slug.com slug.com
16 10

The Left-leaning media like to create and champion underdog stories where an identity-based victim group is being oppressed by straight, white men (SWM). Each of these groups focus on a single issue such as sexism, racism, religion, or sexual identity which results in anti-SWM groups having conflicting priorities. For example, white and Jewish women in conflict with Muslim and black women in this year's failed Women's march (see [medium.com] ).

Do you think that Identity Politics will implode on their contradictions, remain powerful yet siloed or find a way to coalesce with a unified message? Can you come up with a few "kryptonite" contradictory messages for each of these identity groups?

  • 17 votes
  • 6 votes
  • 4 votes
Admin 8 May 16
Share
You must be a member of this group before commenting. Join Group

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

16 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

They can ride along with me for a week if they are ever short on material.

GregHD Level 5 May 19, 2019
1

I'm a 60 year old white guy. I've spent my life as a social worker working primarily with mentally ill people (children 11-17 in a homeless shelter, and adults, poor, wealthy, homeless, single mothers, transgender individuals, gay, etc., with severe mental health diagnosis). I've never, in my heart, held any contempt or thought myself better than anyone. I never looked at any individual as part of a group, even within diagnosis and was respected for that. We win people by how we treat them whether or not we respect them. Yet, many in the agency I used to work for we're shocked to discover that me, and one other employee, voted for Trump. Things changed. It is not only the media, but a very large percentage of people in the social work field, mental health, education, research and grants, state and local HHS that all feed off each other's beliefs and ideologies and work to shape the perceptions of the most vulnerable people in society. This rhinoceroses skin president gives me hope, as does the backlash from public speakers who oppose identity politics.

0

The more integrated a society becomes, the less divisive identity politics will be. As the economy continues to grow, more cultural integration will ensue. Eventually, as people become more successful and more responsible, they will vote more conservatively to protect and preserve what they've achieved. The future is bright.

Facci Level 7 May 18, 2019
2

I think that identity groups will get too big and therefore continue to splinter into more defined groups. It won’t be enough to simply be Poor. Poor and repressed, Poor, repressed and black. Poor, repressed, black and gay. Poor, repressed, black, gay and cross dresser. Poor, repressed, black, gay, cross dresser and Self-identify as a table and so on.... Eventually hating everyone because we are all individuals with our own experiences, struggles and identities. Poor me, I have it worse than you, you don’t know how hard it is to be me!! I am proud to say that in some ways I was given the shit end of the stick but I have overcome and made the best of my God given time, talents, opportunities and skills. Best of all, it wasn’t given to me, it took sacrifice, work and time so it’s worth so much more than a hand out like a welfare check. No one cares if your dad died in Vietnam or you were raised and abused by man hating lesbians, you play the cards you get!!!
MAN THE €¥#€ UP!!!
And you’re a fool if you find that quote gender bias !!

Mardak Level 4 May 18, 2019
4

Identity groups are created as a means to an end. Identity politics is basically an expansion of Marx's conflict theory of the oppressed and the oppressor. The oppressed being the proletariat and the oppressor the bourgeoisie. This was the great class struggle for equality or, as Marx described it, the classless society. Working towards equality requires a process. First, identifying an inequality. Second, defining the necessary dual factions of inequality through a comparison. Third, applying the defined labels. This creates a dichotomy or polarization, and the final step in the process is ensuring there is an interaction between the groups which requires they remain in close proximity to each other.

It is necessary that there is an intellectual class to create the field and a, let's call it a political class, to perpetuate the conditions. The intellectual and political classes can be identical but they are not necessarily so. The political class, or a portion of it, may be entirely unaware of the process and only believe in the goal of equality. In which case they will act as catalysts to incite demands for change. The message would be that, collectively, change can be effected and inequality erased. Destruction or dominance over the oppressor group is never propounded to be the objective, even though for some it is. Some among them will demand revenge or worse subjugation. In the face of opposition, the objective is always forwarded as "equality" which offers a veneer of moral superiority.

The victim identity will always lose power in the end. They may gain power, as they have in North America, by being granted privilege through state-sanctioned victim status. Affirmative action, anti-hate speech and anti-bullying laws are examples of this privilege. Political correctness contributes to it as well.

The target is not the straight white male. The target is the concept of America.

In the end, identity politics is a means to gaining power and the power will not be shared. victim groups will destroy each other. Those that have attained power will use the same reason to destroy the victim groups - equality. The common enemy unites them temporarily but at some point along the way their inherent differences and inequality will come to the fore as the failed Women's march illustrated.

1

The question appears to miss the point. If one regards the purpose of Critical Theory as a strategic implementation (more than a style of Critique) by the admission of some of its proponents, such as Antonio Gramsci, we can see the object is to provoke instability and social upheaval on the strategic level. They don’t need to coalesce around a unifying message, and they will gain power, overall, because greater chaos will cause a natural gravity towards tribalism. One does not need a unifying message when all you’re looking for are a bunch of single-issue political instruments that generally contribute to momentum against the perceived opposition. Sure, there will be purity contests, but the Right is no exception to this rule. The Bible thumping holier-than-thou contest, which somehow related to “better American” in some circles on the Right, ripped the Tea Party into a thousand petty factions.

I think the Left are doing a solid job, and have been for a while, in setting themselves up to influence change. The recent debacle, in their camp, came from Obama and the far-left enthusiasts who changed the strategy of incrementalism into an all-out blitz for the finish line. That was a bad move, but most indicators still favor their disposition, especially when polling the youngsters as to which ideas they identify with. They also have a strangle-hold on the opinion-shaping sectors of society and have, since about 2008, begun deploying methods of Dr. David Kilcullen’s Counter-Insurgency methodology against their own people – most notably in the forms of Information Control and Counter-Sanctuary, the latter being clearly identifiable in the form of Silicon Valley’s censorship of conservative voices (and they have already admitted to collusion and organization in this capacity).

You’re looking at the thing from a tactical perspective and the idea of good strategy is to keep the tactics in line with KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid).

Conclusion: they’re likely to bicker amongst themselves and even get blood-thirsty, but that’s not going to make much of a difference from a liberty-minded perspective. It might afford some opportunities, but it’s not going to derail their momentum.

6

As an old woman who has lived in a truly segregated society, before "women's rights". When women were encouraged to contemplate an adult life as a wife and mother(first and foremost), a teacher, a secretary, or a nurse. I have seen a world of change. Our western culture, now, is the most open, least segregated culture on earth with unlimited opportunities for ANYONE willing to expend the energy and work toward and achieve their heart's desires. Identity groups are a return to segregation and a form of mind control that tells folks they must view themselves as limited and a victim of some sort of cruel power that must be overcome. With identity politics, you never are NOT a victim.....it becomes a never ending cycle.

3

White is the presence of all colors in the spectrum, thus we can technically identify as multi-racial. Do some genetic testing and we could also prove that most of us are quite multi-cultural. Yay science!! Don't be a science denier! Lol.
There is a weird 4 year cycle of ramping up identity politics and I wish it would just stop. Draw a big circle around that entire group on the poster (in the cartoon)...now label it "Americans". I always have trouble understanding why people let the left can be so devisive as to wipe the reality of our inherent united relationship from our daily mindset.

True!! We are all members of the human race. No matter your inherited DNA, if you live in America, you are simply AMERICAN! How difficult is that?

3

jneedler 6 replied May 16, 2019 0
@govols Hmmmm.... your verbiage is argumentative, but I don't see what you are disagreeing with me on.
I only used three sentences - which one exactly do you disagree with?

The reply button isn't working, but I wanted to respond to the above...
I apologize for what was a piss-poor attitude yesterday.

I wasn't quite disagreeing, but poorly attempting to suggest that the victim theory doesn't quite get to the heart of it. I know they use the victim narrative, but I don't believe they feel like victims. The minions really feel like they're warriors . The only victims among the players of identity are those who wear it as a shield against being shunned for not toeing the SJW line.

govols Level 8 May 16, 2019
4

Identity politics is just biology. I like my kids and family more than yours. And my farts, too. That’s not racism but biology. It’s not racism when extended to clans and nations. Most of what’s called “racism” (our strongest pejorative) is ethnocentrism and tribalism. With some quite natural xenophobia for those we didn’t get socialized to, when young.

The most racist part is the stories we confabulate about the inferiority of others, to explain a more natural and visceral response which needs no complicated “explanation.” The Left thinks these stories of “why we don’t like them” are cause. Are really “why”! Wrong. They are effect, not cause. You can make up stories about the other guy’s colon or diet, too, but they are no real explanation for why you don’t like their smell. There is actually nothing wrong with them. You just don’t like them because they aren’t yours. They aren’t YOU.

Confabulation, I say! Imagine you are an ancient desert herder in what we now call the middle East, with little water, used to smelling dry sheep or goat manure. Then the Philistines from Cyprus bring pigs and you smell pigshit for the first time. And you say “Surely this whole animal is unclean! Surely the One True God forbids this!” You make up all manner of wacky stories to explain a simple visceral response. That’s right wing rhetoric and a lot of left wing too.

Everybody has tribalism, but most of the Left denies theirs, or else claims THEIRS is forced solidarity against oppression by others, generally white Europeans. Who are thus the only ones who don’t “deserve” tribalistic impulses. So they are “racist.”

A few enlightened Leftists realize we are all “racist,” but they try to suppress this to zero. That’s like suppressing gas or sexual thoughts. Ethics is about annoying others, not your innate working as a human.

We need to identify biology for what is, and stop using it as political weapon. Suppress tribalism gently in everybody, sure. That’s what civilization is! (The natural state is tribes with warlords and that’s it—see the natives of the Amazon basin). Nations where whites are not in power are the same or worse, so white people are not the problem, but rather human nature.

Try to fix this but stop apologizing for it. It’s exactly like apologizing for farts. Everybody passes gas. Just do it outside or somewhere else. That honors biology and also the needs of broad civilized society.

Politics should be the same. I like my culture more than yours. Pardon me. I’ll try not to get that in your face. But remember, please, that you do that too, and it doesn’t smell like roses to me, though it might not be so bad to you. In an increasingly cramped world we all have worse and worse problems getting along. Identity politics does not help when translated into law.

And finally a word about genocide and the Nazis, who are due just about here via Godwin’s law. I think all ethnic conflict is xenophobia, jealousy, greed, and the stories of superiority and revenge we make up to dehumanize those who have resources that we want to rob. The stories are effect, not cause. They were the same in in Rwanda where the two groups could hardly tell each other apart, though one (which got killed) was richer. Greed and envy and jealousy are natural. It is robbery and murder that need suppression.

If we can get Left and Right to agree on something like the idea that the impulse is unstoppable and not evil, but evil only arises in the physical expression of it, we might get somewhere realistic.

Babou Level 7 May 16, 2019

I agree with what you’re saying here, but you can’t suppress tribalism – it’s retroactive. It’ll be suppressed during times of prosperity and peace (if the culture and official propaganda work against it long enough), but once that time of easy living goes away so does the suppression of tribalism and they'll look back and come up with reasons. Weaponizing everything is politics. Aristotle wrote about it. The great cynic Demosthenes. Machiavelli. Justus Lipsius. Marcus Aurelius. Politics is simply dirty business while trying to appear as a Saint from on-high.

In the end, it comes down to simple motivations. These motivations and what they seek to achieve were predicted by the Framers in the Federalist Papers. It’s not difficult to see how they arrived at these conclusions given Human History and our natural tendencies to arrange ourselves in little hierarchies, even in private settings. Biology. Power is always liable to abuse. Some seek to ward against it. Others seek to exploit it. Most fall victim to it.

The Marxist Three seeks to exploit it by gaining leverage and silencing the opposition via the powers of false accusation and the fear of social disfavor: racism, sexism and homophobia. This is not to say the Republicans do not have their own evils and power lust. I think the idea of Liberty, as a principle, has been abandoned long ago. The idea of Civilization, as I define it, can be summarized as “deferred gratification.” Not about serving yourself as much as serving the generations that follow. A greater purpose than mere greed and self-aggrandizing interests. The Republic sought to achieve this via Institution and the principles for which the Institution stands; a concept that long survives any of we short-lived individuals.

It failed.

The 17th amendment is no small reason why because it undermined the representative power of the Institution of the many states that was designed as a counterbalance against consolidating too much power to an elite few in a central government. Instead, it resorted to giving that power to the easily swayed emotionally cognitive masses, completely destroying the purpose of establishing the Senate and incentivizing run-away spending via vote buying.

When our fiscal irresponsibility finally catches up to us, and it will, the object of the Left’s hyperbolic identity politics will be realized by the many. It’ll be too late by then, however, if we’re trying to avoid a conflict between the factions. We all observe identity politics, to a degree, which is why it’s important to focus on the overarching ideas, but it’s naïve for those who say, “race doesn’t matter.” It matters to a vast swath of the population, and our politics have been reduced to a numbers game, therefore it matters.

There is an old saying: the aggressors establish the rules. Modern conservatives play reactionary politics. It’s only a matter of time unless there are drastic shifts in how the forces of liberty conduct themselves. Fighting human nature, as a human being, is a lose-lose proposition.

@EliCaesar Yes for sure, the written history of the human race is one long battle of tribes being absorbed into microstates and those into empires and regions of influence. Usually those were diverse peoples in culture and knowledge, and the result was quite powerful, like the Borg. The Greeks you mention traded around the Mediterranean (they hardly had a choice as they couldn't only live on mutton, wine and olive oil) and they learned a lot from the sailing, and the people they traded with. The Mediterranean was one big learning and play splash pool for the "Western Civ" cultures that would late conquer the New World. It was their Mercury and Gemini before they went on to Apollo. In particular they started with the Greek wealth from trade that financed Alexander's conquest of nearly the entire known world 2300 years ago.

Even here, though, you find one clan usually lording it over the others in a state or an empire. The Han Chinese. The Macedonians. The Japanese had to consolidate an empire on the island before they gave the world trouble, but they weren't the island's original inhabitants. They were probably transplants from what we now call Korea. The native Ainu got about the same treatment as the first peoples of most countries when the Borg came-- they got marginalized and displaced. Absorbed.

In Canada the "First Peoples" are resisting the process of what there is called "assimilation". Not long ago some wag in Canada put on his license plate holder a very famous Star Trek line: YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED! The Canadians were so offended they made him remove it. As I said, it's the Borg. It wouldn't be so bad if you could get out of the Borg club once you joined. But it's more like US states, who can't get out after getting in (save possibly Texas). It's less like Federation and EU and UK, and more like, well, Amazon Prime....

@AchillesAsheelz Wish I could find something to disagree with, in your wise post. Deferred gratification indeed. Impulse control. Stoicism. None of them very popular these days, but on the other hand, things have started to get worse with each generation in the US after 1980, not better. It's hard to watch that. Such pessimism! You're supposed to be here trying to think of a way out of this!

4

Ultimately, weaponized identity politics will crash, taking down anything initially good about the ideas. You can't weaponize something and maintain what is good about it at the same time. None of identity politics today is about helping anyone. It's part of this self-loathing/elitist duplicity. The rich white elitist radical left is simply virtue signaling a direction they know reasonable people can't go. It's an ill-considered, shallow struggle for the moral high ground. 'Only the best kind of human can be aware how horrible we are.' Haha, see the conflict? They're saying how good they are by admitting something bad. it's self-celebratory. It reeks of inauthenticity. And, obviously, it's doing harm and not doing good for anyone (except for the choads wielding the weapon--rich white elitist radical left. That's by design.).

Psychologically, the entire worldview is simply untethered. If equality was the real psychosocial aim, no REAL psychologist or sociologist would ever advocate identity politics or self-loathing/self-flagellating as a way to progress in a healthy way. And, they'd see through unsophisticated attempts to advance their status over others. What's really interesting is most of the field of mental healthcare is comprised of the rich elitist radical left. It's why you see APA put out stupid, gravely biased tropes hopelessly bound to the radical left.

