Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Identity Politics: the impasse, the debate, the thread.

what do you want me to say? the use of "working class" as code for "racist white man regardless of occupation or relation to capital" is ubiquitous on left, right and centre.

I don't let stupid people dictate my terminology though, pro tip: that's a bad idea. At the very least you would need to add "white" to "working class" for what you say to be true. And even then you'd be generalising massively and conflating class with identity on purpose.

then liberals accuse anyone talking about class as being racist sexists, and other liberals and some leftists use "identity politics" to dismiss feminism, anti-racism, queer politics etc altogether. I've had both multiple times.

I think you're exaggerating how often this happens and how seriously anyone should take it. That's just my opinion, but I'm ok with admitting my political outlook is class based and not identitarian. I feel more can be achieved for more people, and more fairly, by focussing on class than on identity.

If I'm only interested in me, or in "us" then identity is the answer, sure. If I'm interested in everyone benefitting then identity will be too limited a framework to he useful. It's basically cronyism.
 
If I'm only interested in me, or in "us" then identity is the answer, sure. If I'm interested in everyone benefitting then identity will be too limited a framework to he useful. It's basically cronyism.

the whole point of intersectionality as originally formulated is to avoid this
is black lives matter cronyism?
 
Maybe. The question is, does it actually work that way? The road to hell, as they say, is paved with good intentions.

BLM may not be cronyism but BLM isn't identity politics either, same as #metoo isn't.
 
why not? people call both identity politics all the time.

They are wrong. 1. People aren't shot by racist police for identifying as black but for being black. Ditto #metoo, identity has nothing to do with sexual abuse. 2. A single-issue campaign is not necessarily "ID Politics" as critiqued in this thread, just because it deals with the effects of racism or sexism or eg. disability discrimination.
 
Since you seem to have 'liked' some of the shit-politics-incoherent-drivel they've spouted in the last few pages I hope that it's the confused bit of you that's been doing that.
'liked' in a supportive of a different point of view sort of way - not necessarily in agreement. But confused when they kept mentioning groups/language /people I've never heard of and then started to contradict themeslves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDC
..., and other liberals and some leftists use "identity politics" to dismiss feminism, anti-racism, queer politics etc altogether.
That is something I've experienced and was my point early on in this thread. Till many on this thread decided that the thing that I had been accused of being ID politics were a perfectly valid fight for equality afterall.

I still haven't heard anyone in real life use the term ID politics, but then I'm not up with the twatterazzi.
 
That's not from rand, that's basic anarchist communism. Which this person is introducing us to

Pretty sure that's not very Randian.

Maybe, but when I read:
mutual aid is in our self interest
as a standalone statement that appears to be attempting to encapsulate someone's political outlook, what springs to mind is not anarchism as I understand it, but rational selfishness, ie. I will help you because it's in my self-interest to do so. Not bcause it's the right thing to do or whatever. And that is Randian, very much so.

Anyway if I made the wrong assumption maybe some clarification might be in order .. in this case I'm not sure it's going to happen, or would help.
 
only if anything that rejects deontology is randian
and only a tiny proportion of humanity was granted enough agency by rand to have self interest, which in her philosophy is about violent domination
you can't pursue your self interest if you're born at the wrong end of a class system, which is why communism is selfish
 
only if anything that rejects deontology is randian
and only a tiny proportion of humanity was granted enough agency by rand to have self interest, which in her philosophy is about violent domination
you can't pursue your self interest if you're born at the wrong end of a class system, which is why communism is selfish

:thumbs:
 
only if anything that rejects deontology is randian
and only a tiny proportion of humanity was granted enough agency by rand to have self interest, which in her philosophy is about violent domination
you can't pursue your self interest if you're born at the wrong end of a class system, which is why communism is selfish

amazing, every word in that sentence was wrong.

That's what Luke Skywalker would say, I'd just say it's patronising shite .. ''you can't pursue your self interest if you're born at the wrong end of a class system'' .. where to even start ffs.
 
Back
Top Bottom