Latest / PlasticPills Critical Theory & Philosophy / Fit Fascists v. Fat Foucauldians // 266

Transcript

Fit Fascists v. Fat Foucauldians // 266 · PlasticPills Critical Theory & Philosophy

• 0:09
  Speaker 1: Guys, there's news. There's academic news this week. Well, I
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: don't know.
• 0:14
  Speaker 2: Peripheral academic?
• 0:16
  Speaker 3: It's definitely academic adjacent.
• 0:20
  Speaker 4: Conferences about socialism will usually be related to... Well, is academic.
• 0:26
  Speaker 2: And it is also the mandate of leftist podcasts everywhere to.
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: What do you call this?
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: We have to guard the boundary of the earthy, common
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: sense working class from the weirdos who have gone just
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: a bit too far. So we have an important job here, guys.
• 0:44
  Speaker 2: We have to decide what is and what's not left
• 0:47
  Speaker 2: and then pick a side.
• 0:49
  Speaker 4: Yeah, apparently you have to choose a side. What were
• 0:52
  Speaker 4: the different genics? Are you.
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: Telegenic? Carcinogenic?
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: Being.
• 1:00
  Speaker 3: There was a fitness panel. One of them was about
• 1:02
  Speaker 3: being more dysgenic.
• 1:05
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:05
  Speaker 4: Are you dysgenic or are you, what would be the
• 1:07
  Speaker 4: opposite of that?
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: Hot eugenic.
• 1:11
  Speaker 4: Oh, eugenic.
• 1:11
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 1:12
  Speaker 4: Okay.
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:12
  Speaker 4: Are you, are you?
• 1:13
  Speaker 2: Well, based on the group chat, we may all actually
• 1:16
  Speaker 2: all disagree on this one, which, which could be pretty funny,
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: but yeah, but there's a, There's a swirl of disinformation
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: around this as well.
• 1:25
  Speaker 3: Cause I guess Fox and the right wing media were
• 1:28
  Speaker 3: having a field day with the, some of the sound
• 1:30
  Speaker 3: bites that came out of this conference.
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: Our right wing paper up here is called the sun.
• 1:36
  Speaker 2: They were, they were happy about this, but yeah, I'm sure,
• 1:40
  Speaker 2: I'm sure you guys know about it. Uh, listener, I mean,
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: listener guys, some think tank right wing guy, uh, clip
• 1:47
  Speaker 2: some of the speakers. including academic speakers, which puts it
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: in our wheelhouse. But they were at a, there's a
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: big conference, like tons of panels.
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: It was in Chicago, I believe. Lots of people there.
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: Panels on decolonizing Palestine, transformative rural organizing. That sounds like
• 2:08
  Speaker 2: a particularly useful type of panel.
• 2:11
  Speaker 4: Yeah.
• 2:12
  Speaker 2: Journalism, authoritarianism, and struggles against ICE. But the one that
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: took the star of the week, The one that took
• 2:18
  Speaker 2: all the attention.
• 2:20
  Speaker 3: There's some big names there.
• 2:22
  Speaker 2: Yeah, Amy Goodman was there, right?
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: And Hassan Piker was there.
• 2:26
  Speaker 3: Piker, yeah.
• 2:27
  Speaker 2: The star, though. The star, though, was the panel called
• 2:31
  Speaker 2: Health Fascism. You might like there to be a comma there,
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: but there's not. Health Fascism, Body Politics, and the Anti-State.
• 2:40
  Speaker 3: Yeah, there's a lot there. I mean, in some ways,
• 2:44
  Speaker 3: it was similar to what you might see at like
• 2:49
  Speaker 3: a paper, any conference, a presentation from a panel at
• 2:54
  Speaker 3: a conference of like grad or undergrad students working in
• 3:01
  Speaker 3: social studies or the humanities. That is definitely my experience too.
• 3:06
  Speaker 3: I was like, this isn't even that weird. Oh yeah,
• 3:09
  Speaker 3: it's not weird to me.
• 3:10
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it's weird to other people who are like, what?
• 3:14
  Speaker 2: It's funny when you see something that's normal to you
• 3:16
  Speaker 2: and- I mean, not normal, normal, but you know there's
• 3:20
  Speaker 2: always like that one, the one panelist that's like a
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: bit off the rocker.
• 3:25
  Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, yeah. I was going to say, yeah.
• 3:28
  Speaker 2: I mean, you know, it's kind of like a common
• 3:32
  Speaker 2: academic conference experience where you read the program or you
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: hear for the first time the title of the paper
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: and you just, you can mentally flag it. You're like, okay,
• 3:41
  Speaker 2: that's the kook. That's going to be the weird one.
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: The one who says like, all of society is based
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: on pedophilic relations.
• 3:48
  Speaker 2: Or whatever it is. So some form of that, but
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: you kind of develop antibodies to it. You know, like
• 3:55
  Speaker 2: no one's going to be asking that person questions after
• 3:57
  Speaker 2: the talk, but there's no hostility.
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: It's just kind of a, a thing.
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: And then to see one of those papers hit the
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: gen pop where they don't know what to do with it.
• 4:08
  Speaker 2: Left and right, everyone's just totally hysterical.
• 4:12
  Speaker 3: Oh, I guess that was a bit jargony. Oh, I
• 4:14
  Speaker 3: guess out of context, it does look a bit strange.
• 4:18
  Speaker 4: I mean, I will say my experience of going to
• 4:21
  Speaker 4: conferences recently, yeah, I mean, I would say the broader
• 4:26
  Speaker 4: political theory conferences, there's definitely going to be a panel
• 4:29
  Speaker 4: or two that have people advancing... like on it, definitely
• 4:34
  Speaker 4: very unintuitive views to a normie, but then even to
• 4:37
  Speaker 4: an academic, but I don't know, maybe like political theory
• 4:40
  Speaker 4: conferences in general are maybe more conservative than like a
• 4:45
  Speaker 4: humanities or like an interdisciplinary critical conference, right? But yes,
• 4:49
  Speaker 4: I agree with you in the sense that it's not
• 4:51
  Speaker 4: uncommon to see, like, I was thinking back to one
• 4:54
  Speaker 4: of the big political theory conferences I went to last year.
• 4:56
  Speaker 4: And definitely, I remember some some, some debates, but not this, this,
• 5:02
  Speaker 4: I mean, this, I would say definitely pushed the limits.
• 5:05
  Speaker 4: I don't know if I would have seen anybody talking
• 5:08
  Speaker 4: about how fitness is fascist. Uh, you know, that's even,
• 5:13
  Speaker 4: even for my experience, conference going, that's like a little
• 5:16
  Speaker 4: out there.
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: It's the, in the interdisciplinary conferences where.
