Lenin on Lenin

A paragraph:

No, I say this because, like some of the most radical theory, the concept of \’intersectionality\’ poses a profound epistemological challenge, a challenge to ways of knowing. If the feminist challenge to traditional forms of knowledge seeks to expose and counter its androcentric biases, intersectional feminism finds a plethora of other biases (class, ethnocentric, heterosexist, etc) converging on and intersecting with them. It\’s not just a question of how a perceived \’privilege\’ or set of privileges might bind one to the system, to its hierarchies and violence, but more profoundly of how one\’s location in the social structure enables one to see, or prevents one from seeing.


That will get the proletariat into the streets, I\’m sure.

9 thoughts on “Lenin on Lenin”

  1. s location in the social structure enables one to see, or prevents one from seeing.”

    ie. being a woman or a sufficiently leftist male enables one to see, whereas being anything else prevents one from seeing. At least they’ve recognised the contradiction inherent in their traditional kind of “normative relativism” (ie. “there are no good and bad, so you must do as I say”). Shame their response is characteristically intellectually dishonest (“Only I can tell good from bad therefore you must do as I say”).

  2. I preferred this exciting narrative-

    “We had been waiting anxiously for reports in a nearby Wetherspoon’s, holed up with the four recently expelled comrades. This was Saturday 5th January. A tense, polarised conference was already under way. One of the co-conspirators shook my hand when I arrived, and informed me with an appalling smirk that my presence there, simply being seen with the four, could be grounds for expulsion. “Well, fuck em,” I glowered. “Yeah, that’s the spirit.”

    …and so it goes on. It’s an exciting life in the SWP.

  3. What a load of piffle. The man can’t even write English. He seems to think by swallowing a thesaurus, barfing the words back up onto a page and arranging them in what ever fashion takes his fancy, it will somehow make him sound intelligent. It doesn’t. It makes him sound like an idiot that is trying to be pretentious.

    What ethnointegralsocialmethodological analyses can you attach to that response you trotskyite prat?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *