3 ms·

>Unfortunately with the rise of identity politics and ethnic factionalism... Are you aware of what de Tocqueville, thought of Native Americans and Blacks? Even

>Unfortunately with the rise of identity politics and ethnic factionalism... Are you aware of what de Tocqueville, thought of Native Americans and Blacks? Even from de Tocqueville's brief time here, he could see the ethnic factionalism. If you're uncertain he saw the US in terms of ethnic factions, reread chapter 18 of his Democracy in America. Ethnic factionalism was central to the US. (It is this ethnic factionalism that, historically, holds us back actually.) Now, I might concede that Identity Politics may be new. (Only in the sense that we certainly had no LGBTQ etc political movements here in the 19th century for instance.) But to suggest that ethnic factionalism in the US is new is just to ignore the history of the United States.

derp_dee_derp 8y ago
ah yes, the "we can't listen to any ideas from anyone born before the year 2000 because they were racist" argument. we're all done here, ladies and gentlemen. De Tocqueville's ideas are hereby tainted and therefor void. guess we should drop that whole pythagorous theorum while we're at it too, considering Pythagorous' personal beliefs. Also Newton was super racist, so gravity is out. Also every one turn off your lights and your phone because we can't use electricity because of how racist Ben Franklin was.
- scarejunba 8y ago
  I think he's just arguing that the factionalism has been around for a while; that the "rise of ... ethnic factionalism" isn't a new thing. He obviously considers de Tocqueville a reputable source on the issue so he's not undermining him here. I think your criticism is misdirected.
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  >"we can't listen to any ideas from anyone born before the year 2000 because they were racist"... Woah, woah, woah. Where did you get that? No one cares whether de Tocqueville was racist or not. The material point of the post is that ethnic factionalism did not rise in the US in the past few decades, it's been with us from the beginning. De Tocqueville was simply a convenient stylistic means of illustrating this fact, as the original poster implicitly relied on the authority of de Tocqueville in his assertion that ethnic factionalism is new to the US. You're jumping to a conclusion that no one made man.
- unknownkadath 8y ago
  That is not a charitable interpretation of the parent comment, friend.
tathougies 8y ago
> But to suggest that ethnic factionalism in the US is new is just to ignore the history of the United States. Nothing of what I said suggests that ethnic factionalism be new, but only that it be of sufficiently different character. I do still stand by that. Both those on the right and those on the left have each convinced the other that those from different ethnic groups are inherently incapable of joining the American enterprise. While I believe certain groups were marginalized in the past, I believe this was due to what were perceived as temporary and fixable conditions. There was still an underlying belief held by at least one major party that... with sufficient education / propaganda / indoctrination... any man or woman could be 'converted' to the in-group of 'American'. I think there is no longer any political party that actually stands for this kind of integration. The left sees this sort of integration as immoral. The right sees this sort of integration as impossible. Religion or shared philosophy does -- in my opinion -- play a significant role in relieving racism. For example, in my opinion, this is why Catholics are the group most likely to marry a person of another race, even if they are more likely to marry Catholics -- the Church has continued to convert people from many disparate communities, despite the modern day injunction against doing so.
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  >Nothing of what I said suggests that ethnic factionalism be new, but only that it be of sufficiently different character... It is of different character, it's a lot better for minorities today. Notwithstanding the drawbacks of being black or native american today, and I do understand that there are many, it is much better to be native american today than it was to be native american in the 19th century. Ditto for being black. >Religion or shared philosophy does -- in my opinion -- play a significant role in relieving racism... Here we absolutely agree. I just think that relief of racism probably comes more through what I'm just going to call "spiritual practice" for lack of a better term. We all already share a common philosophy. Many of them. Most Americans readily accept the fact that an American of a different race, is still an American. That's a shared philosophy. Most native americans, blacks and whites speak english, eat chicken, and go to some form of christian church on sundays. On the surface, they all have the same sort of base philosophy. But the devil is in those details that I'm calling "spiritual practice" right. The music at a black southern baptist church might be off putting to people accustomed to a white catholic church for instance. Or vice versa. Different spiritual practices. The reason Catholics marry Catholics is familiarity. Same spiritual practices. Also should mention that I think spiritual practices can encompass more than just religion. Habitat for instance. Or playing music with your bandmates at local gigs and festivals might be a spiritual practice. The musician may not even realize it, but the reason he teaches kids at the local festivals is because music is his spiritual practice.

