|
"Identity politics" is just a way of referring to the kind of politics you don't like. So they're bad because the person saying "identity politics" thinks they're bad.
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
Key for left-wing people to start using "identity politics" is to have a theory of politics wherein all of politics emerges from a single root. Because of the way our society is structured, most of the time, this root is class. Thus, race, gender, sexual orientation, ability, age, etc. all are manifestations of capitalist social classes and any effort which doesn't align with the speaker's understanding of communism or anarchism is thus invalid "identity politics". Because most of the people in this thread are liberals and not leftists, they blame "neoliberals" for inventing the idea of gay marriage and not reactionary bourgeois homosexuality itself.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
Software engineers and lawyers being in a different social class from retail workers is pure liberalism.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
A pretty good example of why "we need both" is a facile lie is that the people saying it are pushing respectability politics for the minorities. Thus, since LGBT people can't put pressure on society in general because that's "alienating" and can't put pressure on corporations because that's "neoliberalism", what would actually happen in Freddie the Boor's ideal leftism is that LGBT liberation and LGBT people as a class would slowly get strangled into oblivion.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:is there an otherworld variant of fox news you're subscribing to because not once have i ever seen your type give a poo poo about the most vulnerable of minority classes, trans/gay sex workers What's "my type", motherfucker?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:is this the routine where you pigeonhole yourself into a 34-depth identity thing and berate everyone who gets it wrong while you speak from a position of economic safety, because there's only one correct answer to that You don't know what bourgeois is.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
I do think we should use our pet peeves about things we encounter online and generalize them to a major social issue that is killing our ability to get everyone 100% beyond Cugel the Clever posted:Guys, take a breath. Literally no one in this thread is saying that gender equality, racial equality, or LGBT issues aren't essential to the future we want to build. I can sympathize with your fear and frustration. There remain huge segments of American society that would deny you your right to exist, but the majority of people on these forums and in the broader left have your back. Can we not slap labels on other posters to invalidate their concerns? Dude, I don't care about what you say, I care about what you believe and how you'll act. If you believe that respectability politics is the way forward but also deny that people should interact with the broader society, you quite simply wish to destroy any political movement that isn't the one you believe will win over the residents of Gaylord, MI, pop. 3,645. Because you're closing off both radical politics and the ways respectability politics has any power at all. Brainiac Five fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:keep in mind these are the same people who would throw poor lgbt/minorities under the bus simply because they're sex workers If you post this a third time, it will come true, because that's how magic works.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:This isn't at all what people have been talking about, like in the slightest Interesting that you put the "Q" before the "T", Neurolimited. But here's the thing. There's no loving oppression of white gays going on. None. The most that might happen is them getting their feelings hurt by a 17-year-old kid on Twitter. If that's oppression, what's gaybashing? Super oppression 64? A Buttery Pastry posted:The Democratic establishment claimed America was already great. What else were these people to take from that than "Yeah, not going to lift a finger for you." What are they going to take from "America is poo poo and always was poo poo?"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Have you truly never heard someone aggressively brandy the phrase against someone they disagreed with? This gets back to my earlier point, there is a vocal handful of individuals who do wield this kind of rhetoric to shout down others—that you haven't encountered it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Taking them as representatives of all those who struggle for social justice is absolutely the wrong rational response to it, but being attacked for who you are puts you on the defensive. That's just how the human psyche works, right or wrong. If you don't understand what Freddie de Boer is talking about in the article you posted, do you really think you should have posted it? Respectability politics is the argument that liberatory politics like antiracism, feminism, gay liberation, should emphasize presenting the members of the communities involved in a way that looks good to the majority to break the stereotypes the majority has about the minority group. It also tends to argue for gaining power on an individual level through infiltrating existing power structures and attempting to adjust them from within. Since we're talking about not alienating people, we are more or less abandoning radical politics which emphasize the need of the majority to change. But we're also insisting that infiltrating existing power structures is wrong too. So what is being said is that liberatory politics in any direction are unacceptable. Which means that they will die out.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:You're projecting your fears into other peoples arguments. I don't know what I could possibly say that would dissuade you that we're not all secretly plotting against you. No, I'm reading the thread and you, apparently, are not.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Nobody has said that either needs to supercede the other. That's the entire point here; social leftists are trying to exclude fiscal leftists from the fight by reading tea leaves and divinating word usage to uncover a hidden plot to abandon social leftists because that happened before 50+ years ago. No, it's because "fiscal leftists" argue in favor of a kind of third-way politics instead of actual leftism. So your claims of solidarity are obviously bullshit. Confounding Factor posted:Do you mean classical liberalism which emphasizes "free market" capitalism? Cause that is practically nonextant. No, I mean that the people shrieking about the Third Way and triangulation are triangulators themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
