.
Richard Seymour, China Mieville, and Magpie Corven have, along with several others, resigned from the fledgling International Socialist Network following an internet row over interracial lesbian bondage porn and its ideological implications. (Not kidding. You can read about the original incident here and the ISN Steering Committee’s official response here). Jara Handala alerted me to this development by linking me to the online document they published on Dropbox; thanks for that.
The toxicity of these constant witch-hunts and irresponsible accusations probably requires no further explanation or commentary by me. But hey, I’ll say a couple words about it anyway.
First, while I’m hardly sympathetic to Seymour as an intellectual or political figure, I hold no sympathies for the International Socialist Network either. As far as I can tell, they are little more than Cliffite Trots who’ve lately supplemented this old-fashioned, weak-tea brand of revolutionary socialism with vogue theories of “intersectionality.” Probably to compensate for the culture of institutionalized sexism that characterized the British Socialist Workers Party following its scandalous coverup of rape allegations about a year ago.
Second, in this particular instance I actually find Seymour and Magpie to be far less ridiculous than their accusers. Granted, Seymour’s a stubborn and arrogant prick — but hey, aren’t we all? Like I said a couple posts ago, there’s part of me that feels like his fall from grace (within International Socialist circles, at least) is a kind of comeuppance, that he somehow deserved to be pilloried and lambasted the way he was because he’d used similar logic to anathematize others. But another part of me felt genuinely sorry for the guy. It’s sad enough that the Left has degenerated to such a pitiful state, where it squabbles over such piddly crap. Did Seymour and co. really need to have their reputations ruined on account of it, though? Tarred as perverts and racists? I don’t think so.
Ad hominem arguments and insinuation cannot stand in for rational, ruthlessly critical discourse and debate. Without tedious moralization and thought-taboos. Seymour can and should be challenged at the level of his ideas and actions, but not on the basis of this nonsense. Below is the letter of resignation they released a few hours ago.
Resignation from the ISN
.
To the Steering Committee (SC) and our comrades in the International Socialist Network (ISN):
With great regrets, we are resigning from the ISNetwork. Many of us were involved in the setting up of the network, and we are very sad that it has come to this. We remain in full solidarity with ISN comrades, and look forward to working with them on campaigns.
Despite the repeated characterization of us as a “right bloc,” we do not represent any unified political position beyond our concerns about both the political direction and internal culture of the ISNetwork. It has been clear for some time that our critiques put us in a minority: contrary to a common smear, we have always been willing to argue from this position, and welcomed this political debate. However, there has been an increasing breakdown of trust between us and various leading members of the organization. It is now clear that we are not welcome in the ISN.
One of us is a woman sex-worker and BDSM practitioner. After many years of self imposed isolation from politics, she believed she had finally found a space where even those comrades who disagreed with her positions would discuss controversial topics of sexuality and desire in respect and comradeship. Instead she has been browbeaten, patronized, marginalized, and moralized against, and the topics she wishes to discuss with her comrades dismissed as, in the words of one SC member, self-evidently “sordid.” She has been made to feel so unwelcome that she feels forced to leave the SC and ISN.
The SC has put out a statement strongly implying racism and claiming “inappropriate” argumentative techniques against three of our members. We entirely reject these insinuations and urge anyone interested to examine the threads in question (here & here) and judge for themselves. That they are over a controversial and charged topic — and one on which the signatories to this letter do not necessarily agree — is not in doubt: however, if there is a single statement made by any comrade that can reasonably be judged “inappropriate,” let alone racist, we urge their accusers to state it.
It is claimed, on the basis of a leaked email thread of a private conversation, that we have been politically dishonest, and set out to split or even destroy the network. This is wholly untrue. As has been made clear in this week’s bulletin, we had intended to launch a platform within the ISNetwork in order to argue for our position. However, recent events had given us an increasing sense that we might not be able to remain members, due both to legitimate political differences and to the personalized politics of vituperation at the brunt of which we have felt. Accordingly — as is explicitly allowed in the ISN constitution — we have been discussing among ourselves to work out how best to argue our position within the network, our chances, and our contingency strategies if we felt unable to continue.
At issue here is not just the conduct or content of recent discussions or even the political direction of the ISN, but the question of making a habitable culture of discussion on the Left. When some of us recently wrote an article criticizing a politics of anathema within the ISN, we were derided by opponents who denied any such thing exists. Unfortunately, it does. One SC member has recently publicly insisted that “no one is being targeted personally.” The very same SC member recently seconded a denouncement on Facebook, by another SC member, of several of us as “arrogant fucks” and “bad rubbish” to whom “good riddance.” One leading member expressed a desire on Facebook to strangle one of us — referring to her as a “nauseating tosser” — and not one of the SC members to whom she said this suggested it was an inappropriate comment to make. Several SC members openly expressed their agreement with a status referring to us as “parasites.” Another SC member wrote “they should count themselves lucky they haven’t been expelled” — particularly galling to two of the “Facebook Four” involved in our thread. There are further examples, but this culture is one in which we can no longer work: we also would like comrades to consider whether left organizations can hope to attract a new generation of members if they treat each other in this way.
We look forward to working in a left culture that has ended certain practices inherited from the SWP. These include moralistic browbeating; the implicit claim that various controversial topics are inappropriate for discussion; that certain comrades can not be argued with on them; and that dissenters from these nostrums deserve to be attacked in personalized terms. We know many ISN members look forward to this with similar enthusiasm.
Jamie A.
Magpie C.
Kieran C.
A.M.
China M.
Richard S.
Len T.
Rosie W.
