Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
Well there we have it. From that statement, along with previous positions and statements, I KNOW you don't understand identity politics, and I can comfortably assume Cliff doesn't either.
Do you really think BLM is a rage against sameness? "Hey, we're DIFFERENT, notice our differences and shut up!" Do you think gay rights marches and activism exists because we're just treated too darn the same and want to be seen as different? If you truly believe that the point of identity politics is to highlight differences and silence other groups, you're so far past the point that I have to doubt the relevance of anything you have to say on the matter.
These movements exist as a response to being seen as different and lesser, and their goal is to be seen as the same and equal. How you can think otherwise is almost surreal to me. And don't point to a bad apple, we're talking identity politics as a whole.
I hope you realise how insultingly wrong it is for you to tell me that my desire to have the same freedom and respect as anyone else is akin to trying to shut people up because I'm a special snowflake.
I'm calling you out on your last statement. We'll never agree. Have your vibrant marketplace of ideas where hate is validated, it doesn't sound great to me.
|
Damn, that's an extreme reaction.
I understand that the
intent is equality. I've no difficulty understanding the
motivation behind people behaving this way, and the end result they want to achieve. However, the
method is to divide people into categories based on identity (race, gender, sexual orientation), and suggest that people are inherently different solely by virtue of their membership in a particular category. Their views on certain issues are inherently more valid or credible, and as a corollary, other peoples' views are less credible because of their membership in a
different category (usually on the basis of perceived or actual power imbalances). For example, "It's easy for you to take that position; you're not a X", where X is a disadvantaged group. That's the divisive aspect of identity politics that I object to - both in principle, and from the pragmatic perspective that I think it just backfires and creates resentment and balkanized groups that don't talk to each other.
I really think you need to stop putting the pedal on the floor and jumping right to "YOU CLEARLY DON'T UNDERSTAND ANYTHING I'M CALLING YOU OUT YOUR PERSPECTIVE IS INSULTING WE'RE DONE TALKING", after giving the least charitable interpretation possible to a position of political philosophy. I wasn't insulting you, I wasn't being sarcastic or patronizing or trolling you. I could maybe understand this reaction if I'd done that; some people on here do nothing but that, maybe I do it sometimes, but I wasn't. I was just disagreeing with you, respectfully. Calm down a bit.
I mean I could have had a similar reaction to your perspective that tribalism is a force for good, but I'm more interested in why you think that, even though I'm pretty certain I'm going to totally disagree with you about it.