[WS:] This is very unfortunate because the "big boy attitude" is thinly disguised macho bravado and i thought you were above it. I think intense machismo is what underlies the "serious debate on the left" that Michael Y describes. I do not mean to be dismissive of people whom he personally knew, but they were the product of their times, so to speak. Graeber (funny, I quote him a lot lately) writes about this in his "Direct Action" - he stipulates that the macho-authoritarian style of the "old school" left is the "main thing" that alienates the anarchist/direct action folk. I would like to add that I got the same message many years ago from my ex who was a feminist working as union organizer - the casual gratuitous machismo of the union/left wing folk was what driving her crazy. I've seen that myself too - one of the most "memorable" experiences was observing at a party how a certain union activist treated his wife - as a personal servant - while authoritatively discussing the "union business" with other males in the room.
I find Carroll's discourse falling into the macho form of left discourse rather nicely - pronouncing with characteristically male cock-sureness what is and what is not worth discussing, basically a husband telling his wife "honey you do not know what you are talking about, so shut up and go to the kitchen." There is nothing "purist" "puritanical" or even ideological about it - just plain patriarchal taken-for-granted left wing machismo. I do not think that he, and many others, act like that in their personal lives - they merely fall into a form of discourse that developed among left wing males at certain point in time.
Again Graeber writes about quite a bit about it and also describes how various anarchist groups - influenced by the feminist discourse - consciously try to eliminate this form of discourse from their own interaction with others. This was probably the highest point in my reading of Graeber's ethnography. I can only wish that all male lefties followed the same path.
PS. I got a "crash course" in machismo control from my feminist ex, who was eager to point out examples of it in my everyday taken-for-granted behavior. Small things, like the tone of voice, interruptions, talking instead of listening, making statements instead of asking questions, body language .... Initially I thought that she was making a great ado over nothing, but eventually I started seeing it in my own behavior as well as that of others. What I get from Graeber's ethnography is how much it is entrenched in everyday discourse and thus how difficult it is to overcome it even by people who ideologically oppose it.
-- Wojtek
"Modern conservatism is just a neoliberal gloss on medieval domination."