Cheers! The cultural disputes have finally come to an end, as stated by Lisa Nandy, the newly appointed UK culture secretary. This was met with jubilant celebration, reminiscent of scenes from 1945, with merry crowds in Trafalgar Square, and opposing factions of the trans and gender debates extending heartfelt good wishes for forthcoming times. Baillie Gifford made a return as the sponsor for the Edinburgh Book Festival and Jeremy Corbyn found his way back to the Labour Party.
Hold on, things are not exactly as they seem. Nandy’s address to her department on Tuesday indeed marked “the closure of the culture wars chapter,” but announcing a truce isn’t really a part of her role description. Many might appreciate her commitment to bring a refreshing perspective to the job, as a departure from the succession of Tory predecessors who grievously eroded foundations of international institutions held in high regard like the BBC, with simultaneous cuts in support for arts and creative industries from both central and local governments.
This has culminated in drastic depletion of the UK’s cultural wealth and reinforced the perception that careers in the arts are a luxury, exclusive to the affluent; a narrative of regrettable, petty deconstruction of one of the nation’s prized possessions.
Nandy, an unforeseen choice following the defeat of Labour’s shadow culture secretary Thangam Debbonaire at the Bristol seat in the recent elections, undoubtedly has an uphill task of repairing these damages. Part of her role will indeed be pacifying the biased and constant slogan chanting that characterised the last phase of the Conservative culture policy under the leadership of individuals like Nadine Dorries.
So, we’re to believe the cultural disputes have ceased? Don’t put your bets on the peace lasting.
During the high-season, the Abbey Theatre is unexpectedly drawing its curtains. It’s unclear why. The most striking issue with the fresh five-year plan of RTÉ is its non-addressal of vital matters.
Even amongst the warm Spielberg-kind of friendliness, a barren, dark abyss exists at the core of artificial intelligence.
“Quenching the contentious and frivolous cultural disputes that the Conservatives have stirred will be a welcome task for someone with the balanced mindset of Nandy,” commented Charlotte Higgins in agreement in The Guardian article.
While all doesn’t seem to be smooth sailing, Joan Smith of Unherd has pointed out that Lisa Nandy’s reference to “culture wars” highlights a profound absence of self-cognition. It’s a disdainful dismissal undermining the legitimate concerns about the repercussions of identity politics on a variety of matters, from penitentiary policies to sports, according to Smith.
To be honest, the situation is far from tranquil. These authors exemplify contrasting views on the term “culture wars”. Does this terminology reflect a deliberately fabricated set of disputes contrived by the conservatives aiming to fan the flames of division for political gain? Or is it a comparably contrived expression coined by liberals to negate the existence of valid political disagreements on varying individual and societal rights? Your perspective will determine the proverbial uniform you’ll don before heading to the battlefield.
Venturing into the line of fire, I propose there may be some substance to both viewpoints. The recent speech by Tory leadership contender Suella Braverman criticising the LGBTQ pride progress flag as “repugnant” was a clear appeal to bias and intolerance (this stance, however, has been declined by a considerable number of her party mates). Although, Labour’s tactic towards gender and diversity related issues, while attempting to regain support in “red wall” seats lost to Boris Johnson in 2019, has been somewhat shaky. Whether they will continue on the same path now that they are in power remains to be seen.
Since the advent of the phrase Kulturkampf, initially used to depict the clash between German Catholicism and Prussian state in the 19th century, the term has diversified to include virtually any issue transcending the notion of politics as a mere struggle for economic dominance. The progressive secularisation of Irish society over the last four decades, the rise of American Christian nationalism initiated by Pat Buchanan in the 1990s as embodied in the current Maga movement, the campaigns for marital equality and reproductive rights, all fall under the umbrella of a well-executed culture war. In an era where long-standing notions of class politics and party allegiance have faded or fled, virtually everything seems to be interpreted as a culture war. Unless you frequent the extreme ends of the online world, this interpretation is typically derogatory. War, unquestionably, is nothing but harm.
Smith aptly rebuked this ubiquitous trope that has been employed in countless opinionated pieces. “Those who use the term ‘culture wars’ are essentially picking a side in a dispute they discredit as false, all the while pretending to distance themselves from such trifling conduct,” she penned. It’s a challenging point to counter.
Therefore, one faction refuses to acknowledge the existence of any war, while distinctly declaring their stance in this supposedly non-existent conflict. The opposing faction, on the other hand, confesses to a disagreement but refuses to label it as a culture war. Amidst all this, those of us who do not wish to align with either of these dualistic opposites merely dig our heels in and hope that the dust settles by the time Christmas comes around.