A radical publisher canceled an entire book because it contained an essay on Marxism by yours truly. They said they couldn't "associate themselves" with my decision to appear on Joe Rogan's podcast.
I can relate this situation to a similar scenario in Brazil. A few years back, the most popular Brazilian podcast was hosted by this airheaded ancap sympathizer, Monark. He interviewed congressman and recurring candidate for mayor of São Paulo for the Socialism and Freedom Party, Guilherme Boulos, and I think that was such a hit. Boulos had a long history of organizing with the Movement for Homeless Workers and taking part in squats with them. That turned him into a meme with the uninformed public, that Boulos would come occupy your apartment, etc. His appearance in Monark's podcast allowed him to reach a large audience with clear cut explanations about the problems of homelessness, real estate speculation, and the fact that são Paulo has more available homes than homeless people. He reinforced that Brazil already has laws that should take care of these issues, but they're not enforced because it goes against the interest of rich speculators. It was an amazing interview that made even the ancap host question his own assumptions and I believe that many people might have become more sympathetic to Boulos after that appearance.
Monark had been subsequently "cancelled" due to his nazi-adjacent (or straight up nazi) statements. Should Boulos be cancelled by association? He's had an impressive campaign for mayor (not winning, but impressive given the size of his party). He was the only viable left wing candidate in those elections. Should people have not voted for him just because he gave an enlightening interview to a neonazi ancap
In 2019, Punctum Books published "Post Memes: Seizing the Memes of Production," which featured a contribution by McKenzie Wark. For a number of years through the 1990s, Wark was a columnist for The Australian, a Murdoch press publication, the most influential Right-wing newspaper in Australia. Surely this would also count as an unholy association worthy of book burning, but of course, if Punctum tried to rationally apply this irrational decision as a universal principle and combed through their back catalogue and forthcoming titles they'd have empty shelves.
Also, at what point do you stop the chain of association?
Like Joe Rogan is bad since he had Donald Trump on and is sympathetic to him, and now your bad since you are sympathetic to Joe Rogan (even if you disagree on important issues), now do they not let anyone who published in Jacobin write for them since they are associated with you?
Unfortunately, it’s the type of insular thought that is present on both sides of the political spectrum. My only hope is anyone who is sympathetic to socialism can move past this type of sectarianism.
I can relate this situation to a similar scenario in Brazil. A few years back, the most popular Brazilian podcast was hosted by this airheaded ancap sympathizer, Monark. He interviewed congressman and recurring candidate for mayor of São Paulo for the Socialism and Freedom Party, Guilherme Boulos, and I think that was such a hit. Boulos had a long history of organizing with the Movement for Homeless Workers and taking part in squats with them. That turned him into a meme with the uninformed public, that Boulos would come occupy your apartment, etc. His appearance in Monark's podcast allowed him to reach a large audience with clear cut explanations about the problems of homelessness, real estate speculation, and the fact that são Paulo has more available homes than homeless people. He reinforced that Brazil already has laws that should take care of these issues, but they're not enforced because it goes against the interest of rich speculators. It was an amazing interview that made even the ancap host question his own assumptions and I believe that many people might have become more sympathetic to Boulos after that appearance.
Monark had been subsequently "cancelled" due to his nazi-adjacent (or straight up nazi) statements. Should Boulos be cancelled by association? He's had an impressive campaign for mayor (not winning, but impressive given the size of his party). He was the only viable left wing candidate in those elections. Should people have not voted for him just because he gave an enlightening interview to a neonazi ancap
It's preposterous.
In 2019, Punctum Books published "Post Memes: Seizing the Memes of Production," which featured a contribution by McKenzie Wark. For a number of years through the 1990s, Wark was a columnist for The Australian, a Murdoch press publication, the most influential Right-wing newspaper in Australia. Surely this would also count as an unholy association worthy of book burning, but of course, if Punctum tried to rationally apply this irrational decision as a universal principle and combed through their back catalogue and forthcoming titles they'd have empty shelves.
That's incredible. One of the lamest reasons to cancel someone I've ever heard.
FELICES
FELICES BEN BURGISBEN
FELICES
Also, at what point do you stop the chain of association?
Like Joe Rogan is bad since he had Donald Trump on and is sympathetic to him, and now your bad since you are sympathetic to Joe Rogan (even if you disagree on important issues), now do they not let anyone who published in Jacobin write for them since they are associated with you?
Simply censorship on the left, benefitting no one but those who would prefer that we remain silent or divided.
Unfortunately, it’s the type of insular thought that is present on both sides of the political spectrum. My only hope is anyone who is sympathetic to socialism can move past this type of sectarianism.
Wow. I honestly thought (or let myself think) that we were on the other end of this "leftist" suicide mission.