The "discourse" about wealth inequality tends to be somewhere to the right of Thomas Piketty, so it's fairly loving funny to see people pretend to be some sort of radical hero fighting against the oppressive evil of Ellen Degeneres.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Capitalism dates back to Catalhoyuk?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:imagine being so politically illiterate that your definition of "elites" includes b-list celebs who require the proletariat to have money to function and advocate for socialism by necessity, instead of the fair-weather wall street billionaires who engage in wage thievery but keep putting up smokescreens like this to make people think they don't exist yet keep suckering the DNC into adopting class-exclusionary idpol So I'm actually not a member of the bourgeoisie then. Because you said I was because you assumed I was economically well-off in order to slander me. But if I was, then Ellen is also part of the bourgeoisie. My status as a rentier... gone with the breeze in order to engage in a constant shifting of rhetorical focus... 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:rip effectronica, killed by terminal to-the-letter obsession with labels I could have used that independent wealth you conjured up in order to put me on the defensive, you gently caress. Have you no sense of decency?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
UV_Catastrophe posted:Do you believe there will ever come a point in our lifetimes where racism and sexism are finally extinguished to the point where we can then focus on an economic agenda? This question implies that racism and sexism are more or less eternal, since it's meant to get him to say that it will take forever to get rid of them. This seems inconsistent with the idea that they were invented by capitalism, since surely in that case capitalism would be stronger than they.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:Yes. We know the form of racism in America is the result of European colonialism at the behest of capital. The kind of racism that is opposed never existed before the development of capitalism. On the contrary, the East India Companies and the development of joint-stock companies en masse postdates the beginning of economic exploitation of the Americas, and was roughly concurrent with the beginnings of the casta system. The proto-racial system of limpieza de sangre dates to the post-Reconquista period, and the Canarian sugar plantations point to the beginnings of racialization. Industrial capitalism emerged more or less concurrent with the full-blown casta system in the Americas. Or we could look to earlier joint companies and conclude that capitalism does, in fact, go back to Catalhoyuk, which is not even wrong. EDIT: Then there's also sexism, which you ignored entirely and dishonestly.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
Yeah dude, gayness is a "label granted by the elite" to divide us. Karl Heinrich Ulrichs is the greatest homophobe of history.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It's no complex, friend. It happened in the primaries; any and all concerns about Hillary's competence in the GE and Sander's strength on both fiscal and social sides were handwaved with attempts to tar them as racist and sexist. It got to the point where Hillary surrogates were suggesting that there was a special place in hell for women who voted Sanders, and that Sanders obtained the vast majority of the 18-30 women's vote because they were strolling for dick. I'm sorry your candidate failed to win the Democratic primaries.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:Sorry but this argument is laughable. Anyone can trace whatever outrage to some historical event in the past, which is what you seem set out to do. But you only do that by ignoring the complexities of societies and cultures. What? This is nonsense. You don't know what Catalhoyuk is, so you should have asked or discreetly googled it, instead of making a brainless post like this.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Are you interested in discussing problems within the democratic party and pertaining to identity politics, or are you going to just keep rallying against fiscally left policies and throwing out zero-effort barbs. It's pretty relevant that the candidate of anti-identity politics people lost his campaign to be nominated by millions of votes, yes. Perhaps he shouldn't have made any nods to feminism or anti-racism, and then would have won.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
deep web creep posted:"White, black, gay, straight, trans, cis, man or woman -- we all deserve food, shelter, medical care, and opportunities to better our lives and the lives of our families" Yes, the people who disagree with you are dumb and so god drat crazy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:My argument is racism as we know it today is a modern concept, its simply not how people in the classical, middle ages, or Renaissance era on how people were categorized. No it isn't, your argument is that racism emerged from capitalism, and you ignored the evidence posted against it to repeat yourself like a parrot, except parrots are about three, five times smarter than you. Neurolimal posted:Because he's not. He's trying to imply that fiscal leftists are neoliberals unconcerned with the plight of their allies. That's not critique, that's being absurd. No I'm not. Your brain damage about the term "neoliberalism" is not a universal thing, buddy. It's a real shame that George McGovern democratized the primaries, such that it became necessary to campaign for the nomination instead of just handing the nomination to Bernie Sanders outright. Rexicon1 posted:Maybe don't quote Shmorky when trying to prove your point about not being dumb and crazy. Wait, hold on. I thought that we were talking about the intellectual content, not whether a person you dislike is associated with the idea. I guess now's a good time to point out that Hitler ate, drank, breathed, and poo poo, so you should refrain from doing, well, all of those things, but also the last one, because then I won't be reading any more of your posts. Brainiac Five fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:We're discussing identity politics, its future, and its problems. I don't understand your bizarre obsession with attacking a candidate that displayed this during the primaries via non-sequiturs that contribute nothing to the conversation. The problem, Neurolimal, is that putting forward a candidate who did what the anti-identity politics people wanted, failed. Democrats decided not to pick him as their first choice. So, either you can say he didn't go far enough on opposing identity politics, or you can conclude that minorities need to be reeducated on where their real interests lie, or you can conclude that your obsession with identity politics is the mark of a child, and put away childish things. Confounding Factor posted:What evidence against it? Seriously dude enough with the snarky smug insults, you are out to lunch on this topic. Go humble yourself by taking a simple survey course on the middle ages and the Renaissance. Or read Othello. There was simply no biological theory that supported racial supremacy before colonialism arose. I wrote an entire loving post about how the temporal relationship doesn't work out with capitalism originating racism unless we redefine capitalism. Like, colonizing and economically exploiting an area isn't something only capitalists can do.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
