PGT: President-Elect Donald J Trump

[oilyfan]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

So Chris Christie prosecuted Ivanka Trumps husband, Jared Kushner years ago for illegal campaign contributions, tax evasion and witness tampering. He spent a year in prison.
Jared is a very influential part of Donnys team.
that's what happened to Chris Christie.

No he did not. He prosecuted Jared Kushners father.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Yeah but it's not like they just figured that out this week. The timing of his sudden fall from grace is pretty weird. If that was the problem why'd they make him head of transition to begin with?

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yeah but it's not like they just figured that out this week. The timing of his sudden fall from grace is pretty weird. If that was the problem why'd they make him head of transition to begin with?

To humiliate him?

[sworkhard]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I'm not sure I'm a huge fan of being told identity politics are the cause of division.

Correct me if I'm wrong, anybody, but I'm pretty sure discrimination did that.

It's going to blow people's minds when identity politics disappear and there is zero impact on the issues they're blaming it for. Don't worry though, we can focus more on class warfare!

How do you propose to separate discrimination from identity politics? By and large they are one and the same. Identity politics requires discriminating against groups that don't share that identity (for better or worse) to mean anything at all. Identity politics legitimizes discrimination.

Can you provide even one example of where identity politics where the identity is race, religion, or gender has ever reduced polarization and moved groups closer together?

Sure, there are other identities that can move very polarized groups of people together, like national identity during times of war, but I've never seen policy based on the above criteria do so, except in reaction to it.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by oilyfan

No he did not. He prosecuted Jared Kushners father.

Yeah, I somehow forgot to type that part, but then edited it.

[CaramonLS]

Are whites allowed to practice identity politics without being labelled as racist? Is it ever justified? Or can it only be applied to minorities?

If I say lived in Brampton (where I would be a minority), would I be allowed to tell someone from India that wearing "my" clothing is cultural appropriation?

What exactly are the rules of this game?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by sworkhard

How do you propose to separate discrimination from identity politics? By and large they are one and the same. Identity politics requires discriminating against groups that don't share that identity (for better or worse) to mean anything at all. Identity politics legitimizes discrimination.

Can you provide even one example of where identity politics where the identity is race, religion, or gender has ever reduced polarization and moved groups closer together?

Sure, there are other identities that can move very polarized groups of people together, like nationalism during times of war, but I've never seen policy based on the above criteria do so, except in reaction to it.

Uh, compare the division between men/women, black/white, and gay/straight now to 100 years ago.

They've come significantly closer. I don't know if the people accusing IP as causing the division understand just how FAR apart things were before they became relevant.

Discrimination and IP aren't the same, I think you'd be served well researching more about IP. Here's a bit from Wikipedia to get you going:

The term identity politics has been used in political and academic discourse since the 1970s.[3] One aim of identity politics has been for those feeling oppressed to articulate their felt oppression in terms of their own experience by a process of consciousness-raising.

Tell me how that's the same as discrimination to you. Tell me how it's not simply the response to racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of hate that have led to political oppression. Identity politics requires discrimination? That is completely false, and frankly kind of funny for anyone to actually believe.

If I believe the right to gay marriage is important, please explain how I'm discriminating against someone else. Anyone.

Getting rid of IP is not getting rid of discrimination. That's like saying you're going to stop taking Tylenol to make your headaches go away.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Are whites allowed to practice identity politics without being labelled as racist? Is it ever justified? Or can it only be applied to minorities?

Could you please outline what whites would like to practice and not have a fear of being labelled racist? If its regarding the economy, I doubt that this is exclusively the domain of white people in rural areas. My understanding of minority issues is that they are wanting to be considered equal as a person when compared to white people.

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

If I say lived in Brampton (where I would be a minority), would I be allowed to tell someone from India that wearing "my" clothing is cultural appropriation?

