Indentity Pol

Hey guys are they right ? I am the evil man for disliking identity politics ? i feel like if the class struggle ends there would be no racism or other types of opressions. What i am trying to say other opressions are caused by capitalism.

Other urls found in this thread:

thecharnelhouse.org/2017/08/28/american-thought-from-theoretical-barbarism-to-intellectual-decadence/#more-44572
thenorthstar.info/?p=11299
thenorthstar.info/?p=11411
thenorthstar.info/?p=11425
theanarchistlibrary.org/library/lupus-dragonowl-against-identity-politics
leninology.co.uk/2011/11/cultural-materialism-and-identity.html?m=1
marxists.org/subject/china/peking-review/1966/PR1966-33h.htm
hitomi.la/galleries/322720.html
youtube.com/watch?v=iFPWwx96Kew
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

As long as you realize that anti-idpol means being universalist and not embracing right-wing idpol or not being against racism, sexism etc. (the average idpoler can probably mention atleast 20 -isms)

Essential reading:

thecharnelhouse.org/2017/08/28/american-thought-from-theoretical-barbarism-to-intellectual-decadence/#more-44572

thenorthstar.info/?p=11299

thenorthstar.info/?p=11411

...

thenorthstar.info/?p=11425


theanarchistlibrary.org/library/lupus-dragonowl-against-identity-politics


leninology.co.uk/2011/11/cultural-materialism-and-identity.html?m=1


tl;dr it's inherently reactionary

Liberal idpol is trash, and liberals will get the bullet too.

marxists.org/subject/china/peking-review/1966/PR1966-33h.htm

Leftypol BTFO'd forever

When are you going to wake up and realize all far leftists movements are jewish controlled and deeply triggering and problematic that are simply concerned with "righting the wrongs" of European imperialism?

They don't want to destroy capitalism they simple want to destroy white people and our hegemony.(triggered)

lol triggered

"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles"
t. Brocialist in Chief.

Most members of the ultra-gauche I know of are French.

A lot of the ultra literature I've read is amoral and most of the time doesn't specifically concern itself with European imperialism, but rather exploitation and alienation in general.

It's funny you mention that. Because it was those based Nazis that ended up being the final nail in the coffin of European hegemony (outside the USSR), and it was they who slaughtered millions of white Europeans.

Here's what idpols do wrong.

They think language is a battle for validation and visibility. What matters to them is who speaks and who is silenced, who is validated and who is not. They don't care about the truth, empirical validity, conceptual usefulness, logical consistency, in short, any of the intellectual attributes of an analysis.

Exactly the same way they care how many black women are in a film, not how good the film is.

Exactly the same way they care how politically correct a game is, not how good the gameplay is.

Hence the argument that "class reductionism" is wrong because it "centers class" at the expense of other oppressions.

What really matters is not whether Marxism or anarchism "centers class". What really matters is whether the Marxist or anarchist analysis of the source and structure of oppression - or the idpol analysis - is empirically accurate, analytically useful, and logically consistent.

Marxism is a useful analysis because it is a *general* theory of the structure of oppression, not simply a set of complaints from working-class people about their own marginality. 'Patriarchy', 'white supremacy', 'heteronormativity' and the other systems alleged by idpols don't have the same kind of ontological status that capitalism had for Marx. On the whole, they are treated in idpol as cultural systems based on linguistic categories and resultant social valuations. The root ontology is Derridean or Lacanian. They believe that real social oppressions result from co-constituted self-and-other identities which are constructed in and through language.

The grammar through which idpol connects the different kinds of oppression is Derridean anti-binary theory. The grammar through which Marxism connects the different kinds of oppression is structural analysis of everyday life under capitalism. The main dispute is about which grammar is the better general theory - *not* about whether class or gender or race should be "centered". Marxism is not simply idpol with class at the center. Anarchism is not simply idpol with the state or authority at the center. 1970s idpol, which keeps social structures at the center of its analysis, is very different - and more radical - compared to today's idpol.

continued

Marxism maintains that everyone is alienated from their basic humanity, or creative capacity, by capitalism. This is very different from the idpol idea that oppressed groups are constructed as inferior so that muh privileged groups can feel they're good, secure, etc by comparison.

I find it more plausible that the organisation of work, production, distribution/circulation, reproduction and consumption - activities which take up most of the time and energy of most people - is at the root of oppression. Even if someone thinks that race or gender or disability or sexuality is more important to their experience and identity and political struggles than class, it is still demonstrable that these oppressions are effects of capitalism and its imperative to accumulate profits. Traditional gender roles and heteronormativity stem from the exploitation of unremunerated reproductive labour, as well as secondary labour markets. The repression of non-procreative sexual desire is tied-up with the libidinal economy of capitalism, which is quite afraid of non-commodified passions. 'Race' is connected to secondary labour markets and colonialism as a spatial fix. The global South is poor because it is a source of low-value-added primary commodities, and also because capitalism uses subsistence and petty commodity economies to underpin sub-reproduction wages. Disability usually denotes features which inhibit the exploitation of someone's labour. The confinement or exclusion of people with disabilities and mental illnesses can be historically traced to the early years of factory labour.