• 5:19
  Speaker 4: You get the real loonies.
• 5:21
  Speaker 2: Yeah. A guitarian reading of the, a FIBA file in
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: anime from independent researcher who spells her name and only lowercase.
• 5:29
  Speaker 4: Let's clip that. Clip that, guys. Clip that.
• 5:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, don't... Hey, don't... That's not citing a true event,
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: but let me tell you, it's not far from a
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: couple of true events that have been mixed together to
• 5:40
  Speaker 2: protect the innocent.
• 5:42
  Speaker 3: Oh, for sure.
• 5:43
  Speaker 4: You know what?
• 5:43
  Speaker 2: It takes all types to make a world, all right?
• 5:45
  Speaker 4: But anyway, on the Claymaid, I think there were a
• 5:48
  Speaker 4: few things that struck me from this panelist talking about essentially...
• 5:54
  Speaker 4: I guess the claims seem to be something like stop
• 5:56
  Speaker 4: trying to beat the fascists at their own game, because
• 5:59
  Speaker 4: I guess fascists are eugenic in the sense that they
• 6:02
  Speaker 4: care about physical well-being, like physical fitness.
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: That's what you call it.
• 6:08
  Speaker 4: But then because I guess some people have had a
• 6:11
  Speaker 4: call and there's been some discourse online about like Hassan Piker,
• 6:15
  Speaker 4: like going to the gym and like, oh, that's like
• 6:18
  Speaker 4: a good model. Like men should be getting out there
• 6:21
  Speaker 4: to improve themselves and in general fitness being a good
• 6:25
  Speaker 4: thing but i guess it had become sort of right
• 6:28
  Speaker 4: wing coded so it sounds like this panelist is saying
• 6:33
  Speaker 4: basically accepting that framing like essentially that's one thing that
• 6:36
  Speaker 4: i found a bit shock it's just like oh you
• 6:38
  Speaker 4: just like accept that fitness is owned by the right
• 6:41
  Speaker 4: what you call fascists already i'm like what are you
• 6:45
  Speaker 4: talking about but then But then it moves to this claim,
• 6:49
  Speaker 4: and I think this is a very slippery kind of use.
• 6:51
  Speaker 4: This is one of the things that annoys me the
• 6:52
  Speaker 4: most about this kind of theory, left circles, is I
• 6:57
  Speaker 4: would say the ideological, almost propagandistic framing of terms, right?
• 7:02
  Speaker 4: So this kind of like eugenic, dysgenic, right? I mean,
• 7:05
  Speaker 4: there's a very, it's very clever to use that term
• 7:08
  Speaker 4: because eugenic obviously sets off all these alarm bells, right? Eugenics,
• 7:13
  Speaker 4: oh my God, you know, Nazis, right? So it's like,
• 7:17
  Speaker 4: already she's smuggling in this term for ideological effect, right?
• 7:21
  Speaker 4: To create a distinction, a binary, right? That is already
• 7:26
  Speaker 4: ideologically loaded to make, to kind of predetermine this side bad,
• 7:31
  Speaker 4: this side good, right? And that's why she goes on
• 7:32
  Speaker 4: and says, the more dysgenic, the better, right? Which to
• 7:37
  Speaker 4: me also was kind.
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: Of, Wait, how much of the, did you listen to
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: the talk first?
• 7:42
  Speaker 4: I didn't listen to the whole talk, but I did
• 7:43
  Speaker 4: see more than just a clip.
• 7:44
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 7:44
  Speaker 4: I'm just, I'm just kind of analyzing the clip that
• 7:46
  Speaker 4: went viral, but yeah.
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: The, the panelists or her panelists, um, let's, let's say
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: played a little bit fast and loose with the term genocide,
• 7:55
  Speaker 2: which I, you know, maybe at the moment it would be, uh,
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: valuable to be a little specific with the term genocide,
• 8:03
  Speaker 2: but he was saying that, uh, Ozempic, represents a fascist
• 8:07
  Speaker 2: genocide of fat people.
• 8:09
  Speaker 4: Oh, that's incredible. That's incredible.
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: Or it was this new drug.
• 8:14
  Speaker 3: I didn't... GLP-1?
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, that's Ozempic, I'm pretty sure.
• 8:19
  Speaker 4: Yeah, that's Ozempic, yeah.
• 8:21
  Speaker 2: Instead of evaluating the arguments, first of all, the way
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: this is being taken up is the same way the
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: last ones have been taken up, like the NDP conference.
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: Was taken up, which is it's clipped by the.
• 8:35
  Speaker 2: Potentially bad actors or anti-left actors. But then it becomes,
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: the debate is leftists are trying to do PR for themselves.
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: And who speaks for the left? Who's a leftist? And
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: who does the left associate itself with? What should the
• 8:53
  Speaker 2: left be telling, who should the left be telling to
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: shut up? That's also on the left. So it becomes
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: a weird, this is where it ties into the reading
• 9:02
  Speaker 2: that we're going to get to, which is about collective racism. violence.
• 9:06
  Speaker 2: But it actually becomes a quite interesting perspective of who speaks,
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: how do you speak, who do you let speak? Do
• 9:14
  Speaker 2: we want to shut these people up because they're making
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: us look bad? And I don't really buy the premise
• 9:21
  Speaker 2: of that. I don't mind looking at the argument because
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: it's funny, but I don't speak for the left and
• 9:26
  Speaker 2: I don't want to be so annoying as others I
• 9:28
  Speaker 2: have seen to decide that I personally am the left
• 9:32
  Speaker 2: And now it's the burden has fallen onto me to
• 9:35
  Speaker 2: decide who should shut up because I'm not going to
• 9:37
  Speaker 2: make them shut up.
• 9:39
  Speaker 3: The conference itself has such a weird background because it
• 9:43
  Speaker 3: used to be the flagship conference of a Trotskyist organization
• 9:47
  Speaker 3: called the International Socialist Organization. And they got a reputation
• 9:54
  Speaker 3: for being kind of controlling of the messages that they sent. out.
• 10:03
  Speaker 3: As a Trotskyist group, they would ensure kind of ideological
• 10:09
  Speaker 3: conformity behind closed doors before they went out into the public.
• 10:13
  Speaker 3: But they collapsed in 2019 when allegations that there is
• 10:19
  Speaker 3: some kind of suppression of sexual assault charges within the organization.