Im confused by this and hope you shed some light on it. Are Indian people in Brampton going to work in dress shirts, ties, and office appropriate skirts rather than a Nehru jacket or Saris? Is it more to do with having appropriate work attire rather than being culturally appropriate? There are tons of Indian weddings where white people have attended wearing Saris and no one would say they're culturally appropriating India. Granted, these are some of my own examples, but if you could highlight some of your own, then we can carry that discussion further.

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

What exactly are the rules of this game?

You do realize that this is not a game for some people in America right?

[Senator Clay Davis]

You know it seems the media is really ignoring how horrifying the Trump team looks like right now to instead focus on how dysfunctional it appears to be. Take Frank Gaffney, a top national security adviser on Trump's transition team. He doesn't seem all that ####ed up does he?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Uh, compare the division between men/women, black/white, and gay/straight now to 100 years ago.

Cliff's argument (and mine) is that this is the result of equal rights at the individual level, not the group level. In other words, the division between black and white is much less than it was 100 years ago more thanks to the philosophy of Martin Luther King than to the tactics of the Black Panthers.

If I believe the right to gay marriage is important, please explain how I'm discriminating against someone else. Anyone.

This is a straw man. No one would argue that "if you believe the right to gay marriage is important, you're discriminating against straights (or anyone else for that matter)". The argument is that gay marriage is important because there's no reason to deny people happiness on the basis of their sexual orientation, and allowing people to marry who they love causes no harm to anyone, nor does it restrict their freedoms. The people who argue that it restricts their "religious freedom" are essentially attempting to enforce their own religious values onto people who don't want to subscribe to them, which is an anti-liberal view, in the classical sense.

Getting rid of IP is not getting rid of discrimination. That's like saying you're going to stop taking Tylenol to make your headaches go away.

Getting rid of identity politics won't get rid of discrimination, again this is something that no one is arguing. What is being argued is that the best way to combat discrimination is the classical liberal model, and that identity politics only serves to create new divisions, entrench existing ones and drive people further to extremes. It's a bad solution to discrimination.

In other words, our view is that you're not taking tylenol to get rid of your headache, you're eating broken glass.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Izzle

There are tons of Indian weddings where white people have attended wearing Saris and no one would say they're culturally appropriating India.

Ah, yes there is. There is a lot of people on the internet who get 'outraged' with this type of stuff.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Ah, yes there is. There is a lot of people on the internet who get 'outraged' with this type of stuff.

I see. Like I originally said, these are some quick examples that I thought of myself. I would like to see who were 'outraged' with this type of stuff? I am trying to go out of my bubble here.

ETA: We should probably take this to PM as this could be construed as off-topic.

[RyZ]

Heres a link to a story about a Yoga Class being shut down in Ottawa due to "cultural appropriation"

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...vity-1.3330441

No shortage of this type of stuff all over the internet. Punch "cultural appropriation" into Google under the NEWS tab and weep. (Or smile & nod if you are from the far left).

[Senator Clay Davis]

Yeah I think it's about time for an ongoing Identity Politics/Cultural Appropriation thread. We have the apocalypse to talk about in this thread, don't derail it with other things.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Izzle

Im confused by this and hope you shed some light on it. Are Indian people in Brampton going to work in dress shirts, ties, and office appropriate skirts rather than a Nehru jacket or Saris? Is it more to do with having appropriate work attire rather than being culturally appropriate? There are tons of Indian weddings where white people have attended wearing Saris and no one would say they're culturally appropriating India. Granted, these are some of my own examples, but if you could highlight some of your own, then we can carry that discussion further.

http://ca.complex.com/style/2013/08/...shouldnt-wear/

Dozens of examples like this.

[sworkhard]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Uh, compare the division between men/women, black/white, and gay/straight now to 100 years ago.

They've come significantly closer. I don't know if the people accusing IP as causing the division understand just how FAR apart things were before they became relevant.

Discrimination and IP aren't the same, I think you'd be served well researching more about IP. Here's a bit from Wikipedia to get you going:

True, they aren't the same thing. IP legitimizes discrimination.