Just as they are constructed in these social ways, so they can be reconfigured, even within capitalism. Hence, idpol often involves the creation of a comprador intellectual class which 'represents' various excluded groups in terms of its own, elite concerns and experiences. A black woman intellectual speaking 'as' a black woman (hence, by implication, 'for' the category of black women) about her own experience of marginality in 'the academy' is actually rather useful for global capitalism. She helps to capture the struggles of black women, most of whom are working-class or poor, within a frame focused on representation - how many women in movies, how many women in academia, renaming Columbus Day, telling white people not to wear dreadlocks - and not on the sources of poverty and suffering which affect the majority of black women. cf. Arif Dirlik on postcolonial theory. Postcolonial theorists are elite middle-class intellectuals connected to the bourgeoisie's incorporation of a middle-class elite in the former colonies. They create a self-enclosed theoretical universe which largely ignores the real conditions of most of the 'subaltern' poor, and which, rather, foregrounds their own elite position as standing for the 'subaltern' as such. They also work to undermine Marxism within academia and social movements.

Also, Marxism and anarchism tend to have disinhibitory psychological theories. They believe in disalienation, de-repression. They aren't moralities. Idpol replicates the inhibition-based psychology promoted by the (white male) bourgeoisie. It's a morality. People aren't supposed to follow their inclinations and affinities. They're supposed to submit to "leadership" by idpols with the correct positionalities, to suppress inclinations which stem from "privilege", and to feel constantly ashamed, humiliated and guilty (if they're muh privileged) or resentful and hypersensitive (if they're oppressed).

i loev you user

idpol is a spook

...

Comrade I fully agree, but I do not think denunciation is the way forward. Communism must be shown to advance each particular cause more effectively than any other strategy, and those partisans must be convinced themselves. If they are deluded at the moment, it is nothing new. Communists faced the same problem in 1914. In short, we will not win the masses by telling them to read theory, but by honing our own skills and action in order to push forward.

I think that one good way to do this at the moment is not to deny that there is a point to idpol. There is no use waving away the concerns of potential comrades. What is wrong with us that we are unable to convince them of the obvious superiority of communism? Dialectics means dialog, and to Aristotle meant arguing from agreed upon premises. Where can we catch them believing something that leads them to communism? What are the unprecedented actions we can take that will make it obvious that private property is at the core of the social issues?

Perhaps focusing on private property instead of class would help, since it is not one idpol against another (who is the true working class when even Marx argues that capitalists will labor more and more?), but rather a focus on the real driver, the objects. Maybe if we can get people to stop looking at their skin for just a moment and consider the technological marvels we are making, they will understand the necessity of finding out how to work together to harness it instead of opportunistically jockeying for position using the language of social justice. Don't forget anti-sjwism is now just as large of an industry if not more so- and on the radical left, hateporn over idpol takes the place of concrete strategy and tactics just as antisemitism does for our unfortunate Nazi brothers.

If you are so sure of the superiority of your ideas, as I am, then let us work to perfect them and the actions which must flow from them, and not hate our misguided future comrades because they choose to dwell on irrelevancies.

Capitalism is certainly a large cause of different types of oppression beyond just class oppression (sexist, transphobic, etc.). However, we could imagine a situation where cultural beliefs or views that maintain transphobic, sexist, racist, etc. oppression still exist in a Socialist or Communist society. There are other causes for these beliefs or behaviors outside of just Capitalism or the state.

Woah Ritsu is hot!

There will always be oppressions, oppressions are a necessity to leftist ideology. The goal is not for them to end but to find more of them, hence why the more the left get what it wants, the harder they cry out in pain, they're fundamentally sado-masochistic; perfect example of this being the orgasmic act of slam poetry.

If I'm somehow wrong, explain to me how a world without any oppression at all would look like, or a life without oppression for that matter.

hitomi.la/galleries/322720.html
Or go to tsumino.com and search the title for ch 1 in English. It looks like the other chapters haven't been translated though. Be careful though…it's for adlut only.

Are you a postmodernist and/or poststructuralist?

Not by identification, but I do find myself agreeing with the more self-aware postmodernists. How so?

I don't know much about either of those schools of thought, only what I've heard by reputation. All I know is that your writing was rather poetic and a little hard for me to understand, so I hazarded a guess that you might be a poststruc or postmod.

Odd, pomo's tend to write in the style of technical manuals. To them the world is a dungeon in which everything gains its form by the boot that forever stamps on the human face, hence they can only view it as machinal, as instrumental (marxists are guilty of this too, difference being that they also believe in redemption, which allows heroism, however shallow and infantile this may be). This lack of authenticity leaves little room for poetry, the exception being slam poetry, which isn't so much poetry as morally sanctioned orgasm, like how catholics are only allowed orgasm for pro-creation, pomo leftists are only allowed orgasm as reaction to castration. Look at this video to get my meaning; youtube.com/watch?v=iFPWwx96Kew

Or as they're properly known, communism and anarchism.

The way you write is amazing

...

That's the most undialectical "meme" I have ever seen.