• 10:25
  Speaker 3: The leadership suppressed these charges and then it all came
• 10:28
  Speaker 3: out and the organization quickly lost a third of its
• 10:32
  Speaker 3: membership and collapsed. But then Haymarket Books took over, which
• 10:36
  Speaker 3: was their publishing wing. So they were somewhat separate from
• 10:40
  Speaker 3: this Trotskyist organization, but shared some of the membership. But
• 10:47
  Speaker 3: basically the ISO completely collapsed in 2019, uh, and Haymarket
• 10:53
  Speaker 3: took over and now there's sort of now the, this
• 10:57
  Speaker 3: conference is sort of funded by, I guess, a mixture
• 11:01
  Speaker 3: of like Haymarket books, university grants and foundation money. So
• 11:11
  Speaker 3: that's that kind of economic ecosystem. And so, yeah, that's
• 11:20
  Speaker 3: just where it comes from, I guess. And I guess
• 11:23
  Speaker 3: it doesn't have the same sort of, maybe there's like
• 11:27
  Speaker 3: that NDP conference in Canada has a similar sort of niche,
• 11:35
  Speaker 3: weird funding arrangements, but then it doesn't strike me as
• 11:38
  Speaker 3: something that has this like huge grassroots base, like the
• 11:41
  Speaker 3: DSA or like Zor and Mamdani or something like that.
• 11:47
  Speaker 3: But so to hold up like the excesses of these
• 11:51
  Speaker 3: sorts of things as representative of like socialism in general
• 11:57
  Speaker 3: is also pretty unfair. And that's obviously what like the
• 12:02
  Speaker 3: right wing media and the clipping culture is trying to do,
• 12:07
  Speaker 3: but it does just kind of have a fashion. It
• 12:09
  Speaker 3: has a, has a fascinating kind of background.
• 12:13
  Speaker 2: Yeah. From policing, uh, Optics to just putting it straight
• 12:18
  Speaker 2: on the internet and politics is aesthetics. Like that's an
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: unfortunate truth.
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: And now.
• 12:24
  Speaker 2: Like there's a difference here. The thing, you know, from
• 12:26
  Speaker 2: the NDP convention, they had, they had oppression cards that
• 12:32
  Speaker 2: let you jump the line. You get to talk more
• 12:35
  Speaker 2: and you know, you can infer it's coming from a
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: good place.
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: It's equity, whatever.
• 12:40
  Speaker 2: But you can choose to either be a majoritarian movement
• 12:44
  Speaker 2: or you can choose to do that stuff. Like, I'm sorry,
• 12:47
  Speaker 2: I was an 18 year old guy once. And if
• 12:50
  Speaker 2: the thing that I know about your party is that
• 12:52
  Speaker 2: you have literal oppression cards to decide who speaks or not,
• 12:56
  Speaker 2: I'm not joining that party because I'm sorry, that's retarded. Now,
• 13:01
  Speaker 2: you know, I could now at this point, I could
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: look past that.
• 13:06
  Speaker 1: Because I prefer NDP.
• 13:08
  Speaker 2: Policies or whatever, but it doesn't matter because they're They're, they're,
• 13:12
  Speaker 2: they're years away from any power for shit like that.
• 13:16
  Speaker 2: And I do think that this one is different. I
• 13:19
  Speaker 2: do think, you know, at least in an intellectual, whatever
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: space you got, you got to allow people to get
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: a little kooky, right? It's not, it's not even that crazy.
• 13:29
  Speaker 2: We haven't talked about it yet, but it's not that crazy.
• 13:32
  Speaker 2: You know where the argument is. And there's a difference
• 13:35
  Speaker 2: in saying like, this is the policy of a federal
• 13:38
  Speaker 2: party that which I think should be criticized. And then
• 13:42
  Speaker 2: that's different from like, this person should not be able
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: to overuse the term fascist, or they shouldn't be allowed
• 13:50
  Speaker 2: to wear a mask because it looks bad for us.
• 13:54
  Speaker 2: One is policy criticism, which is a productive thing to do.
• 13:58
  Speaker 2: The other is appointing yourself, whatever, the arbiter of leftist research.
• 14:03
  Speaker 2: And you know what I'm saying? The kooks have the
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: right to research too, goddammit. They want to wear masks
• 14:09
  Speaker 2: in 2026. You just giggle behind their backs. They're allowed
• 14:12
  Speaker 2: to wear masks in 2026. Well, here's the right wing.
• 14:16
  Speaker 2: They support their kooks.
• 14:17
  Speaker 4: OK, here's also the here. I guess the other way
• 14:22
  Speaker 4: in which I think the right wing, this is such
• 14:25
  Speaker 4: a gift for for them right now with, you know,
• 14:28
  Speaker 4: the midterms coming up is right. I think I think, Eric,
• 14:32
  Speaker 4: you said Hassan Piker was there.
• 14:34
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 14:34
  Speaker 4: So it's like, OK, socialism conference. Hassan Piker was there.
• 14:37
  Speaker 4: Guess who Hassan Piker has been hanging out with or
• 14:39
  Speaker 4: has a history of hanging out with? Abdul El-Said, the
• 14:43
  Speaker 4: senator candidate in Michigan, right? Who's like the DSA one.
• 14:47
  Speaker 4: So now right-wingers can be like, look, here's this conference
• 14:50
  Speaker 4: where Hassan Piker is going to. Hassan Piker hangs around
• 14:52
  Speaker 4: with that crazy senator who's trying to win in Michigan, right?
• 14:56
  Speaker 4: So it's just, it allows them to create all these connections.
• 15:00
  Speaker 3: Yeah, which is fine. But like, you can think about
• 15:03
  Speaker 3: it yourself, right? Like, Like, Piker is independently, like, moneyed.
• 15:09
  Speaker 4: People don't think for themselves, though.
• 15:12
  Speaker 3: He's independently moneyed, so he can kind of choose where
• 15:16
  Speaker 3: he wants to go. There's no way you can say, well,
• 15:18
  Speaker 3: this is, like, funded by this or that.
• 15:20
  Speaker 4: Oh, obviously.
• 15:21
  Speaker 3: I'm just saying.
• 15:23
  Speaker 4: It's propaganda.
• 15:24
  Speaker 3: On the other hand, that Ryan Grimm, I did see
• 15:27
  Speaker 3: his analysis on breaking points, and he brought up Gabriel
• 15:31
  Speaker 3: Rockhill without mentioning his name. So I was reading a
• 15:34
  Speaker 3: communist writer.
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: Eric is breaking this because I didn't notice this. And
• 15:38
  Speaker 2: it's potentially theoretically valuable information that Eric has uncovered here.
• 15:44
  Speaker 3: Yeah, well, I heard he was doing his little analysis.
