4 ms·

Identity is a wedge used to split class solidarity (but note the terrific solidarity of the elite class). The best improvements for everyone will come from poli

Identity is a wedge used to split class solidarity (but note the terrific solidarity of the elite class). The best improvements for everyone will come from policies which ignore identity and materially improve the lives of people. The Democratic party has held the belief that demographics will keep them in power without having to actually address economic and legal inequalities, that is, without having to do anything at all. But the middle and lower classes will never find solidarity amongst themselves so long as we are fixated on identity, and nothing will change (that's the point).

Kye 5y ago
Funny thing: the DNC agrees with you, at least right up until an identity has sufficient popular support. I already expounded way more than was worth the effort on here recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29981488 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29981488 As someone on the boot-end of people who chant "no politics maaaaan, just vibin', peace and love with no ideology" to distract from the boot, I vehemently disagree.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> Identity is a wedge used to split class solidarity (but note the terrific solidarity of the elite class). It's not, inherently, though it can be used that way, which is the essence of bourgeois identity politics, which is a distinct subset of identity politics. > The best improvements for everyone will come from policies which ignore identity and materially improve the lives of people. Identity is often intimately tied to distinct material circumstances; policies that “ignore identity and materially improves the loves of people”, without exception, ignore the distinct material circumstances of identifiable groups of people while improving the material circumstances of other groups of people, and invariably do so in ways which favor the groups most privileged by visibility in the status quo. > The Democratic party has held the belief that demographics will keep them in power without having to actually address economic and legal inequalities That's very much not true of either of the major factions of the Democratic Party. The dominant neoliberal centrist faction actively doesn't want to deal with the economic inequalities more than is necessary to smooth out social disruptions interfering with corporate capitalist profit making (though it does want to deal with legal inequalities that impede efficient exploitation of human potential by capital), to the point of being willing to have the party lose power rather than doing more than is necessary to that end, whereas the progressive populist wing actively wants to deal with the problems. And neither faction is so ignorant of the political realities of the US system to expect that the party is secure in it's (extremely narrow) federal legislative majority or control of the White House.
- nescioquid 5y ago
  > Identity is often intimately tied to distinct material circumstances Not so fast. Au courant are stories around data disaggregation, highlighting that Asian Americans in NYC have the highest poverty rate (also noted is the way this runs counter to popular perceptions). But rather than splitting up the populace in increasingly finer-grained ways, why don't we just do something to address the poverty in our society? To wit, yes we agree the DNC does want to do anything about poverty or economic inequalities in general. They are happy to stage photo ops while draped in kente cloth but they will never do anything to improve the material circumstances of the lower classes. > The Democratic party has held the belief that demographics will keep them in power without having to actually address economic and legal inequalities >> That's very much not true of either of the major factions of the Democratic Party. You mean the neoliberal and conservative wings of the Democratic party? I assume "the squad" knows how to use political power as well as Manchin, but the fact that they don't indicates they, too, simply use identity as a means to the ends of the donor class.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > But rather than splitting up the populace in increasingly finer-grained ways, why don't we just do something to address the poverty in our society? Because the actual specific dynamics are different for different parts of society; when you try to address the problem without regard to those differences, which tend to be very closely tied to identity because they are one of the things that forges shared identities, you end up addressing the broad problem in the way which address the way that problem manifests in the most dominant group primarily. > I assume "the squad" knows how to use political power as well as Manchin, Better, probably. > but the fact that they don't Uh, they do. What they don't do is have the position Manchin (or Sinema) does by virtue of the 50-50 balance in the Senate, and the reliable support of Republicans when they oppose the rest of the Democratic Party.

Kye 5y ago

Funny thing: the DNC agrees with you, at least right up until an identity has sufficient popular support. I already expounded way more than was worth the effort on here recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29981488 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29981488 As someone on the boot-end of people who chant "no politics maaaaan, just vibin', peace and love with no ideology" to distract from the boot, I vehemently disagree.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> Identity is a wedge used to split class solidarity (but note the terrific solidarity of the elite class). It's not, inherently, though it can be used that way, which is the essence of bourgeois identity politics, which is a distinct subset of identity politics. > The best improvements for everyone will come from policies which ignore identity and materially improve the lives of people. Identity is often intimately tied to distinct material circumstances; policies that “ignore identity and materially improves the loves of people”, without exception, ignore the distinct material circumstances of identifiable groups of people while improving the material circumstances of other groups of people, and invariably do so in ways which favor the groups most privileged by visibility in the status quo. > The Democratic party has held the belief that demographics will keep them in power without having to actually address economic and legal inequalities That's very much not true of either of the major factions of the Democratic Party. The dominant neoliberal centrist faction actively doesn't want to deal with the economic inequalities more than is necessary to smooth out social disruptions interfering with corporate capitalist profit making (though it does want to deal with legal inequalities that impede efficient exploitation of human potential by capital), to the point of being willing to have the party lose power rather than doing more than is necessary to that end, whereas the progressive populist wing actively wants to deal with the problems. And neither faction is so ignorant of the political realities of the US system to expect that the party is secure in it's (extremely narrow) federal legislative majority or control of the White House.

nescioquid 5y ago
> Identity is often intimately tied to distinct material circumstances Not so fast. Au courant are stories around data disaggregation, highlighting that Asian Americans in NYC have the highest poverty rate (also noted is the way this runs counter to popular perceptions). But rather than splitting up the populace in increasingly finer-grained ways, why don't we just do something to address the poverty in our society? To wit, yes we agree the DNC does want to do anything about poverty or economic inequalities in general. They are happy to stage photo ops while draped in kente cloth but they will never do anything to improve the material circumstances of the lower classes. > The Democratic party has held the belief that demographics will keep them in power without having to actually address economic and legal inequalities >> That's very much not true of either of the major factions of the Democratic Party. You mean the neoliberal and conservative wings of the Democratic party? I assume "the squad" knows how to use political power as well as Manchin, but the fact that they don't indicates they, too, simply use identity as a means to the ends of the donor class.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > But rather than splitting up the populace in increasingly finer-grained ways, why don't we just do something to address the poverty in our society? Because the actual specific dynamics are different for different parts of society; when you try to address the problem without regard to those differences, which tend to be very closely tied to identity because they are one of the things that forges shared identities, you end up addressing the broad problem in the way which address the way that problem manifests in the most dominant group primarily. > I assume "the squad" knows how to use political power as well as Manchin, Better, probably. > but the fact that they don't Uh, they do. What they don't do is have the position Manchin (or Sinema) does by virtue of the 50-50 balance in the Senate, and the reliable support of Republicans when they oppose the rest of the Democratic Party.