3 ms·

> so do you think race has a higher material impact on you than foreign policy, or education policy? Probably so. At least more day-to-day. At the extremes I

> so do you think race has a higher material impact on you than foreign policy, or education policy? Probably so. At least more day-to-day. At the extremes I imagine foreign policy could be huge (if we go to war with China, for example), but even the war with Ukraine/Russia has had little impact on my day-to-day life (that I've noticed). > I'm genuinely curious whether you think a white person in your place would not have had most of the same negative experiences Probably not. And to be clear, these aren't small day to day interactions. But major negative interactions I've had in my life. From being put up for adoption because my birth-moms family didn't want her to have a black child (I have this directly from my birth grandmother), to being picked on as the only black kid in my class, to having my fiancée say that her family won't come to our wedding due to race (never got married, so won't know if they'd follow through or not -- but it put an extra strain on the relationship that didn't help). And these are selected examples where race was explicitly noted as the reason. There's also a bunch where race wasn't noted, but I have strong suspicions. And while this makes me cautious, it doesn't make me disengage because most day-to-day interactions with people are tend toward quite positive. > Because human beings are tribal and love defining in-groups for solidarity and blaming out-groups for their problems, justified or not. These tribes are social constructs, as it applies to identity politics. But you're ignoring the fact that real politics have been used against the out-groups. Whether it was slavery, internment camps, home loans, segregation, medical care, etc... Sure you can say, "their just constructed tribes", but when one tribe has used this construct to great advantage -- it won't go unnoticed. And I'm unclear if you're saying it should be ignored or that the advantage gained doesn't exist.

naasking 3y ago
> Probably so. At least more day-to-day. What's an example of a race-based policy that has been or you think can be realistically enacted that has had or should/will have material benefits? > From being put up for adoption because my birth-moms family didn't want her to have a black child (I have this directly from my birth grandmother), to being picked on as the only black kid in my class, to having my fiancée say that her family won't come to our wedding due to race (never got married, so won't know if they'd follow through or not -- but it put an extra strain on the relationship that didn't help). That all sucks and I don't at all doubt that such people still exist, but I'm confused how you think race-based politics would help. To recap, you said that race issues are #2 in your political priorities after material/economic issues, ostensibly because of experiences like this, so what sort of municipal, state or federal policies or laws could be enacted that would help? > But you're ignoring the fact that real politics have been used against the out-groups. If identity politics have been used against out-groups, I'm skeptical that you can fix it by doubling down on identity politics in some "opposite" direction. > And I'm unclear if you're saying it should be ignored or that the advantage gained doesn't exist. Depends what you mean by "ignored", but to be clear I've been saying a few things: 1. identity politics is a pseudo-zero sum game and divides people who should unite against the people with the actual power. 2. class politics is materially more important than identity politics. 3. groups that have been disproportionately disadvantaged by identity politics, as you point out, are also disproportionately advantaged by a focus on class politics, and this has been born out by studies on the economic impacts of class-focused policies vs. identity-focused policies. You don't have to ignore history to ally with someone against a common foe.
- kenjackson 3y ago
  > What's an example of a race-based policy that has been or you think can be realistically enacted that has had or should/will have material benefits? The Equal Employment Opportunity Act is an example. Affirmative Action is another example that I have mixed feelings on, but an example nevertheless. Other examples include things like access to voting, typically at a state level. > but I'm confused how you think race-based politics would help. Those were personal interactions meant to show where the underpinnings for where racial identity comes from. I don't think there's a policy that would fix those things. > If identity politics have been used against out-groups, I'm skeptical that you can fix it by doubling down on identity politics in some "opposite" direction. It's been the only thing that has worked so far. Slavery didn't stop because people suddenly forgot about identity. But rather because there were people who fought against it. The "opposite direction" doesn't mean being "equally racist", but rather not being racist AND mitigating against leverage created by past racism. > groups that have been disproportionately disadvantaged by identity politics, as you point out, are also disproportionately advantaged by a focus on class politics, The problem is that once this association is known the in-group fights these class policies too, even if it would've helped them. Aka, Drained Pool Politics. Welfare is a common example of this. Or even healthcare reform. Public school funding another. And if you're not aware of the underlying reason for this it'll be exceptionally frustrating because it will seem like they're going against their own interest.

naasking 3y ago

> Probably so. At least more day-to-day. What's an example of a race-based policy that has been or you think can be realistically enacted that has had or should/will have material benefits? > From being put up for adoption because my birth-moms family didn't want her to have a black child (I have this directly from my birth grandmother), to being picked on as the only black kid in my class, to having my fiancée say that her family won't come to our wedding due to race (never got married, so won't know if they'd follow through or not -- but it put an extra strain on the relationship that didn't help). That all sucks and I don't at all doubt that such people still exist, but I'm confused how you think race-based politics would help. To recap, you said that race issues are #2 in your political priorities after material/economic issues, ostensibly because of experiences like this, so what sort of municipal, state or federal policies or laws could be enacted that would help? > But you're ignoring the fact that real politics have been used against the out-groups. If identity politics have been used against out-groups, I'm skeptical that you can fix it by doubling down on identity politics in some "opposite" direction. > And I'm unclear if you're saying it should be ignored or that the advantage gained doesn't exist. Depends what you mean by "ignored", but to be clear I've been saying a few things: 1. identity politics is a pseudo-zero sum game and divides people who should unite against the people with the actual power. 2. class politics is materially more important than identity politics. 3. groups that have been disproportionately disadvantaged by identity politics, as you point out, are also disproportionately advantaged by a focus on class politics, and this has been born out by studies on the economic impacts of class-focused policies vs. identity-focused policies. You don't have to ignore history to ally with someone against a common foe.

kenjackson 3y ago
> What's an example of a race-based policy that has been or you think can be realistically enacted that has had or should/will have material benefits? The Equal Employment Opportunity Act is an example. Affirmative Action is another example that I have mixed feelings on, but an example nevertheless. Other examples include things like access to voting, typically at a state level. > but I'm confused how you think race-based politics would help. Those were personal interactions meant to show where the underpinnings for where racial identity comes from. I don't think there's a policy that would fix those things. > If identity politics have been used against out-groups, I'm skeptical that you can fix it by doubling down on identity politics in some "opposite" direction. It's been the only thing that has worked so far. Slavery didn't stop because people suddenly forgot about identity. But rather because there were people who fought against it. The "opposite direction" doesn't mean being "equally racist", but rather not being racist AND mitigating against leverage created by past racism. > groups that have been disproportionately disadvantaged by identity politics, as you point out, are also disproportionately advantaged by a focus on class politics, The problem is that once this association is known the in-group fights these class policies too, even if it would've helped them. Aka, Drained Pool Politics. Welfare is a common example of this. Or even healthcare reform. Public school funding another. And if you're not aware of the underlying reason for this it'll be exceptionally frustrating because it will seem like they're going against their own interest.