deep web creep posted:check it out here's what the blackest transest satanist and the whitest straightest christian want: The latter person wants to deny the third of those things to the former person, at a minimum, and wants to deny the first two in the majority of cases. Your inability to recognize that this is even a possibility points to why your approach failed.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Alternatively, the Clinton family had a lot of (well-earned) support among minority communities thanks to decades of outreach through the power only a federal billionaire family could hold, and that they liked Sander's message but simply felt in Clinton's debt, for being a politician who actually reached out to black community leaders. "a compelling read". What the hell is wrong with you. Alternatively, people preferred Hillary Clinton because they genuinely believed she would be better on those issues than Bernie Sanders, instead of black people operating like La Cosa Nostra.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:It's actually because all the people Hillary's husband put in prison weren't allowed to vote. Funnily enough, the story of the crime bill in the mid-90s is a lot more complicated than white Euros like to shriek about.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Actually the super delegates system can from anti democratic leadership in the 80s . Happy to educate you. Bernie lost the nomination by hundreds of delegates more than the total number of superdelegates, and lost the popular primary vote by 20 points, and lost in number of states, too. By every possible metric he lost the primary nominations and only could have won through a reversion to pre-McGovern-Faber rules. You moron.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:What other economic model of colonialism is there besides a kind of capitalism which is distinct from modern capitalism? Look at what I bolded, whoever does that is exactly a capitalist. Well, I mean, dude, if you're going to say that Roman latifundia were capitalist, or that the Greek cities on Syracuse were capitalist, you can, but that gets us back to Sumeria being capitalist since they had mercantile capitalist ventures, and some financial capitalism. It's a definition that is really not instrumentally useful for anticapitalism as politics.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:But the system isn't the one McGovern created it in fact is a system created to prevent majority making decisions. Dude, if the superdelegates didn't exist, Bernie would still have lost. His only path to victory involved eliminating primary results and going back to backroom nominations and brokered conventions. deep web creep posted:I'm not sure if you mean Identity Politics or ~IDPOL~ but like I and so many people in this thread have said that there is no reason why we can't or shouldn't fight housing discrimination or hate crimes or whatever else that affects mainly or exclusively minorities while at the same time fighting for the safety and security of the poor even if some of them happen to be - horror of horrors - white! (or straight or cis &c &c) Haha yeah, big fan of white genocide here. I slaughter thousands of str8s with grenade launchers and bazookas.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
Whoa, drat, it turns out that you can make people say anything with judicious use of backspace.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I guess I would say Id politics have to be real change. Anti discrimination stuff not Goldman Sachs having 50% of its board be women. When did you stop beating your significant other? Oh, wait, you don't have one.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I can see you are too much of a coward to answer a simple question. Sad really. I didn't say anything about the superdelegate system being good or bad one way or another, so your question is obviously made with dishonest intent, as dishonest as when you ran a kid over with your car in 2007 and drove away without turning yourself in.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I asked you a simple question and you refuse to answer. That's actually dishonest. I can only assume you You asked a leading question, just like the incompetent prosecutor did, allowing you to walk for your many vile crimes. It's fun to play the insinuation game, isn't it?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
"Fiscal leftism" isn't a loving thing. It's just plain ol' liberalism 99.9999999% of the time. The remaining infinitesimal fraction is when someone dives into fascism inadvertently.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:You're defending the continuing re-enslavement of the black community with "it's complicated", I didn't really make you say anything. Interesting how "the new Jim Crow" became "re-enslavement." In any case, the 1990s crime bill didn't create carceral racism, motherfucker. That began in the 1960s with the involuntary hospitalization of civil rights workers as schizophrenic and developed into its modern form with the War on Drugs. The 1990s crime bill also had a great deal of support from minority communities at the time, because there was a genuine fear of surging violence in the early 1990s. People worried about children growing up to be "superpredators" because of high-profile cases where children murdered other children in hideously violent ways. That turned out to be bullshit, but it's also a level of bullshit a whole bunch of people fell for, so it is, in fact, more complicated than "Killary Kkklinton has bamboozled all the black people of American into voting for her so she can kill and eat them all", as y'all euros like to insist upon.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Fiscal Leftism describes the push towards increasingly leftist fiscal policy, given traction by the increasing number of failures on tge part of fiscal conservatism and austrian economics. Leftist economic policy has fuckall to do with fiscal policy, because fiscal policy is predicated upon the capitalist system as it currently stands.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:What is your plan for abandoning capitalism, if you denigrate the strategy of diluting capitalism with socialism until capitalism is left irrelevant. Carefully stuffing people who say "fiscal leftism" and "identity politics" in a room well-stocked with printouts of Freddie de Boer's tweets and back issues of Jacobin is step one.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Your hero HRC used the words super predators in a very dog whistle way. Also she never apologized for it. You gotta say it three times in a row for the magic to work, dude.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 23:36
|
|