derp_dee_derp 8y ago

ah yes, the "we can't listen to any ideas from anyone born before the year 2000 because they were racist" argument. we're all done here, ladies and gentlemen. De Tocqueville's ideas are hereby tainted and therefor void. guess we should drop that whole pythagorous theorum while we're at it too, considering Pythagorous' personal beliefs. Also Newton was super racist, so gravity is out. Also every one turn off your lights and your phone because we can't use electricity because of how racist Ben Franklin was.

scarejunba 8y ago
I think he's just arguing that the factionalism has been around for a while; that the "rise of ... ethnic factionalism" isn't a new thing. He obviously considers de Tocqueville a reputable source on the issue so he's not undermining him here. I think your criticism is misdirected.
bilbo0s 8y ago
>"we can't listen to any ideas from anyone born before the year 2000 because they were racist"... Woah, woah, woah. Where did you get that? No one cares whether de Tocqueville was racist or not. The material point of the post is that ethnic factionalism did not rise in the US in the past few decades, it's been with us from the beginning. De Tocqueville was simply a convenient stylistic means of illustrating this fact, as the original poster implicitly relied on the authority of de Tocqueville in his assertion that ethnic factionalism is new to the US. You're jumping to a conclusion that no one made man.
unknownkadath 8y ago
That is not a charitable interpretation of the parent comment, friend.

tathougies 8y ago

> But to suggest that ethnic factionalism in the US is new is just to ignore the history of the United States. Nothing of what I said suggests that ethnic factionalism be new, but only that it be of sufficiently different character. I do still stand by that. Both those on the right and those on the left have each convinced the other that those from different ethnic groups are inherently incapable of joining the American enterprise. While I believe certain groups were marginalized in the past, I believe this was due to what were perceived as temporary and fixable conditions. There was still an underlying belief held by at least one major party that... with sufficient education / propaganda / indoctrination... any man or woman could be 'converted' to the in-group of 'American'. I think there is no longer any political party that actually stands for this kind of integration. The left sees this sort of integration as immoral. The right sees this sort of integration as impossible. Religion or shared philosophy does -- in my opinion -- play a significant role in relieving racism. For example, in my opinion, this is why Catholics are the group most likely to marry a person of another race, even if they are more likely to marry Catholics -- the Church has continued to convert people from many disparate communities, despite the modern day injunction against doing so.

bilbo0s 8y ago
>Nothing of what I said suggests that ethnic factionalism be new, but only that it be of sufficiently different character... It is of different character, it's a lot better for minorities today. Notwithstanding the drawbacks of being black or native american today, and I do understand that there are many, it is much better to be native american today than it was to be native american in the 19th century. Ditto for being black. >Religion or shared philosophy does -- in my opinion -- play a significant role in relieving racism... Here we absolutely agree. I just think that relief of racism probably comes more through what I'm just going to call "spiritual practice" for lack of a better term. We all already share a common philosophy. Many of them. Most Americans readily accept the fact that an American of a different race, is still an American. That's a shared philosophy. Most native americans, blacks and whites speak english, eat chicken, and go to some form of christian church on sundays. On the surface, they all have the same sort of base philosophy. But the devil is in those details that I'm calling "spiritual practice" right. The music at a black southern baptist church might be off putting to people accustomed to a white catholic church for instance. Or vice versa. Different spiritual practices. The reason Catholics marry Catholics is familiarity. Same spiritual practices. Also should mention that I think spiritual practices can encompass more than just religion. Habitat for instance. Or playing music with your bandmates at local gigs and festivals might be a spiritual practice. The musician may not even realize it, but the reason he teaches kids at the local festivals is because music is his spiritual practice.