4 ms·

Good intentions do not absolve people of objectively bad ideas. I drew that comparison because they are playing opposite sides of the same game of identity poli

Good intentions do not absolve people of objectively bad ideas. I drew that comparison because they are playing opposite sides of the same game of identity politics, which I'm saying is inherently flawed

fzeroracer 7y ago
It's interesting that you say that, since looking through your post history here you've engaged in identity politics all the same. Everyone engages in some form of identity politics. The post we were responding to engaged in identity politics as well because they believed white men were discriminated against the most. If you want to make an arguments make an actual argument against their position, not one against the concept of identity politics because that's an inherently flawed argument.
- charliesharding 7y ago
  Right, as in I'm arguing that it's a bad way to view the world... Total non sequitur. No, not everyone engages in identity politics. Only people who are looking for an easy out and not individually assessing ideas and their ramifications
  - fzeroracer 7y ago
    What about the fact that again, you've engaged in identity politics here on HN? My entire point is that it's hypocritical to decry identity politics while also engaging in identity politics.
    - charliesharding 7y ago
      Go ahead and quote me in context. I'm not going to go back and read through all my comments like you have but I'm sure it's defensible
- MockObject 7y ago
  > If you want to make an arguments make an actual argument against their position, not one against the concept of identity politics because that's an inherently flawed argument. It's not inherently flawed to a liberal of the 1960s - 2010s, who idealized universal principles, individual identities, colorblindness, and single standards of behavior to be applied to all, regardless of sex, race, etc. Please, have the intellectual honesty not to erase that entire era. It's not necessary to do that in order to promote the contrary ideology of intersectionality.
wpietri 7y ago
Complaining about identity politics is a big way white men practice identity politics, Charles. When there's a problem, refusing to let people talk about the problem becomes part of the problem.
- charliesharding 7y ago
  What makes you think it's ok to make wide, sweeping generalizations about how people of a certain race and gender think and how do you think that doesn't constitute racism?
  - komali2 7y ago
    As stated before, pointing out and having a clear and honest dialog about racism isn't in itself racism. That, and white people can't experience racism. They may at some point in their lives be discriminated against based on their race, unlikely though it is and extremely unlikely it'll be in some massively detrimental way. But, that's not racism. Also, "wide sweeping generalizations about how people of a certain race and gender" is a mischaracterization of what's happening. In the Charlottesville example, white supremacists set out to do what they do by the very definition of their organization - oppress non whites. There is no sweeping generalization there. If they weren't out to oppress non whites, they wouldn't be white supremacists lol.
    - charliesharding 7y ago
      > That, and white people can't experience racism. They may at some point in their lives be discriminated against based on their race, unlikely though it is and extremely unlikely it'll be in some massively detrimental way. But, that's not racism. That is some insane mental gymnastics... https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
      - wpietri 7y ago
        Dictionaries are descriptive of majority usage, Charles. So to put it bluntly, that's the average white person's definition of racism. Expert definitions often differ from common usage. E.g., people talk about the "memory" of their computer, meaning their hard drive space. (And when they say "hard drive" they often mean the whole tower.) The common definition for "energy" contains things that would horrify physicists. And the dictionary gives definitions for things like astrological signs, too. The definition komali2 is using seems to be a pretty standard expert definition. If you disagree with it, you should explain what books on racism you've read and which one you're getting your definition from. And if you haven't read any, I'd suggest you start by reading DiAngelo's, which is material to your behavior here. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07638ZFN1/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07638ZFN1/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?...

fzeroracer 7y ago

It's interesting that you say that, since looking through your post history here you've engaged in identity politics all the same. Everyone engages in some form of identity politics. The post we were responding to engaged in identity politics as well because they believed white men were discriminated against the most. If you want to make an arguments make an actual argument against their position, not one against the concept of identity politics because that's an inherently flawed argument.

charliesharding 7y ago
Right, as in I'm arguing that it's a bad way to view the world... Total non sequitur. No, not everyone engages in identity politics. Only people who are looking for an easy out and not individually assessing ideas and their ramifications
- fzeroracer 7y ago
  What about the fact that again, you've engaged in identity politics here on HN? My entire point is that it's hypocritical to decry identity politics while also engaging in identity politics.
  - charliesharding 7y ago
    Go ahead and quote me in context. I'm not going to go back and read through all my comments like you have but I'm sure it's defensible
MockObject 7y ago
> If you want to make an arguments make an actual argument against their position, not one against the concept of identity politics because that's an inherently flawed argument. It's not inherently flawed to a liberal of the 1960s - 2010s, who idealized universal principles, individual identities, colorblindness, and single standards of behavior to be applied to all, regardless of sex, race, etc. Please, have the intellectual honesty not to erase that entire era. It's not necessary to do that in order to promote the contrary ideology of intersectionality.

wpietri 7y ago

Complaining about identity politics is a big way white men practice identity politics, Charles. When there's a problem, refusing to let people talk about the problem becomes part of the problem.

charliesharding 7y ago
What makes you think it's ok to make wide, sweeping generalizations about how people of a certain race and gender think and how do you think that doesn't constitute racism?
- komali2 7y ago
  As stated before, pointing out and having a clear and honest dialog about racism isn't in itself racism. That, and white people can't experience racism. They may at some point in their lives be discriminated against based on their race, unlikely though it is and extremely unlikely it'll be in some massively detrimental way. But, that's not racism. Also, "wide sweeping generalizations about how people of a certain race and gender" is a mischaracterization of what's happening. In the Charlottesville example, white supremacists set out to do what they do by the very definition of their organization - oppress non whites. There is no sweeping generalization there. If they weren't out to oppress non whites, they wouldn't be white supremacists lol.
  - charliesharding 7y ago
    > That, and white people can't experience racism. They may at some point in their lives be discriminated against based on their race, unlikely though it is and extremely unlikely it'll be in some massively detrimental way. But, that's not racism. That is some insane mental gymnastics... https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
    - wpietri 7y ago
      Dictionaries are descriptive of majority usage, Charles. So to put it bluntly, that's the average white person's definition of racism. Expert definitions often differ from common usage. E.g., people talk about the "memory" of their computer, meaning their hard drive space. (And when they say "hard drive" they often mean the whole tower.) The common definition for "energy" contains things that would horrify physicists. And the dictionary gives definitions for things like astrological signs, too. The definition komali2 is using seems to be a pretty standard expert definition. If you disagree with it, you should explain what books on racism you've read and which one you're getting your definition from. And if you haven't read any, I'd suggest you start by reading DiAngelo's, which is material to your behavior here. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07638ZFN1/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07638ZFN1/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?...