• 15:47
  Speaker 3: I was repeating a bit of it, but he was
• 15:51
  Speaker 3: doing his analysis of this sort of leftist phenomenon, this
• 15:56
  Speaker 3: sort of academic slash... like foundation grant funded kinds of
• 16:03
  Speaker 3: conference circuit kind of area of the left. And what
• 16:08
  Speaker 3: we were talking about with critical theory and like throwing
• 16:12
  Speaker 3: in postmodern philosophy and post-structuralism and that sort of stuff,
• 16:16
  Speaker 3: he brought up the term compatible left, which is the
• 16:20
  Speaker 3: term that Rockhill uses in his work, which he got
• 16:24
  Speaker 3: from the CIA when the CIA was like spying on
• 16:30
  Speaker 3: french theory back in like during the cold war the
• 16:33
  Speaker 3: french would use the term combat i mean they would
• 16:37
  Speaker 3: use the term compatible left to describe leftist theory that
• 16:42
  Speaker 3: was non-marxist or anti-marxist and posed no threat to the
• 16:46
  Speaker 3: sort of social order because it was either too jargony
• 16:51
  Speaker 3: or or or it was explicitly anti-marxist and he get
• 16:57
  Speaker 3: kind of gives he rehashes kind of Gabriel Rockhill's broad
• 17:02
  Speaker 3: outline story about moving into the Cold War and the
• 17:07
  Speaker 3: CIA-funded journals and conference networks and the Ford Foundation and
• 17:12
  Speaker 3: all that, and the involvement of Trotskyist organizations and kinds
• 17:16
  Speaker 3: of third-way politics, which was all an effort to sort
• 17:19
  Speaker 3: of drive a wedge in the left and create like
• 17:23
  Speaker 3: a non-Marxist compatible left. So you can sort of listen
• 17:26
  Speaker 3: to Ryan Grim's rehash. He doesn't mention Rockhill by name,
• 17:30
  Speaker 3: but I heard compatible left. And then I heard that
• 17:34
  Speaker 3: outline of that story, which is exactly sort of the
• 17:37
  Speaker 3: story Rockhill's been developing in the last couple of years,
• 17:41
  Speaker 3: like in his takedowns of Zizek and his repudiation of
• 17:45
  Speaker 3: French theory and his sort of, yeah, takes on this
• 17:50
  Speaker 3: strange segment of the left that seems to exist. in
• 17:55
  Speaker 3: these like minority conference circles and in kind of humanities
• 17:59
  Speaker 3: university departments, which we, some of us here on the
• 18:03
  Speaker 3: podcast are, are definitely familiar with. Um, but I mean,
• 18:09
  Speaker 3: it's not as big a deal anymore because Marxism isn't
• 18:13
  Speaker 3: this huge phenomenon. People are turning to socialism.
• 18:17
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 18:18
  Speaker 3: And then they see this and they're like, well, is
• 18:20
  Speaker 3: this what socialism is? No, it can't be. But after
• 18:23
  Speaker 3: world war two, know socialism was huge the liberals had
• 18:29
  Speaker 3: collaborated with the nazis more than they opposed them and
• 18:33
  Speaker 3: the communists everywhere had fought the nazis including russia including
• 18:39
  Speaker 3: vietnam including places like that they they were fighting fascism
• 18:43
  Speaker 3: whereas the liberals were at best doing their sort of
• 18:47
  Speaker 3: placating strategy what was that famous strategy called yeah So
• 18:52
  Speaker 3: they had the moral high ground and the CIA saw
• 18:55
  Speaker 3: that and yeah, the rest is kind of, you can
• 18:57
  Speaker 3: watch that to get the rest of that sort of
• 19:00
  Speaker 3: trajectory and the, and then the emergence of all these
• 19:03
  Speaker 3: foundations and the funding circuits and stuff in the seventies
• 19:06
  Speaker 3: and eighties that promoted the sort of third way non-Marxist left.
• 19:11
  Speaker 3: And so, I mean, I don't know that there's a
• 19:14
  Speaker 3: sense in which this conference maybe is a kind of residue.
• 19:21
  Speaker 3: of that, but definitely intersects with maybe more active grassroots and,
• 19:28
  Speaker 3: and broad-based kind of big tent leftists that do have
• 19:33
  Speaker 3: potential for things. And then there's also like that sort
• 19:36
  Speaker 3: of jargony, crazy, interpretive, hermeneutic, critical left that reminds you of, yeah, the,
• 19:45
  Speaker 3: the identity cards or the people screaming point of order
• 19:49
  Speaker 3: at each other and things like that.
• 19:51
  Speaker 2: Well, like I said, there was like 30 panels or so.
• 19:54
  Speaker 2: And we're focusing on one panel made all the news
• 19:58
  Speaker 2: and there was like at least 30.
• 20:00
  Speaker 4: I'm sure there were great panels and you listed some
• 20:03
  Speaker 4: that sounded interesting. I did just want to highlight one
• 20:06
  Speaker 4: more specific thing that came up in the viral clip.
• 20:09
  Speaker 4: Just based on what Eric was saying, it was interesting
• 20:11
  Speaker 4: to me the way that she kept linking it to
• 20:13
  Speaker 4: working class. Like one of her justifications was stop making
• 20:16
  Speaker 4: yourself useful to the working class or something by being fit,
• 20:20
  Speaker 4: I guess.
• 20:21
  Speaker 3: Useful to the capitalist class.
• 20:22
  Speaker 4: To the capitalist, right.
• 20:23
  Speaker 2: Sorry, sorry.
• 20:23
  Speaker 4: Useful to the capitalist class.
• 20:25
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 20:25
  Speaker 4: Why do you want to be productive, basically? Like you
• 20:27
  Speaker 4: should be– this is like– this is obviously the way
• 20:30
  Speaker 4: that right-wing– People will interpret it, but it's just kind
• 20:34
  Speaker 4: of funny. It's like, no, be fat and lazy and
• 20:38
  Speaker 4: don't be productive, basically. Be fat, unfit, and lazy so
• 20:43
  Speaker 4: that you can– that's really going to stick it to
• 20:45
  Speaker 4: the capitalists.
• 20:46
  Speaker 3: That's not what that means at all. Those panelists and
• 20:51
  Speaker 3: people making those arguments definitely see themselves as being anti-capitalist
• 20:56
  Speaker 3: and sort of fighting the good fight.
• 20:59
  Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly.
• 21:00
  Speaker 3: But it's just the way that maybe others would see
• 21:04
  Speaker 3: that as more of an idealist project to change the
• 21:07
  Speaker 3: way people think about things is going to lead to
• 21:11
  Speaker 3: broad social change.
• 21:13
  Speaker 4: I don't know.
• 21:14
  Speaker 3: It's not a good look when it's clipped out of context.
• 21:17
  Speaker 2: Eric, why are you just accepting this? Victor does this
• 21:20
  Speaker 2: shit with post-humanism too.
• 21:21
  Speaker 4: You're like, post-humanism? How are we post-humanism?
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: I see humans everywhere I look.
• 21:26
  Speaker 4: I look over there, human.
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: No, the argument is not to be fat and lazy.
