3 ms·

>Ultimately identity should be empowering not oppressive. I agree completely. Are there any examples of that though, where it is empowering? Talking about gov

>Ultimately identity should be empowering not oppressive. I agree completely. Are there any examples of that though, where it is empowering? Talking about government (or any bureaucracy) there is no chance of empowerment, at least from the administrative arm. Software is written by lowest bidders for the convenience of administrators, to help them treat people like cattle. This can only change when we complain to real politicians who could potentially advocate for empowerment. As long as bureaucrats are in charge, it only gets worse.

dmbche 3y ago
Without identity posession is impossible - i.e. tying your name to contracts is impossible, thus owning objects or property becomes difficult. This is between individuals, but enforced by governement. It becomes oppressive when you do not consent to giving your identity but it is taken and possibly used against you i.e. logging what you do online, having cctv video taken of you without consent - all things that can be used against you without explicit consent
- cgio 3y ago
  The acceptance of a higher power that enforces contracts is not empowering. It is rational but still oppressive even if one argues that it is chosen rather than merely accepted.
  - orlp 3y ago
    It IS empowering. The default state of being is that nothing is enforced besides what you can personally enforce. As a regular person this means you have no power, no property, no rights, nothing in the face of someone with a bigger stick. The rule of law empowers all but the absolute strongest to also own property and gather resources while protecting them from arbitrary violence.
    - cgio 3y ago
      We merely replaced bigger sticks with bigger balances because physical strength is not the end all for our society. There is nothing empowering in the arrangement. Supposedly the purpose is to limit power to ensure a more level playing field, but it does not work that way in the end anyway.
GuB-42 3y ago
It is two sides of the same coin. Take science for example. Identity is empowering because you can say, "look, I synthetized unobtainium, my name is on the paper", which shows your value as a scientist and so you will be respected and trusted with important experiments. It is also oppressive because if you don't have your name on a paper, you will be considered a worthless scientist. If you have something attached to your name that gives you some power, we can also say that not having that something takes that power away from you. Or its counterpart: if something attached to your name causes you to be oppressed, not having that something empowers you.
perryizgr8 3y ago
> Are there any examples of that though, where it is empowering? In most airports of the world, a US passport is quite an empowering identity.

dmbche 3y ago

Without identity posession is impossible - i.e. tying your name to contracts is impossible, thus owning objects or property becomes difficult. This is between individuals, but enforced by governement. It becomes oppressive when you do not consent to giving your identity but it is taken and possibly used against you i.e. logging what you do online, having cctv video taken of you without consent - all things that can be used against you without explicit consent

cgio 3y ago
The acceptance of a higher power that enforces contracts is not empowering. It is rational but still oppressive even if one argues that it is chosen rather than merely accepted.
- orlp 3y ago
  It IS empowering. The default state of being is that nothing is enforced besides what you can personally enforce. As a regular person this means you have no power, no property, no rights, nothing in the face of someone with a bigger stick. The rule of law empowers all but the absolute strongest to also own property and gather resources while protecting them from arbitrary violence.
  - cgio 3y ago
    We merely replaced bigger sticks with bigger balances because physical strength is not the end all for our society. There is nothing empowering in the arrangement. Supposedly the purpose is to limit power to ensure a more level playing field, but it does not work that way in the end anyway.

GuB-42 3y ago

It is two sides of the same coin. Take science for example. Identity is empowering because you can say, "look, I synthetized unobtainium, my name is on the paper", which shows your value as a scientist and so you will be respected and trusted with important experiments. It is also oppressive because if you don't have your name on a paper, you will be considered a worthless scientist. If you have something attached to your name that gives you some power, we can also say that not having that something takes that power away from you. Or its counterpart: if something attached to your name causes you to be oppressed, not having that something empowers you.

perryizgr8 3y ago

> Are there any examples of that though, where it is empowering? In most airports of the world, a US passport is quite an empowering identity.