just my view and not intended to be a definitive account. Sorry it’s so long and covers things you undoubtedly already know but can’t connect to the English terminology (and also for the lack of three word sentences).
“Identity politics” is when people who share a common identity act together to attempt to cause political change that is relevant to people who share that identity. Since left organizations focused on class-based economic issues have historically been dominated by white, male, etc. individuals, people who didn’t share one or more of these identities often felt that these organizations didn’t address many of their concerns. Eventually, they began to form other political entities focused on those concerns particular to their identity. For example, say a white dominated reformist organization calls for a higher minimum wage. It applies to everyone, problem solved, right? The non-white organization’s response is that a higher minimum wage doesn’t help if you can only get informal work because there’s a bias against hiring non-whites that the white reformists don’t recognize. There’s a need to act against that bias as well. Identity politics of this sort is a real and positive thing. But nothing is ever quite so simple. Tensions arise within or between organizations over where limited resources are best directed or who gets to fill scarce leadership roles (in hierarchical organizations) and also between identities, such as is currently seen between some feminists and transgendered people. This led to the criticism that identity politics disrupts solidarity and has made left politics less effective. This gave identity politics a negative connotation. The right then seized on and amplified this negative view of identity politics to attract white, male, etc. people essentially by claiming that identity politics means being told what to do by non-whites and/or females and/or etc. So, yes it exists, no it’s not a bad thing but it also opens the door to certain attacks by the right, which is why you see them using the term. (Note that as a term, identity politics could just as easily apply to white supremacists or Hindu nationalists in India, but historically it has meant what Meezly has said).
“Cancel culture” is one of those right-wing terms that shows how unoriginal they can be. Essentially, they saw the left using “rape culture” and swapped in “cancel” for “rape”. There is a real left wing phenomenon here, for example, when anti-fascists call the attention of internet advertisers to the poorly concealed fascist content of certain websites, resulting in those websites losing their funding. It’s essentially an extension of boycotting. Generally, it’s a good thing when done carefully, but people can be quick to judge according to their pre-existing ideas rather than consider all the facts, and can end up targeting the wrong people. It’s easy enough for the right to attract people further rightward by exploiting concern that this might happen. “Cancel culture” is the term the right uses in its efforts to exploit this concern.
I’m on even shakier ground with “wokism” but I currently understand it thusly. “Woke” was a term applied by some people on the left to their own views, the idea being that they were “awake to” (that is, aware of) issues that other people, including (possibly, especially) on the left, were “asleep to”. As it became more commonly recognized, the right seized on it as a replacement for “politically correct”, which was getting a bit stale as an insult. The right grafted on the “ism” to make it sound more like an ideology.
I can’t quite agree with Arzhey that “cultural marxism” is simply a dog whistle for anti-semitism. I know people I was friends with as a teenager who have in the intervening years become quite right wing (via gun culture, I think) and quite happily parrot the term “cultural marxism” but who give zero sign of being anti-semitic (anti-Islam on the other hand…). Basically, it’s a popular term on the right because lots of people (right and center) still equate “left” with “Marxist” and “Marxist” with “Stalinist”. These people don’t particularly comprehend any of the more recent left ideas (other than to understand that they involve people who are different from them), so right wing commentators like Jordan P. label the more recent left ideas as “cultural marxism” to use such people’s reflexive anti-marxism to get them to reject these ideas before they try to understand them (and possibly see that they have some merit).
Raymond Lutz 20:51 on 2021-10-22 Permalink
Merci à tous. En parlant aujourd’hui avec un ami de ce commentaire, il m’a rappelé que Natalie Wynn avait fait un excellent video (comme toujours) sur le cancelling, video que j’avais sauté, faute de temps. Il m’a expliqué que le cancelling est effectivement présent dans la communauté progressiste: disons que je croise un nazi et que je ne le punch pas ou que je l’invite sur ma plate-forme et que je ne le confronte pas avec une véhémence qui satisfait ma propre communauté: celle-ci alors pourrait décider de me mettre au ban, au même titre que le nazi lui-même… C’est une espèce de culpabilité par association, par amalgame.
As for Cultural Marxism, I found this from Bruce Wilson:”’Cultural Marxism’ is now the grand unifying narrative for the hard, fascist & neo-Nazi right. It does the same work as did the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ forgery did, a century ago, to inspire Hitler & his Nazis,”. Somber factoid: “Anders Breivik, who killed 77 people in Norway in 2011, used the terms “cultural Marxism” or “cultural Marxist” more than 600 times in his 1,500-plus-page manifesto.” (Salon article).
nau and Meezly explainations of Identity politics do clarify things for me, thanks, and Azrhey m’a bien fait sourire. As for wokism, I didn’t think of looking at wikipedia… their section on it’s pejorative use is clear.
Tim S. 09:49 on 2021-10-23 Permalink
Nice discussion. I’m a little late to this thread, and haven’t yet found an hour 40 minutes to watch Raymond’s video, but would the 2002 Netanyahu riot at Concordia be considered an early example of cancel culture/deplatforming?
Meezly 11:11 on 2021-10-23 Permalink
@Tim S. Why would you want to reduce the complicated history of Israeli-Palestinian conflict to cancel culture/deplatforming?
@Raymond Lutz, I’m glad the explanations were helpful, but why did you bring up these questions on the topic that was supposed to be about land acknowledgement?
The Kahnawake Mohawks responded to Lafrenière’s blatantly ignorant, knee-jerk reaction with a measured and articulate statement that had nothing to do with wokeism, cancel culture or identity politics.
The question that should be asked is why Quebec politicians keep defaulting to their colonial playbook and why they’re not interested in reaching out in any way towards truth and reconciliation.
Maybe we should all educate ourselves in how patriarchal colonialism and capitalism has shaped society today and how civil rights activists in the past century has helped inform our discussions today? I’m a little astounded that wokeism, cancel culture or identity politics can siderail discussions where people could potentially learn something.
Raymond Lutz 13:30 on 2021-10-23 Permalink
@Tim, I tought Legault was doing “Identity politics” using the landback movement: cajoling its electoral base simply being “against”, but was not sure (and I thought it would be a good occasion to toss in all the other stuff I’m not familiar with).
Meezly 14:40 on 2021-10-23 Permalink
There is land acknowledgement, which is what the Montreal Canadiens were simply doing, and there is the landback movement. Based on Lafrenière’s reactionary response, he seems to be conflating the two.
Acknowledging that we’re on unceded lands does not mean returning all stolen land to the Kanien’keha:ka. Why is there this unfounded fear that a simple land acknowledgement gesture is going to lead to a gateway call to action?
Legault has used ‘identity politics’ in his dealings with the federal government who seem more concerned with appeasing the francophone Quebec majority, at the expense of other minorities, because francophone Quebecers see themselves as a threatened minority. I really don’t think it would work that way with the Quebec gov’t’s relations with First Nations, as they see obviously through all their bullshit.