• 21:30
  Speaker 2: It's not to... I guess, signify people in such a
• 21:35
  Speaker 2: way that their ability to work is their determining characteristic.
• 21:38
  Speaker 2: You should reject your ability to contribute to the economy
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: as the feature which includes you in the category of human. Now,
• 21:44
  Speaker 2: that isn't my argument.
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: I won't defend it.
• 21:47
  Speaker 2: I don't really accept any arguments that say, hey, what
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: we just need to do now is change signification.
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: But you know what? I ain't mad.
• 21:56
  Speaker 2: And I ain't mad just because, you know, this is
• 21:59
  Speaker 2: how Foucauldians are.
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: No offense, you know. And we need Foucauldians for some things.
• 22:06
  Speaker 4: Why are you pronouncing that so weird?
• 22:07
  Speaker 2: Foucault.
• 22:08
  Speaker 4: I don't know. You're pronouncing the L? Like, what are
• 22:10
  Speaker 4: you doing? Foucault.
• 22:12
  Speaker 2: This is not my pronunciation. And they also turn it
• 22:15
  Speaker 2: into a D.
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: I don't know. It's just Foucauldian.
• 22:20
  Speaker 2: I'm serious.
• 22:20
  Speaker 4: This is how it's.
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: Pronounced in English. I don't know why, but Foucauldian.
• 22:25
  Speaker 4: Foucault.
• 22:28
  Speaker 2: Yes, this is a received pronunciation, and I'm going to
• 22:31
  Speaker 2: keep using it. The Foucauldians, they are hysterical and I
• 22:35
  Speaker 2: don't mean hysterical even as an insult, but you're like,
• 22:39
  Speaker 2: you're wearing masks. Yeah.
• 22:40
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 22:41
  Speaker 2: I really, I mean, the Lacanian hysteric. Yeah. The, the
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: expression of hysteria is to like the benefit of hysteria
• 22:50
  Speaker 2: is to constantly be negotiating your place in, in the
• 22:55
  Speaker 2: eyes of the other. So it's actually the way to,
• 22:58
  Speaker 2: to undermine the big other, which is, which is good.
• 23:02
  Speaker 2: You've got to keep the big other on its toes.
• 23:05
  Speaker 2: And the hysteric, Lacan even says, is the best at
• 23:08
  Speaker 2: doing this. But the flip side is that they come
• 23:12
  Speaker 2: off as extremely paranoid at times.
• 23:16
  Speaker 1: And that's just how it is.
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: You remember Agamben? Agamben, when the COVID lockdown started.
• 23:21
  Speaker 4: The state of exception stuff, yeah.
• 23:23
  Speaker 2: Yeah, he's like, okay, this is it.
• 23:25
  Speaker 1: This is it, guys.
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: This is the state of exception. Lockdown is starting. The
• 23:29
  Speaker 2: fascists are doing lockdowns. Lockdown will never end.
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: And then, oh, it ends.
• 23:33
  Speaker 2: So, you know, but Agamben was really useful when we
• 23:38
  Speaker 2: were trying to read Israeli propaganda about Palestinians. So this is,
• 23:43
  Speaker 2: this is my, my, we got a big tent that
• 23:47
  Speaker 2: lets the Foucauldians in there.
• 23:48
  Speaker 1: Cause yeah, they're paranoid.
• 23:49
  Speaker 4: They are. They are.
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: But we need him sometimes.
• 23:52
  Speaker 4: I really like Foucault.
• 23:53
  Speaker 2: It's a shame.
• 23:54
  Speaker 4: I like Foucault so much more than I like Foucaultians.
• 23:58
  Speaker 4: It's kind of amazing.
• 23:59
  Speaker 2: Who is that not true of, though?
• 24:02
  Speaker 4: I mean, it feels especially true, to me at least,
• 24:06
  Speaker 4: of Foucault.
• 24:07
  Speaker 3: I think a lot of famous thinkers have even said
• 24:09
  Speaker 3: that about their own followers, that I am not a
• 24:12
  Speaker 3: Marxist thing that Marx wrote. I think Freud might have
• 24:17
  Speaker 3: said something similar too.
• 24:19
  Speaker 4: People have said that about Lacan a lot too. I've
• 24:20
  Speaker 4: heard people say, oh, Lacanians are the worst.
• 24:23
  Speaker 2: Anyway, the paranoia here is, I think the theoretical mistake
• 24:28
  Speaker 2: is that capitalism is this conscious entity that's focused on
• 24:34
  Speaker 2: you in particular. And Ozempic is like Zyklon B for
• 24:39
  Speaker 2: fat people because they're trying to kill fat people. And
• 24:42
  Speaker 2: then to use the word genocide, it's like, Okay. So,
• 24:47
  Speaker 2: so the institution of marriage is a genocide of single people.
• 24:50
  Speaker 4: Yeah. Okay. Yeah. As soon as you, as soon as
• 24:53
  Speaker 4: you scrutinize that use of the word, it just kind
• 24:55
  Speaker 4: of falls apart when you apply it to other contexts.
• 24:58
  Speaker 4: Like exactly. That's the perfect example.
• 25:00
  Speaker 2: Now, of course there's like, there's, there's truth in there
• 25:05
  Speaker 2: that the, the, the current fashion, Part of the science
• 25:10
  Speaker 2: system has this weird commitment to masculinity and eating steaks
• 25:15
  Speaker 2: and testing the hormones of the American military and posting
• 25:20
  Speaker 2: pictures of Canada's fat military and all that stuff.
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: There's truth to it.
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: I'm not saying it's untrue, but maybe there's some value
• 25:30
  Speaker 2: to the... to the clarity of the choice of words.
• 25:34
  Speaker 4: And you know me, where I like to find common ground,
• 25:36
  Speaker 4: I want to try to find where can we get
• 25:38
  Speaker 4: some mutual understanding between sides. And I feel like there
• 25:40
  Speaker 4: is maybe an opportunity for left fascists and crazy left
• 25:44
  Speaker 4: Foucaultians to come together in their hatred of Ozembek. Because
• 25:49
  Speaker 4: I feel like both of them don't like Ozembek, but
• 25:51
  Speaker 4: for kind of, because I feel like for the right
• 25:54
  Speaker 4: wing fascist, like, you know, the fit fascists for them,
• 25:58
  Speaker 4: it's like, well, this is just cheating. This is lazy.
• 26:00
  Speaker 4: You didn't actually work hard to lose the weight, right?
• 26:02
  Speaker 4: You didn't actually like use your own self volition. You're
• 26:04
  Speaker 4: just like using a shortcut. Uh, and then, you know,
• 26:08
  Speaker 4: the Foucaultian like crazy lefty lefties can, can, you know,
• 26:12
  Speaker 4: they can at least agree on the outcome of getting
• 26:15
  Speaker 4: rid of Ozempic, but obviously for vastly different reasons.
