Poptimism, Populism, and the Death of Progressivism

In recent years, a new trend has appeared in music journalism:poptimism. The term was born as a reaction the prevailing ‘rockism’of music critics in the previous decade. Under this view, the prevailing orthodoxy that music is in decline and pop music has no artistic value is challenged. Now, obviously, this is not necessarily bad, in and of itself. However, it has been taken to an extreme where anything that makes the top 40 is unapologetically celebrated by critics, regardless of its quality or artistic merit. Thus, figures like Drake, Taylor Swift, and Beyonce (whom, to her credit, is actually somewhat deserving of the praise) are elevated to a heroic status on par with The Beatles.

The poptimist mentality has become so ubiquitous that even standard bearers of good taste such as Pitchfork are getting in on the act, featuring Swift’s latest album, 1989, on their best of 2014 list. Perhaps more troubling is the fact that the poptimist consensus operates like a hive mind, silencing any dissenting opinion lest they be labeled haters. Anyone who questions the poptimist consensus is dismissed as being elitist, racist, sexist, or worse, an enemy of progress. Even having alternative music taste is now seen as politically incorrect, evidenced by recent think pieces that stop short of accusing indie fans of being white supremacists.

It must be noted, however, that poptimism does not exist in a vacuum. Rather, it is symptomatic of a larger trend that has become pervasive within millennial discourse: a combination of lowest-common-denominator pandering and sanctimonious faux-progressivism, a phenomenon which Phoebe Maltz Bovy at The New Republic has termed “feelings journalism”. This style of writing, first popularized on the blogging platform Tumblr, and later perfected by websites such as Upworthy, Buzzfeed, and Gawker, has now started to seep into more serious media as the Tumblr generation comes of age, to the point where outrageous clickbait headlines and an informal writing style that prefers buzzwords over carefully constructed arguments, and feelings over facts and data, have now become commonplace.

Thinkpieces about celebrities being culturally appropriative, and op-eds denouncing the “problematic” elements in a film or TV show,preferably in the form of a list, are now given as much weight as in-depth political analysis or stories about the economy or world affairs. Thomas Picketty’s groundbreaking writings on economic inequality are ignored, while Beyoncé is treated like the next Nelson Mandela for dancing in front of a neon sign that says “feminist”.

Again, this trend in journalism exists as a self-affirming consensus, in which there is little space for differing opinions. Writers who dare challenge the prevailing status quo, or who deviate even slightly from the prescribed ideology are often hounded on Twitter, in a kind of postmodern witch-hunt.

Equally troubling is the fact that this mentality has begun to seep into universities, once largely considered bastions of free thoughtand intellectual debate. In many universities in the United States, Great Britain, and Canada, amongst other countries, students have taken upon themselves to demand censorship of ideas they find troubling or upsetting, under the guise of a safe space. The placement of trigger warnings on course reading lists and the banning of speakers deemed ideologically inappropriate certainly set a dangerous precedent for free speech and open debate, producing an entire generation of students unable to think or themselves or be challenged by new ideas. A particularly troubling example of this was when students were banned from holding a Nietzsche reading club at University College London. Apparently, not even great philosophers are safe from attempts at censorship due to “problematic” content.

Indeed, collective irrationality and anti-intellectualism can no longer be said to be the exclusive domain of the Right. One needs onlyto look at the popularity of anti-vaxxer and anti-GMO sentiments tosee how pervasive the anti-science mentality has become within progressive Left-wing circles.

However, is this phenomenon exclusive to progressivism, or is it part of a wider turn towards irrationality? Evidentltly, the difficult economic circumstances, the growing social inequalities, the increased risk of environmental catastrophe, and the disillusionment of a generation unable to find jobs have all led people to embrace a wide range of non-mainstream political ideas, from the. populism of Syriza and Podemos, to the Eurosceptics and the Tea Party, and even towards the neo-Fascism of Jobbik, and the religious extremism of ISIS. This new form of reactionary progressivism can easily be seen in this light. Perhaps the tragedy of it all is that it should have been up to the reasonable progressive Left to fill the vacuum of leadership and heed the call to combat the social malaise in which we are now living in. Unfortunately, it has chosen to consistently dig itselfinto a hole by policing language, obsessing over celebrities and enacting trigger warnings than by taking real steps to combat inequality in all its forms