10 ms·

i'm very left-wing, hell i'm an antifascist activist and im not a big fan of "idpol" This is an essay with the same name from 2015: https://theanarchistlibrar

i'm very left-wing, hell i'm an antifascist activist and im not a big fan of "idpol" This is an essay with the same name from 2015: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/lupus-dragonowl-against-identity-politics https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/lupus-dragonowl-agai... and this is a politically incorrect drama about identity politics written by, err, the unabomber: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ-Upb4Szms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ-Upb4Szms

dbrueck 8y ago
That 2015 article is great, thank you. I think this part sums up the problem in a nutshell: "[identity politicians] deny that people exist as unique individuals at all; people are simply instances of spectres". In my experience at least this is true: anytime I've tried to engage in a discussion with someone who is into identity politics, I've been told that I may say one thing, but my actual intentions are nefarious, that I'm full of fear and hate, and that my view is meaningless since I'm a white hetero male. There is no need to talk to me because they already know everything about me and what a horrible (or at least very blind) person I am. I think the Left would do well to try to minimize "idpol" if for no other reason than strategically it's a disaster - it chases away tons of potential allies.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- happytoexplain 8y ago
  Excuse my ignorance, but does the term "idpol" have a more specific meaning than as an abbreviation of "identity politics"? If the article describes it, it's after the paywall, and a quick Google doesn't quite clear it up. The reason I ask is that it sounds like you're using it to describe a liberal movement I haven't heard of, but I could change the identifying nouns in your post and it would describe the sum of my anecdotal experience instead - the salient difference being not that I feel the opposite way that you do, but that I have always assumed that this experience of mine is not representative of broader reality, and that the problem is (at least similarly) pervasive on all sides of political divides.
  - dbrueck 8y ago
    I'm not aware of any alternative meaning; the article mentioned in the earlier post gave a good explanation of it IMO. My personal experience is with the Left and certain people being extremely in-your-face about it and (ironically) pre-judging me by my gender, sexual orientation, and skin color. But yeah, I think identity politics exists everywhere on some level, it gets corrupted and bad the further you go towards the extremes of the spectrum, but for better or for worse on the Left there seems to be more of an overt part of the narrative currently (which leads to e.g. https://goo.gl/V47VH8 https://goo.gl/V47VH8).
- yourbandsucks 8y ago
  One of the biggest markers of ideological blindness is when people lose their ability to do basic arithmetic. The United States is 65% white. How you gonna get to 51% of the vote when your primary message to white people is "check your privilege"? Bonus points when it's coming from a 25yo making $200k a year.
  - crooked-v 8y ago
    Who exactly is making that their "entire message" in politics?
    - yourbandsucks 8y ago
      I should have said "primary message". Edited, thanks. That said, the primary message is basically the entire message in a world of soundbites.
      - mrguyorama 8y ago
        And yet you still haven't answered his question. This[0] is the democratic party platform. Can you point to the portion that says "White people; Check your privilege"? If you were not talking about the democratic party, as I've assumed you are, I'm sure you can find the party platform of the group you are referencing. [0]: http://s3.amazonaws.com/uploads.democrats.org/Downloads/2016_DNC_Platform.pdf http://s3.amazonaws.com/uploads.democrats.org/Downloads/2016...
        yourbandsucks 8y ago
        I'm talking about the social justice warriors who make up a disproportionate slice of tech community liberals. They're the loudest, their message is what gets through, especially when you've got people like Hannity and Limbaugh to help spread and 'interpret' their message[1]. Not about the broader democratic party, which very much includes me and many others who get annoyed as hell by the divisiveness of the above group. And I'm certainly not talking about the platform. If people voted based on that instead of media soundbites, we'd have a different country. [1]: If you're a democrat, and you find that Hannity and Limbaugh are excited to quote you, please shut the fuck up immediately until you understand why they love you so much.
- someguydave 8y ago
  Not only this, but how credible is a government that explicitly operates only in the interests of particular identity groups? Why pay taxes if you are the outgroup?
amaccuish 8y ago
Same here re left-wingness; agreed, I think it's possible to be sensitive and cautious around certain topics without going nuclear.
stcredzero 8y ago
hell i'm an antifascist activist and im not a big fan of "idpol" I observe that a number of antifascists have been documented to be into a form of "idpol" based on tribalism of subcultural affiliation of choice -- to the point where they are willing to do physical violence against people because they merely "seem" a certain way. There are many affiliations which are not immutable, but which are very hard to change and closely held or prized. I don't think that people should be coerced to give those up. Perhaps the tearing of such identities of choice is only 70% as toxic as identity based on immutable characteristics, but 70% of awful is still pretty awful. It's better to convince than to coerce.

