Jan 312010
 

I gather that few others found this as funny as I did:

Fundamentally, the remit of any new localized ‘cell-based’ but centrally co-ordinated publication, whether electronic or hard copy, will be the creation of an effective interface between the existing ‘lifeworld’ and the development of an appropriate register of anti-hegemonic discourse.

By ‘lifeworld’, I refer to the post-Husserl Habermasian conception (‘Lebenswelt’) of a set of socially and culturally sedimented linguistic meanings, shared in their current form by the working class and its hegemonized identities (and sets of identities).

Into this existing set of shared understandings of how the world operates, it is necessary to ‘infuse’ the appropriate set of Marxian conceptions both around the essential nature of capital/labour relations and the consciousness of the working class as an objective entity in relation to capital. In turn such conscientization will lead to the development of a renewed ‘Lebenswelt’ in which class struggle becomes both more desirably and feasible through solidaristic local and then wider action.

Displaying a startling lack of self-awareness, one commenter blithely bypasses the main point and thus demonstrates a complete absence of appreciation for the author’s craft:

I think my approach here would have been a little simpler: sheerly ripping the piss out of these so-called libertarians. Several of them make comments which demonstrate that they didn’t read your article, particularly as regards where the funding comes from for your blogging endeavour.

Another misunderstands the definition of satire:

You can self-satirise Frankfurt school jargon, rampant bureaucracy and heavy-handed control-freakery all you like, but this is how the Left operates.

Ah, well.

One of the things that’s always puzzled me is that, in this current struggle between ‘right’ and ‘left’, each side is convinced that the other is the hegemonic group. This suggests that, in reality, neither is.

So who’s actually in charge, then?

UPDATE: Anna Raccoon has also picked this one up. I can only echo the remark of commenter Katabasis:

What makes the joke even funnier is that the satire is sufficiently subtle that not all of his fellow travelers will get it.

And the same person who, on the original post, misunderstood satire again levels accusations of FAIL at Anna’s place, because apparently, Lefties really are like that. Seriously.

*le sigh*

  6 Responses to “Autosatiricism”

  1. I particularly liked his first comment on the piece:

    I was more amused at the herding that took place amongst the ‘libertarians’ when faced with something to do with (social) entrepeneurship.

    Going back to the so-called ‘serious’ piece for his definition of “(social) entrepreneurship”:

    in the longer term these costs should as far as possible be covered by worker organisations like trade unions (and thereafter a Labour party more open to wider left engagement), the reality is that funds may need to be raised friom (sic) charitable/employment creation sources (see, for example, this kind of opportunity coming along in Wales), and from very local advertising.

    So, as an “entrepreneur”, he expects his funds to be given to him from the trade unions (i.e. public money), from the Labour Party (I just feel that £18 million debt expanding) or just straight from the public teat (that Welsh link. If none of that works – he might have to force himself to take adverts. So, actually, he is taking public support to compete with his local paper?

    You’ve got to remember, this blogging lark is a hobby / obsession for most of us. For them, there is their glorious political career to consider and paid political blogging is just a lowly rung on his progression up it.

  2. Each new publication should therefore contain at least one ‘romance’ story, written in the appropriate register (cf. the ‘Mills and Boon’ phenonemon, and the rise of Heat Magazine), but with elements of Marxian teaching and concientization woven into the fabric of the story, along with other elements (in the shape of minor character and secondary plot devices) aimed at challenging some of the more reactionary theoretical and practical digressions offered up by the so-called ‘post-Marxist’ left. 

    It’s funny but all I can think of is left leaning titles for porno movies like Workers Uprising 4 or Animal Farm; I really should stop reading Obo’s page…

  3. OK, you’ve quoted my comment- please explain how I’ve “misunderstood” satire?

    • Because what you identify as fail – ‘this is how the Left operates’ – is the very thing that makes the piece satire. I’m not saying I don’t get your point – I do get it, believe me. But give the dude a little credit. It was very good satire.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.