I guess all of that is to say this stuff is inherently insincere. It's all pathology, a farce, or worse. These people who are saying they care so much really don't care about anything more than advancing their own egos. Ugly shit. As someone under the umbrella of psychology, it's appalling that so many in my field succumb to this self-serving fantasy. Talk about a dramatic lack of awareness...

chuckpo Level 8 May 16, 2019
5

These groups are set up to recruit, raise funds and produce numbers for events. As long as they are well funded they will exist and maintain some level of influence. I do not believe they will continue to grow. Their grievance are mostly garbage cobbled together. In reality they stand with their backs to their own future and progress ranting at the past and the past will not change. A quick and dreadful dragging of these victim addicts through real history in context, including the slavery and carnage inflicted upon Europeans by various groups proves that every group has known persecution. Only western culture has risen up to stop it. Women, gays and all minorities have their rights protected only in western culture. Now you can not make these points in front of a paid for mob. Which is my point. As long as somebody will pay for nice hotel rooms, air conditioned buses, conference rooms, meals and two free drink tickets these groups will exist. We must have the courage to confront their lies. Stuff real history down their throats and make them aware of the debt they owe Western Civilization for their ability to wimper together in peace and prosperity as long as someone is paying them to do it!

4

I'd like to think identity groups (namely the Democrats and Republicans) will lose favor with most of the citizens over time, then again a good portion of society is thoroughly convinced they must choose a side...

@SpikeTalon - Spike, I agree with many things you've posted on IDW, but this comment seems to be unenlightened, 'intelligentsia' style, provocateur hogwash.

Political parties are the opposite of identity politics (but I suspect you already know that).

I don't know if you meant it this way, but your post seems intended to convey that you are 'better than' people who align with a political party. Of course, being an independent is your perogative .... but I don't believe you should act like it makes you smarter or better than people who do claim membership in either of the two major parties currently active in United States' politics.

Full disclosure - I used to claim to be an 'independent,' mainly because I wanted to be 'hip' and 'edgy,' and because the party of abortionists had convinced me that I should be embarrassed for having moral values. After about 10 years of realizing I just could not vote for people that advocate for killing unborn babies, raising taxes, increased government spending of taxpayer money, and increased government control of our lives, I finally gave up and admitted it: I am generally Republican. I disagree with many specific people, policies, and actions in the GOP, but they are the available option that most generally reflects my values and ideals.

@jneedler First of all, your response was not exactly an enlightened one either, for that matter. No, when someone insists on identifying or associating with a certain political party they are partaking in identity politics then, so what I said above is accurate. Political parties are not the opposite of such as you had suggested.

I never stated anywhere that I was smarter than another who associates with one of the two major US political parties, just said I don't buy into the lies both parties peddle often, if you got something else out of my prior comment that's unfortunate. This site is not for the faint of heart and I am noted for being a controversial individual to both sides of the political argument. Over the years I've sat back and quietly observed my fellow Americans, and what I've observed from both sides is anything short of appalling. I'm getting tired and cranky getting caught in the middle of two extremes. Sometimes in life we hear things that we don't want to hear but really need to hear such anyway, as sometimes that inspires us to be better people and think things out a little more, and I've done some serious thinking over the past years.

I could make a case that your above comment was meant to be condescending towards those with independent inclinations. For what it's worth, I identify as independent overall speaking, but political wise my views align best with the libertarians. I can assure you that I'm not "hip" or trendy just because I (or anyone else for that matter) identify as independent, I do so because I am not swayed by what others think. You say you don't wish to associate with the party that kills unborn children, but what automatically makes your assertion there correct? Quite a few others out there would disagree with you, are they all automatically wrong? See where I'm going with this? The very thing you accused me of in reality you could be guilty of yourself, and that would be just one example there, and part of the reason why I am like I am with people and their identity politics.

You are whatever you are (generally Republican you said), good for you. As for me, I'm a balance of the two extremes, as at one point or the other in my lifetime I have associated with both Democrat (as an indoctrinated teenager) and as a Republican, and now I am convinced both of them lie to the citizens. Nothing in this country will truly change where corrupt politics are concerned so long as the citizens believe they only have one of two choices, I stand by my previous comment. These days I tend to hang back more and do more observing once again, and wait for more people to wake up and realize that of which I had realized years ago, and I'm still waiting. That doesn't for one minute make me better or smarter than someone else, I just implore my fellow Americans to think a little more deeper for themselves is all.

3

Intersectionality, of the sort practised by the Women's March organizers, is supposed to be the antidote for those contradictions. Without a class analysis, identity politics doesn't make the world a better place. It is hollow, arbitrary, and only serves to form a slightly more diverse elite.

I don’t think a class analysis helps a bit. Marx saw class. He should have seen biology.