• 26:18
  Speaker 2: To be clear, this is confusing the panel members. The
• 26:21
  Speaker 2: guy who said that Ozempic is Zyklon B, uh, that's
• 26:25
  Speaker 2: not his actual term.
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: That's what I'm saying. But, Ozempic is a tool of
• 26:28
  Speaker 1: the fascists.
• 26:29
  Speaker 2: Genocide.
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: He's not an academic.
• 26:30
  Speaker 4: And it's a genocide.
• 26:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: He's not an academic, so I don't think he's a Foucauldian.
• 26:36
  Speaker 2: Okay. Okay.
• 26:36
  Speaker 4: Fair enough. Fair enough. But I think it's, it's kind
• 26:38
  Speaker 4: of in that vibe though. It's like being suspicious of like,
• 26:41
  Speaker 4: what is this thing they're trying to impose on us? Right.
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: Look, don't get mad at me. I'm saying this with
• 26:47
  Speaker 2: love Foucauldians, but it's Foucauldianism can tend towards a paranoia.
• 26:51
  Speaker 4: You're not going to get used to that pronunciation at all.
• 26:54
  Speaker 3: No way.
• 26:55
  Speaker 4: I know.
• 26:56
  Speaker 2: I'm, I don't know. I'm right. I think I'm right.
• 26:59
  Speaker 4: It is.
• 26:59
  Speaker 3: I think my brain is just correcting it as we
• 27:02
  Speaker 3: go along.
• 27:03
  Speaker 1: Foucauldian?
• 27:04
  Speaker 4: Foucauldian. Foucauldian.
• 27:05
  Speaker 2: I do not think that's right. I think in French,
• 27:08
  Speaker 2: because you add the suffix, the silent letters are no
• 27:11
  Speaker 2: longer silent. Eric, am I crazy here?
• 27:14
  Speaker 3: I don't use that term a lot, so I don't know. Foucauldian, yeah,
• 27:17
  Speaker 3: I wouldn't pronounce any of that.
• 27:19
  Speaker 2: I think it'd be like Foucauldian.
• 27:21
  Speaker 4: No, I would say Foucauldian. I would just say no L,
• 27:23
  Speaker 4: just a D at the end. I don't know.
• 27:25
  Speaker 2: French listeners, please weigh in here. I want real French.
• 27:29
  Speaker 2: I don't want Quebec French. Please tell Victor he's wrong.
• 27:32
  Speaker 4: Foucauldian. Foucauldian. Whatever, who cares? Anyway, sorry. I'm sorry I
• 27:36
  Speaker 4: keep drawing attention to it.
• 27:38
  Speaker 2: Je m'en fiche.
• 27:39
  Speaker 4: I feel like you have... This has come up before
• 27:42
  Speaker 4: at Pills. I feel like you have a couple weird
• 27:44
  Speaker 4: ways of pronouncing different things.
• 27:45
  Speaker 2: I can't remember what they are. Okay, Mr. Cloud and Mr.
• 27:48
  Speaker 2: Silicon Valley are going to correct my pronunciation of French. Look,
• 27:54
  Speaker 2: I believe in myself and I believe in Foucauldians until
• 27:57
  Speaker 2: the point at which I am told otherwise.
• 28:00
  Speaker 4: Keep doing it. Keep doing it. I'll stop mentioning it.
• 28:03
  Speaker 4: Go on.
• 28:04
  Speaker 3: I think the analysis is valuable we get from Foucault.
• 28:08
  Speaker 2: Yes.
• 28:09
  Speaker 3: I was reading a bit about biopower just the other day,
• 28:14
  Speaker 3: and I thought it was extremely interesting. He connects biopower
• 28:20
  Speaker 3: to racism and war. You can't have a state without racism,
• 28:27
  Speaker 3: and the exercise of biopower is implicit in that. It's
• 28:32
  Speaker 3: pretty powerful stuff. I guess it just depends on if
• 28:37
  Speaker 3: you're more committed to Marx, then something's lacking there. The
• 28:44
  Speaker 3: connection to organizing the working class and orienting things towards
• 28:51
  Speaker 3: the overthrow of capitalism and those sorts of things tend
• 28:54
  Speaker 3: to be missing. And those seem to be the things
• 28:58
  Speaker 3: that present a threat. to the current system and, and
• 29:03
  Speaker 3: the other, the other things like, like doing a, a
• 29:06
  Speaker 3: cultural analysis of, of fitness and eugenics or, and, or
• 29:15
  Speaker 3: Ozempic just doesn't seem, it seems a bit benign. And
• 29:21
  Speaker 3: I think you can all get that maybe Ozempic and
• 29:24
  Speaker 3: the sort of material economic system that it's plugged into
• 29:28
  Speaker 3: big pharma and the kind of We all understand that
• 29:34
  Speaker 3: the unequal distribution of wealth, Ozempic, is one of those things.
• 29:40
  Speaker 3: Being fit and healthy is another thing. Socially determined kinds
• 29:45
  Speaker 3: of outcomes, right? People who are less well-off probably can't
• 29:50
  Speaker 3: afford to spend the time and money on themselves in
• 29:53
  Speaker 3: the ways that other people can. If you remove those
• 29:56
  Speaker 3: sorts of soundbites from the overall spectrum, I think it
• 30:01
  Speaker 3: really just makes them sound silly, which is obviously the
• 30:05
  Speaker 3: point when the right-wing media clips these things.
• 30:10
  Speaker 2: And it's not even so much– the defense of this
• 30:13
  Speaker 2: is saying, oh, well, they're clipping out of context. But
• 30:16
  Speaker 2: even in context, the leftists who are trying to gatekeep,
• 30:20
  Speaker 2: Ryan Grimm, who's saying this is not leftist, they want
• 30:22
  Speaker 2: us to be unhealthy. It is incredibly naive and just
• 30:27
  Speaker 2: false to say that working out, workout culture, gym culture
• 30:32
  Speaker 2: is about health, as if working out, the goal of
• 30:37
  Speaker 2: it is to get your blood pressure down, as opposed
• 30:40
  Speaker 2: to the goal of working out is to look a
• 30:44
  Speaker 2: certain way. Where does the look come from? Why does
• 30:47
  Speaker 2: the look become a goal? Oh, what do you know?
• 30:50
  Speaker 2: Now we're in a science system. So to accept or
• 30:53
  Speaker 2: to pretend like, oh, they don't want us to work
• 30:55
  Speaker 2: out because they don't want us to be healthy. That
• 30:58
  Speaker 2: is completely disregarding the truth of the situation, which is
• 31:02
  Speaker 2: that this is for aesthetics. It belongs to a science system.
• 31:08
  Speaker 2: Where did that science system come from? You know, personally,
• 31:11
  Speaker 2: I wouldn't call it straight up fascist, but it's naive
• 31:14
  Speaker 2: to think it's not in the neighborhood. It's naive to
• 31:18
  Speaker 2: think that working out is simply about getting your blood
• 31:22
  Speaker 2: pressure down. And all of that can be read in
• 31:25
  Speaker 2: the clip. That's not taken out of context. That's just
• 31:28
  Speaker 2: being stupid.
• 31:30
  Speaker 4: If only you were there to say that in such
• 31:32
  Speaker 4: a more persuasive and clear way.
• 31:35
  Speaker 2: Well, listen, if they clipped my podcast out of context,
• 31:38
  Speaker 2: it would be like, you know, I don't actually believe
• 31:40
  Speaker 2: humans exist.
• 31:41
  Speaker 4: What do you mean?
• 31:42
  Speaker 2: There's one right over there. I'm talking to a human
• 31:44
  Speaker 2: right now.
• 31:46
  Speaker 4: Yeah, that's fair. Yeah, but then you go on to
• 31:48
  Speaker 4: explain it. Then you go on to explain it. I
• 31:50
  Speaker 4: don't know. I feel like.
• 31:52
  Speaker 2: As she did.
• 31:52
  Speaker 4: Did she later like explain like carefully kind of what.
• 31:56
  Speaker 1: That was later in the.
• 31:57
  Speaker 2: Yeah, well, I think we should be dysgenic as possible
• 32:02
  Speaker 2: was a tongue in cheek comment.
• 32:03
  Speaker 1: It wasn't like.
• 32:04
  Speaker 2: Oh, actually make yourself look ugly.
• 32:08
  Speaker 4: Or make yourself into some kind of, as a friend
• 32:11
  Speaker 4: of the show, Jay Reg likes to talk about, like abominations,
• 32:14
  Speaker 4: like transhuman. Well, that's different, but yeah, like this kind
• 32:16
  Speaker 4: of like.
• 32:18
  Speaker 1: Hey, that's what Baudrillard says. Make yourself, being productive.
• 32:22
  Speaker 2: This is where Marxists just actually serve the interest of
• 32:26
  Speaker 2: capital by agreeing that the basis of human being is productivity.
• 32:31
  Speaker 4: I did want to raise one point about this dysgenic thing. Yes,
• 32:36
  Speaker 4: she said it tongue-in-cheek. I could see that.
• 32:39
  Speaker 3: It was a bit throwaway.
• 32:40
  Speaker 2: You couldn't see her tongue or her cheek because she
• 32:42
  Speaker 2: was wearing a mask.
• 32:45
  Speaker 4: But I do feel like there can be a bit
• 32:48
  Speaker 4: of a tendency on the Foucauldian left or whatever we're
• 32:51
  Speaker 4: calling it to sort of aggrandize or like you guys
• 32:57
  Speaker 4: being– you know semi semiotics friendly i'm curious and and
• 33:01
  Speaker 4: into symbols and and how they circulate certain kinds of
• 33:05
  Speaker 4: linguistic economies i'm just curious what you all think because
• 33:09
  Speaker 4: it does strike me that the way that she used
• 33:11
  Speaker 4: that term was getting at something that that in some
• 33:14
  Speaker 4: circles there is almost this this fixation with just being
• 33:19
  Speaker 4: different like being subversive like maximally subversive And I guess
• 33:24
  Speaker 4: it struck me that in this left circle, it almost
• 33:27
  Speaker 4: seemed like dysgenic or whatever that is, was functioning in
• 33:32
  Speaker 4: a very similar way that the term authenticity functions for normies.
• 33:37
  Speaker 4: Like that there's this kind of fantasy of like, oh,
• 33:40
  Speaker 4: I'm going to be my true self. Oh, I'm going
• 33:42
  Speaker 4: to be like this radically subversive thing, right? Like that is,
• 33:46
  Speaker 4: I don't know, it just seems to be operating at
• 33:48
  Speaker 4: this level of fantasy that exists. That strikes me as interesting.
• 33:56
  Speaker 3: I personally am not against resistance at the level of semantics,
• 34:01
  Speaker 3: I guess you could say. When I think of the
• 34:04
  Speaker 3: jargon of authenticity, which we talked about a couple weeks ago,
• 34:09
  Speaker 3: that's more about terms doing the work that maybe analysis
• 34:16
  Speaker 3: and argument should be doing. Whereas I think activating a
• 34:20
  Speaker 3: rhetorical argument structure like a semantic structure like eugenics and
• 34:25
  Speaker 3: just sort of trying to subvert that is is resistance
• 34:30
  Speaker 3: at the level of of meaning right which which i'm
• 34:34
  Speaker 3: not against because i i think semantic structures and social
• 34:40
  Speaker 3: structures are connected not in any straightforward way but resistance
• 34:46
  Speaker 3: at one level implies resistance at another level and so
• 34:50
  Speaker 3: i'm not i'm not just against cultural analysis and idealist,
• 34:57
  Speaker 3: materialist arguments as such. But do we need a left-wing
• 35:03
  Speaker 3: equivalent of the manosphere?
• 35:05
  Speaker 4: I don't know. Yeah, fair enough.
• 35:07
  Speaker 2: This question, do we need X? Do we need a
• 35:11
  Speaker 2: Joe Rogan? This is all idealism.
• 35:13
  Speaker 4: Everyone.
• 35:14
  Speaker 2: is trying to plan the concepts of the future. The
• 35:17
  Speaker 2: fascist health panel is doing that. They're saying, we need
• 35:21
  Speaker 2: to change the concept of fitness so everyone's included in it.
• 35:24
  Speaker 2: And then the anti-health panel leftists are saying, no, we
• 35:28
  Speaker 2: need to stop these people. They're trying to change the
• 35:30
  Speaker 2: signification and making us look bad. The truth is, look,
• 35:33
  Speaker 2: all you people, you can't change a meaning system, okay?
• 35:37
  Speaker 2: This is the humanism... not human, Victor. This is the
• 35:40
  Speaker 2: humanist bias that if we plan carefully, we can decide
• 35:44
  Speaker 2: on the future of meaning together when no people can
• 35:48
  Speaker 2: do that. So here's some free advice for everyone involved
• 35:50
  Speaker 2: in this. You can't change meanings. You're just moving words
• 35:54
  Speaker 2: around over top of the meaning. You're saying eugenic, replacing
• 35:58
  Speaker 2: it with health, replacing it back to fitness, changing the
• 36:01
  Speaker 2: signifier will have no effect.
• 36:03
  Speaker 4: Okay.
• 36:04
  Speaker 2: This is the materialist perspective.