dbrueck 8y ago

That 2015 article is great, thank you. I think this part sums up the problem in a nutshell: "[identity politicians] deny that people exist as unique individuals at all; people are simply instances of spectres". In my experience at least this is true: anytime I've tried to engage in a discussion with someone who is into identity politics, I've been told that I may say one thing, but my actual intentions are nefarious, that I'm full of fear and hate, and that my view is meaningless since I'm a white hetero male. There is no need to talk to me because they already know everything about me and what a horrible (or at least very blind) person I am. I think the Left would do well to try to minimize "idpol" if for no other reason than strategically it's a disaster - it chases away tons of potential allies.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
happytoexplain 8y ago
Excuse my ignorance, but does the term "idpol" have a more specific meaning than as an abbreviation of "identity politics"? If the article describes it, it's after the paywall, and a quick Google doesn't quite clear it up. The reason I ask is that it sounds like you're using it to describe a liberal movement I haven't heard of, but I could change the identifying nouns in your post and it would describe the sum of my anecdotal experience instead - the salient difference being not that I feel the opposite way that you do, but that I have always assumed that this experience of mine is not representative of broader reality, and that the problem is (at least similarly) pervasive on all sides of political divides.
- dbrueck 8y ago
  I'm not aware of any alternative meaning; the article mentioned in the earlier post gave a good explanation of it IMO. My personal experience is with the Left and certain people being extremely in-your-face about it and (ironically) pre-judging me by my gender, sexual orientation, and skin color. But yeah, I think identity politics exists everywhere on some level, it gets corrupted and bad the further you go towards the extremes of the spectrum, but for better or for worse on the Left there seems to be more of an overt part of the narrative currently (which leads to e.g. https://goo.gl/V47VH8 https://goo.gl/V47VH8).
yourbandsucks 8y ago
One of the biggest markers of ideological blindness is when people lose their ability to do basic arithmetic. The United States is 65% white. How you gonna get to 51% of the vote when your primary message to white people is "check your privilege"? Bonus points when it's coming from a 25yo making $200k a year.
- crooked-v 8y ago
  Who exactly is making that their "entire message" in politics?
  - yourbandsucks 8y ago
    I should have said "primary message". Edited, thanks. That said, the primary message is basically the entire message in a world of soundbites.
    - mrguyorama 8y ago
      And yet you still haven't answered his question. This[0] is the democratic party platform. Can you point to the portion that says "White people; Check your privilege"? If you were not talking about the democratic party, as I've assumed you are, I'm sure you can find the party platform of the group you are referencing. [0]: http://s3.amazonaws.com/uploads.democrats.org/Downloads/2016_DNC_Platform.pdf http://s3.amazonaws.com/uploads.democrats.org/Downloads/2016...
      - yourbandsucks 8y ago
        I'm talking about the social justice warriors who make up a disproportionate slice of tech community liberals. They're the loudest, their message is what gets through, especially when you've got people like Hannity and Limbaugh to help spread and 'interpret' their message[1]. Not about the broader democratic party, which very much includes me and many others who get annoyed as hell by the divisiveness of the above group. And I'm certainly not talking about the platform. If people voted based on that instead of media soundbites, we'd have a different country. [1]: If you're a democrat, and you find that Hannity and Limbaugh are excited to quote you, please shut the fuck up immediately until you understand why they love you so much.
someguydave 8y ago
Not only this, but how credible is a government that explicitly operates only in the interests of particular identity groups? Why pay taxes if you are the outgroup?

amaccuish 8y ago

Same here re left-wingness; agreed, I think it's possible to be sensitive and cautious around certain topics without going nuclear.

stcredzero 8y ago

hell i'm an antifascist activist and im not a big fan of "idpol" I observe that a number of antifascists have been documented to be into a form of "idpol" based on tribalism of subcultural affiliation of choice -- to the point where they are willing to do physical violence against people because they merely "seem" a certain way. There are many affiliations which are not immutable, but which are very hard to change and closely held or prized. I don't think that people should be coerced to give those up. Perhaps the tearing of such identities of choice is only 70% as toxic as identity based on immutable characteristics, but 70% of awful is still pretty awful. It's better to convince than to coerce.