@Babou Well it helps if your goal is to create a more egalitarian society. If you think the elite is oppressing you, making it a little more diverse, which is all that mere identity politics accomplishes, mostly just makes the oppressor look a little bit more like you. In all likelihood, they'll even start identifying as white within a generation or two! I think the liberal establishment is misguided in wielding identity politics against individuals in public like a cultural human resources department.

I did see your post above about biology. I want to be cautious about going down this road--there are many biological reductionists among the IDW and the right, who want to give up trying to improve society because tribalism, violence, and hierarchy are purportedly human nature. By their logic we should revert to cave people any day now!

But I do agree that there is a biological component to racism, for example, and that none of us escape it. We have a lot of control over our beliefs, but it is harder to control the subconscious patterns that our brain recognizes, e.g., in the crime report on our local news. Recognizing this is important, of course, and there are ways to condition yourself to "see" more positive patterns, but it is unreasonable to expect such from the average person.

Of course, the main focus of identity politics is elite formation, and elite institutions are where systemic oppression comes from. And I take it from your comments on the Nazis, for example, that you're on board with trying to stop such expressions of tribalism, even if you disagree on the causality. At the end of the day, if we can agree to lighten up on the moralizing over individual racism, isn't the causality beside the point? Shouldn't we try to make the local news not form such negative patterns in the subconscious mind? Shouldn't we oppose political nativism?

@WilyRickWiles I’m not a fan of going fully down the biological road, but nobody else is, either. Civilization has its discontents and we all need to suppress some atavistic impulses. We can’t act on antisocial impulses.

It does make a difference how we view these. The Left doesn’t see their origin, and thus thinks their personal politically correct feces is not odiferous. See Israel. The Right thinks bad culture can always be overcome by choice and free will, which is why the US prison system is such a mess. The religiosity of the US, plus belief that Jim Crow should have had no lasting impact, are both directly to blame. A biological view here is more humane.

4

Identity politics appeal to individuals who indulge in victim mentality, either for themselves or on behalf of others. Identity politics is predicated on the belief that some groups (blacks, females, Muslim, LGTBQ) have been collectively victimized. As such, it will increasingly appeal to those disposed individuals who believe their life is the product of what other people have imposed on their 'group,' rather than a result of their own personal choices and actions.

No, identity politics doesn't rely on somebody being victimized. The entire fucking theory is that culture exists as a power structure. The victim story is a sub-story. The narrative is a dominance structure that we're all subjected to. Victimization is just an aspect, and the cause we must banner around. It's important to understand the foundation as they understand it.

All of human history is a story of how the strong and powerful imposed the very norms of society upon the weaker classes over which rules might be made normative.

@govols Hmmmm.... your verbiage is argumentative, but I don't see what you are disagreeing with me on.

I only used three sentences - which one exactly do you disagree with?

@govols Yes, but that begs the deeper question: what do the oppressors get out of it? Resources and the chance to spread their genes. Same reason two anthills go to war. You need no fucking philosophy for this! Liebenstraum and racial superiority are stories to justify deeper wants. If you want something, one story is as good as another. The Left thinks the stories are cause, instead of effect

The left thinks class struggle is some law of nature. Natural selection and the selfish gene are laws of nature. Class struggle is merely the human face of that operation. Identifying oppressors and oppressed may help, but looking at their philosophies will not, because they are confabulated later bolt-ons. As well ask a lion why she eats zebras, and educate her prey on the structural oppression of the veldt.

Here is where religion and the Right in general sees more clearly. Greed and lust and love for your own kids are innate. They cannot be programmed out. Only some of the uncivilized actions that result from them, like corruption and Jim Crow, can be suppressed.

The Left needs to realize that the human oppressed, as soon as they can, get up on their hind legs like the pigs in Animal Farm, and turn into oppressors. Marxist cultural awakening “woke” doesn’t stop this. Law and civil behavior conditioning is the best we have. If money makes laws that favor money, it’s the same as corruption. Fix it. You need the golden rule but Marx is no help.

Marxist analysis is worse than useless, for it claims that when the farmers are gone from the Animal Farm the farm will be one happy dictatorship of the communal non greedy proles who live as one big communal family. Which for innate biological reasons is totally unstable. Communes and kibbutzes and communist countries go downhill. They forgot the flesh and the fact that humans are animals and not tabula rasa.