I think you'd be well served by researching more about discrimination. Here's a link to the dictionary to get you going:
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/discrimination

These improvements were not made on the basis of IP by race, gender, etc. They were made with appeals to fairness, equality, etc; namely liberal principles widely held in society. This is a form of IP, but not of the form of which you speak.

Tell me how that's the same as discrimination to you. Tell me how it's not simply the response to racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of hate that have led to political oppression. Identity politics requires discrimination? That is completely false, and frankly kind of funny for anyone to actually believe.

If I believe the right to gay marriage is important, please explain how I'm discriminating against someone else. Anyone.

Getting rid of IP is not getting rid of discrimination. That's like saying you're going to stop taking Tylenol to make your headaches go away.

It is a form of discrimination by definition (not just to me). Positive discrimination is still discrimination that is negative for someone else. The effects may not be proportional on the two groups, but the strength of the effect has nothing to do with if something is discriminatory. Indeed, those discriminated against may not even notice, but it is still discrimination.

Not all discrimination is bad either. Discriminating against the KKK is fine by me. However, discriminating against the KKK because they are KKK is not fine with me; rather I'm fine with discriminating against them (for example, providing more security in neighborhoods nearby common locations of KKK meetings) because they oppose classic liberal principles, including those above. The KKK is using Identity Politics to discriminate against all those who are not white. Identity politics is more than just a part of left wing thought. The term for it is relatively new, but it's been around far longer than the term.

And your right, getting rid of it won't get rid of discrimination. That's never been the argument. You still need to fight discrimination, but doing so on the principles of fairness and individual liberty has and will probably continue to make far greater strides in reducing discrimination than IP.

IP, especially religious IP, has been used to promote racism, sexism, etc far longer than it's been used to oppose it.

Edit:
I don't think eliminating all IP should be the goal. I don't think that would be possible. Everyone wants to belong to a group. I just think the identities we use to belong to these groups around should be based on shared principles and shared experiences rather than irrelevant physical traits.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Yeah I think it's about time for an ongoing Identity Politics/Cultural Appropriation thread. We have the apocalypse to talk about in this thread, don't derail it with other things.

It was a huge part of Trump getting elected.

[ernie]

I don't know what to think about cultural appropriation complaints. Sometimes I think things are done in bad taste and yes it's offensive. Other times I can't screw my head around why it's offensive. Culture is to be shared and to me it's a question of respect. If what you are doing is truly disrespectful then stop (wearing a traditional dress when you haven't gone through an appropriate ceremony etc).

The link above...a Kimono? Seriously? I've been to Japan enough to know that they do not take the slightest offense to someone wearing a kimono that isn't asian. Now they take offense if because you see a Geisha or someone wearing a kimono that you think they are a prostitute. But they actually encourage you to wear a kimono if you want to (heck some traditional japanese restaurants will give you one to change into to dine there). But respect the rules of the kimono and the culture. Work to get it right. Don't just throw one on that is appropriate for unmarried under 20 when you are 40 etc.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by sworkhard

However, discriminating against the KKK because they are KKK is not fine with me; rather I'm fine with discriminating against them because they oppose classic liberal principles, including those above.

'Discriminating' against the KKK for any reason is fine with me...

[PepsiFree]

I think the problem is there are people ignoring the good identity politics have achieved and focusing only on the distortion of those politics by hate groups.

And there are people like me who are ignoring the distortion of those politics by hate groups and focusing only on the good identity politics have achieved.

I suppose it's important to remember that maybe they aren't inherently good or bad, but the good should be celebrated (and not lumped in with the bad) and the bad should be condemned (and not lumped in with the good).

Regardless, you can't separate history into segments that support only your argument, this is true. I don't believe that the use of "identity politics" by the alt-right is in the true spirit of equal rights and the fight against oppression... nor is the use by the extreme left. I think it still has value.

All I can say is that if you think IP is just a bunch of people saying "cultural appropriation! Safe spaces! White privilege!" then you should probably read up. Nobody is served well by sitting in an uniformed bubble.