Why do so many of you buy into idpol?

None of you understand what identity politics means.

...

Making all political discussions about how much you hate trans people is idpol, yes. The only anti-idpol option is to ignore such discussions as the distractions they are

Trying to stop people from doing things, i.e. infringing on their "rights" because of their identity is idpol. Defending them against it is anti-idpol. Bringing up the issue when it's not relevant is idpol. The non-idpol response is to say "Fuck you, everyone can have their rights. People telling you LGBTs are the bad guys are scapegoating them to distract us all from capitalism. You anti-LGBTs are distracted by giving you a false enemy. Us pro-LGBTs are distracted by giving us a false enemy (you). The real enemy we all share is capitalism."

...

Yes, it's just that you're on the opposing idpol team

That is an incredibly trash definition of idpol.

What's your definition then, because for all the talk about it I see very little defining what the boundaries are supposed to be.

Identity politics is a subset of politics that is concerned with the interactions of various socially defined identities with one another. That's really all it is, but that should be read carefully.

Liberal identity politics is effectively sterile and neutered, wherein they presuppose such an identity exists and then analyzes its own relations to other identities and assumes that both material and ideal components of an identity are simply part of the identity.
A proper socialist identity politics would examine the roots for such an identity existing in the first place, and then understanding that the relation of the roots of the identity define the roots of the relation of the identity to the other identities.

The problem with liberal identity politics is that it's very much a surface level analysis and argument. They want to change the identity itself directly.

Traps are cool.

Identity politics is totally legitimate from an anti-capitalist perspective. However, it's also legitimate from a liberal perspective (which I don't subscribe to), so a line must be drawn between the two.

I don't "buy into" it, it's there, it exists. The problem is that liberals don't understand that economy is the be-all and end-all. I'm glad to live in a country where organized identity politics advocates are relatively well integrated into an anti-capitalist framework.

Yawn.

All politics are identity politics.

So when a local community decides to build a solar farm, that's idpol?

What does local community mean?

Only white people are concerned with the environment in a meaningful way, it's really the last refuge of politics populated exclusively by whites so yes it is implicitly idpol.

Are you kidding me?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China

Had to do a double take on this one. Jesus christ the sheer ignorance.

kek get back to me when you walk around in Beijing without a respirator

Get back to me when you quit your fascist bullshit.

I refuse to believe all polyps posting here are not shitposters, you can't possibly be that mentally limited

Get back to me when you can literally drink tap water in Flint without a filter.

China is an irradiated toxic waste land with literal rivers of sludge, the only ecologically minded people on this planet are fucking white. green peace, green parties, urban farming collectives. All white. Even the injuns protesting the DAPL only did it because muh sacred land and not because if ecological concerns. Ecological movements are implicitly white and it's only a matter of time before they are criticized by PoC for being too white if they are not already. Deal with it.

WEW

What's your definition then, because for all the talk about it I see very little defining what the boundaries are supposed to be.>>2084884
That's literally the same thing I said here

IDpol is a fucking disease, pic related

they are