1

Part of what's happening... Many on the left have been exposed to a deconstruction of every idea of the good that might have existed within the culture in which they were born. European culture colonized and oppressed foreign lands and indigenous peoples across the globe. European culture itself was an oppressive regime of class dominance and imposed inferiority complexes that spanned generations and reduced whole populations to gradated positions of "place" within the power structure. They've been made to feel shame, resentment, or both over most aspects of their heritage. They have been stripped of any pride of place or past, their entire society condemned as a vile scheme designed by their ancestors to impose a domineering or inferiority station upon all within it. That shit is traumatizing on some deep fucking psychological level in a way that undermines any faith in the goodness that might be proposed among traditional cultural accomplishments. They're not snowflakes, they're the heirs to an empire of evil and are guilty by association of either the original sin of oppression, or of the other sin of presenting historically inadequate resistance.

Given the depth into history that the modern theorists have dug, the criticisms levied against culture back even to the ancients, what identity might an individual derive from their heritage but one infused with a guilt so profound as to warp the sense of connectedness in such a way that the ties that used to bind us as people are now thought of as the chains that bear us into the very hell our own societies deserve. I ask you, can such a rearing result in any possible outcome but a collection of disoriented generations who share very damned little cultural cohesiveness beyond PTSD and a deeply seeded need for repentance and forgiveness?

The identity politics masses are experiencing the real and actual symptoms of trauma, and the identities they're embracing are an expression of a reasonable desire to share their trauma with those who have experienced and who understand the pain of realizing that the entirety of their reality is a manifestation of historic fucking EVIL committed by the very culture that marginalizes their lived experience even into the present here and now.

There ain't no Kriptonite for that kinda mindset.

govols Level 8 May 15, 2019

@R_D_Russell

This. It's all about how the argument is framed and people aren't about to shine a light on massive volumes of data that contradict their narrative. It was this observation when I was reading Miyamoto Musashi's "The Book of Five Rings," (as a counter-balance to the Art of War, I recommend it if you haven't experienced the read) that I discovered a profound fondness of Greco-Roman Natural Law. Their framework of Justice and how to view the world applies outside of tribal thinking and observes Human Nature, on the whole, instead of cherry-picked examples; demanding a level of self-possession and discipline that largely goes abandoned by other views.

The issue is we need to discuss these other things in the broader context and take the entire picture into account if we really want to address underlining tendencies and improve society. Most societies have their evils. All have done things we would not approve of in the modern age. No single person is flawless. All of this projection and selective rendering, in the modern political context, tends to operate this way precisely because of the flaws of the people employing these strategies.

My view of history is this: people always seek to escape reality instead of embrace it. They seek to subvert human nature instead of understand it. They seek to conquer rather than empathize. Reality always catches up with them. It's the way every story ends.

Reality always wins.

Write Comment

Recent Visitors 118

Photos 127 More

Posted by Admin Does teaching "white guilt" also cultivate a "white pride" backlash?

Posted by Admin Is it time to take a knee on the Superbowl?

Posted by Admin Why not equality right now?

Posted by Admin How's Biden doing?

Posted by Admin How many good friends do you have from other political tribes?

Posted by Admin What did Trump do, if anything, to incite violence?

Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?

Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?

Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?

Posted by Admin Under what time and circumstance is the use of violence warranted?

Posted by Admin Now what?

Posted by Admin What do you expect to be achieved by this week's pro-Trump DC rally?

Posted by Admin What did you learn in 2020?

Posted by Admin Should pedophiles be allowed to have "child" sex robots?

Posted by Admin Do you have a "line in the sand" regarding political or social change?

Posted by Admin Should big tech firms hire more Blacks and Hispanics?

  • Top tags#video #media #racist #world #biden #truth #government #liberal #racism #democrats #conservatives #society #politics #community #youtube #justice #IDW #hope #friends #videos #Identity #FreeSpeech #Google #book #policy #vote #Police #conservative #evidence #culture #violence #reason #economic #USA #liberals #tech #Socialmedia #money #god #guns #gender #whites #campaign #population #laws #religion #TheTruth #equality #democrat #Christian ...

    Members 9,848Top

    Moderator