As I read more from the original theorists of intersectionality, I increasingly find their arguments similar to those of the first theorists of conservative fusionism.
— George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) March 3, 2019
That is, they were working to build a long-term philosophical justification for what might otherwise have been a political marriage of convenience.
— George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) March 3, 2019
Both the US left and right are made of coalitions that often seem to have little in common, but do have a common opponent. Such coalitions are vulnerable to partisans who wish to drive a wedge into the other side.
— George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) March 3, 2019
In the post-war right, libertarians, war hawks, and traditionalists shared little beyond their fear and hatred of communism. Their specific interests were often actually at odds.
— George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) March 3, 2019
Frank Meyer and others tried very hard to prove that there were no internal contradictions within the broad conservative movement. It was important to demonstrate that all sides, properly understood, wanted the same thing.
— George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) March 3, 2019
Later, on the left, the Black Power movement, feminists, immigrant advocates, gay liberation supporters, etc., did not necessarily always have the same policy agenda, but it was important to emphasize that they had shared premises. Intersectionality served that purpose well.
— George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) March 3, 2019
I am not arguing that the proponents of either view were cynics. I think Meyer on the right and Kimberle Crenshaw (and others) on the left were sincere. However, trying to view both as an outsider, and looking at their arguments while considering the context of the time …
— George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) March 3, 2019
it often seems that the political coalitions came first, and the justifications came second. Over time, however, those justifications were taken for granted, & many among the next generation of activists just assumed that certain groups were (and would always be) natural allies
— George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) March 3, 2019
Surely someone has written about this, and perhaps someone else has argued that this view is wrong. If that’s the case, I’d love to see some links showing me how I can be further educated.
— George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) March 3, 2019
I think @KeeangaYamahtta wrote about this in her book about the CRC.
— Shane Burley (@shane_burley1) March 3, 2019
Thanks! I will check it out.
— George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) March 3, 2019
You can find a similar argument to yours here: https://t.co/r7JYvR8DoL
— Simon Kennedy (@simonmotorbike) March 3, 2019
No comments:
Post a Comment