• 36:06
  Speaker 4: Ozempic.
• 36:07
  Speaker 2: Ozempic might change the system. A miracle can change the system,
• 36:11
  Speaker 2: the fashion system.
• 36:13
  Speaker 4: It does seem like a miracle. And I keep seeing
• 36:15
  Speaker 4: it's kind of crazy. I don't know if you guys
• 36:16
  Speaker 4: have noticed this, but there keep coming all these studies.
• 36:18
  Speaker 4: Like I literally just saw one this morning about how
• 36:21
  Speaker 4: Ozempic has all these positive side effects for a bunch
• 36:24
  Speaker 4: of other things. Like I think I just saw something
• 36:26
  Speaker 4: the other day, like yesterday or today that was like.
• 36:29
  Speaker 4: ozempic linked to like lower chances of like dementia linked
• 36:33
  Speaker 4: to lower chances of of uh what was it was
• 36:36
  Speaker 4: it i mean a bunch of things like it's interesting
• 36:38
  Speaker 4: it's actually i was reading from somewhere that it's like
• 36:39
  Speaker 4: the first new drug that just reduces all cause mortality
• 36:45
  Speaker 4: like very very effectively.
• 36:46
  Speaker 2: Well this is this has given me some video ideas
• 36:50
  Speaker 2: to be honest.
• 36:52
  Speaker 4: You should do something i would love you to to
• 36:54
  Speaker 4: cover some fat studies that stuff is fascinating.
• 36:57
  Speaker 1: Why are you calling it Fat studies.
• 37:00
  Speaker 4: Fat studies, like critical fat studies? Yeah, yeah. There's probably
• 37:03
  Speaker 4: a journal on that.
• 37:03
  Speaker 3: Yeah, didn't the so-called squared people.
• 37:06
  Speaker 4: They call it fat? I think they call it fat studies. Yeah,
• 37:09
  Speaker 4: I think they do. I think they do because they're
• 37:10
  Speaker 4: trying to reclaim the term, right?
• 37:12
  Speaker 2: Really?
• 37:13
  Speaker 1: To each their own.
• 37:14
  Speaker 4: Yeah.
• 37:16
  Speaker 2: I guess if they're correct, we don't have to worry
• 37:18
  Speaker 2: about them much longer because they're like an endangered population.
• 37:21
  Speaker 4: Yeah, literally there's a Taylor and Francis, there's a Taylor
• 37:24
  Speaker 4: and Francis journal literally called Fat Studies, an interdisciplinary journal.
• 37:28
  Speaker 2: If Ozempic is a tool of genocide, that means that
• 37:31
  Speaker 2: taking Ozempic is a fat person killing them.
• 37:34
  Speaker 1: It's suicide.
• 37:37
  Speaker 3: The perpetrators who are making and distributing it would be
• 37:41
  Speaker 3: the ones, I think. I mean, genocide, what did one
• 37:48
  Speaker 3: of our reading people call that sort of thing? Charles
• 37:51
  Speaker 3: Tilly called it. He called it like.
• 37:54
  Speaker 2: Hey, I like the segue.
• 37:55
  Speaker 4: Okay.
• 37:56
  Speaker 3: Mass destruction. It's one of the types of warfare, lethal contests,
• 38:04
  Speaker 3: which are wars between relatively equal powers. And then you
• 38:08
  Speaker 3: have campaigns of annihilation, which is usually what genocide sort
• 38:14
  Speaker 3: of refers to. Genocide kind of has fuzzy borders and
• 38:21
  Speaker 3: is very contested. But campaigns of annihilation are when one
• 38:25
  Speaker 3: overwhelmingly powerful force is destroying another one for various reasons.
• 38:34
  Speaker 3: You could call it genocide. You could call it politicide.
• 38:37
  Speaker 3: Whatever reason they decide that these people are a group
• 38:40
  Speaker 3: and they need to be exterminated.
• 38:42
  Speaker 4: Whatever it is.
• 38:44
  Speaker 3: Israel, overwhelming force.
• 38:46
  Speaker 2: Excellent transition there.
• 38:48
  Speaker 1: So yeah, we.
• 38:50
  Speaker 2: This is not necessarily a continental theorist by any means,
• 38:54
  Speaker 2: but a very famous American sociologist.
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: Yeah, not, well, yeah, it's a different continent. Wait, sorry, sorry.
• 39:03
  Speaker 4: Just one really quick last point just before you go.
• 39:06
  Speaker 4: I just have to tell you this. The journal Fat Studies,
• 39:09
  Speaker 4: there's a special issue that just came out all about
• 39:12
  Speaker 4: GLP-1s and they have a bunch of essays talking about
• 39:14
  Speaker 4: like GLP-1s and the eugenicist logic of Ozempic. Anyway. What
• 39:19
  Speaker 4: is it?
• 39:20
  Speaker 1: The last issue?
• 39:21
  Speaker 4: It's a special issue.
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: So, final issue.
• 39:23
  Speaker 4: Final. What does that mean, final issue? Oh, the final
• 39:26
  Speaker 4: issue because it's going to be over?
• 39:29
  Speaker 1: You know when there's like.
• 39:30
  Speaker 2: a fat celebrity who's like a body positivity advocate for
• 39:35
  Speaker 2: being fat and says, no, I like being fat. Then
• 39:38
  Speaker 2: they disappear for six months and they come out skinny.
• 39:43
  Speaker 4: Lost weight.
• 39:43
  Speaker 1: And all the fat people feel betrayed.
• 39:45
  Speaker 4: Yeah, didn't that happen to... What's her name? That British singer, Adele.
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: A fat person committed suicide and gave birth to a.
• 39:54
  Speaker 4: To a fascist fit.
• 39:56
  Speaker 2: Do you guys remember my video on fascism and hyper-real?
• 40:00
  Speaker 2: All of those Nazi propaganda posters, the women were plump.
• 40:06
  Speaker 2: They weren't thin. The thin women were untrustworthy because you
• 40:11
  Speaker 2: couldn't trust them to bury your children.
• 40:15
  Speaker 3: Again, it's important because eugenicist logic can become a normative
• 40:20
  Speaker 3: justification for campaigns of annihilation and other acts of violence.
• 40:27
  Speaker 3: So it is something to pay attention to, for sure.
• 40:31
  Speaker 2: Eric, thank you very much for your dedication to transitioning
• 40:34
  Speaker 2: to the reading. And yeah, just because signification exists as
• 40:40
  Speaker 2: it does, and even though you can't change it, it
• 40:43
  Speaker 2: would be foolish to pretend like it's natural instead of
• 40:47
  Speaker 2: arbitrary because they change all the time fat fat used
• 40:51
  Speaker 2: to be in style it's currently not in style