How do you go about explaining why idpol is bad to people without sounding reactionary? Pic related for instance...

How do you go about explaining why idpol is bad to people without sounding reactionary? Pic related for instance, obviously white people have caused immeasurable amounts of damage but to make the distinction "white" rather than just identifying porky is doing more harm than good. Most of the time these people are liberals, so I guess my question is how do you explain idpol to a liberal?

Other urls found in this thread:

Tell them how they would feel like if a white supremacist said Jews are the cause of everything bad in the world.
Now ask them why they do the same with whites.

The predominant problem with liberals is that they aren't really liberal.
They're all just people looking out for their own groups as always.

Feminists will claim all men regardless of race are evil, blacks will claim all whites are evil and potentially other races. Same with all other ethnic groups.

Tldr: It's not real social justice, no one wants to look out for one another.

Why bother with someone that far up their on ass.

It also has a lot to do with spite politics and revenge nationalism. Just like polyps like to piss off the libtards, the average "socialist" likes to stick it to the salty wypipo

People are retarded. You literally can't explain anything to """""""people""""""" unless you're some kind of genius.

Hate leads to hate and people divide themselves, union is key.

People need to understand that the differences the experience in race, sex, sexuality, (idpol) are ultimately manufactured differences in class. What these people, and everyone really, is concerned about is ease of life and access to resources. That is what people are feeling when they feel discrimination. Being more targeted by LEO, being paid less, not getting hired/getting fired, those are some of the biggest topics at the heart of most idpol that I see, and it's all about access to resources and ease of living.

When people realize that, the distinctions become less about the words we use to differentiate ourselves, and more about who is being exploited and towards what end (who benefits).

Class consciousness washes away our superficial distinctions and leaves us with an analysis of who has access to what resources. When we are all asking that question the true nature of society is revealed.

I always go with the example of so-called feminists lauding Taylor Swift for winning those two grammies or whatever. Ask them, why is this lauded? What does this do for Nora the cleaner? How is that a victory for womanhood when the average woman will not be affected by it.
It is in that logic that you tie the victory of the proletariat to that of liberation of these peoples, basically you take out the identity part and put in class.

along that logic, though, how do you convince someone in the middle class that lifting up poor and oppressed people's condition benefits them? it would be a very removed and simulated victory for them, just like the feminist example you gave.

they'll just say it contributes to a shift in mentalities. that doesn't sound very useful honestly.

Well what do you mean by "middle class"? If you mean the petit-bourgeois, they are not the revolutionary subject. If you mean the proletarian "middle class": class consciousness can easily be built around them: look at teachers, doctors ect.

They will just throw some bootstrap trite dressed up with Idpol and liberalism at you saying "See that means that Nora can make it there someday if she works hard enough"

Eh, I have got some people to question their fundamental assumptions with it.

Remind them that the hand that giveth also taketh it away. We live under an all encompassing system of military governance whose power depends on controlling as many humans as possible. The violent and repressive aspects of the system are inseparable from it's tolerant, benevolent aspects: ie. the spectacle of pop culture and linear progress. You have to get into capitalism and the war machine in the abstract, and how they are really the determining factor beyond the wilful malice or the insufficient 'modesty' or 'empathy' of individual wypipo. Bring up imperial japan or the numerous empires of antiquity and how they were essentially massive resource extraction machines, just like the current empire with a human face represented by the US and progressive global capitalism. Identity politics denies the people it purports to help any semblance of independent existence, de facto pushing them into a codependent relationship with the very system that enslaves them and the 'Good Whites' who currently run that system. The left needs to emphasise creativity again, engaging in a creative recalling and redemption of the past instead of focusing on powerlessness and resentment.

If someone says whites, Canadians, blacks, Jews, women always nicely ask which whites,? you mean all whites or working class or proletariat?

If you want to change their mentality you are going to have to change their material reality. A famous person winning an award does nothing to improve the material conditions of the average working woman. Their relation to the means of production of remained unchanged and all you have is a symbolic victory that only gratifies the person receiving that award and just posturing to the audience.
"This award goes to all the hard working women and single moms out there, because without my mom I wouldn't be here" yadda yadda this has be done over and over again

We don't want baboons! Why is the question of whether or not baboons are necessary never asked? We don't need them! We don't want them! Not now, not ever!

Byyyyyyyyyyyyeeeeeeeeee baboons!

why is it that every time I see it, it only becomes funnier?


oops meant to bump

This doesn't work. For a lot of these people it is about revenge for what whites did to their ancestors.

Firstly, these people are suffering and victims of alienation and hyper-individualist ideology.

So our task is to figure out how to start conversations that first acknowledges that they're in emotional pain.

People aren't very rational. Trying to explain "it's systemic.etc" isn't always the smartest option.
So we need to practice some compassion and take some time to listen to our alienated comrades who are yet to frame their psychological distress and alienation in a class conscious way. As socialists we should actively take steps to listen to people in a gentle and understanding way. Getting angry about their lack of class consciousness and unconscious ideological programming is not the way to fix this. They need our help and understanding.

To an extent you can't. I've noticed there are levels of idpol, and some are much easier to ween people off of than others. Even american conservatives are starting to peel back the image of a lazy stoner from marijuana. It's a little harder but many can see the difference between gay parades and homosexual equality. But race is very ingrained in people's minds, probably because everyone has a "race" and they want to belong to something. They like having heritage, they like having historical culture and gloaming off the accomplishments of dead ancestors. They feel that giving up racial identity and everything that goes with it is somehow abandoning part of themselves and their families. It's even worse with minorities, as they tend to clump up into insular communities (often due to racism) and double down on the us vs them mentality.

That's just essentialism op. White people did so because they were in a position to do so. Was Genghiz Khan more altruistic? The Aztecs? People have just historically been scumbags and white people were scumbags from a position of strength.

Yeah this. Everybody loves to fight for justice- for themselves

Bring up the atrocities of Chiang Kai-shek and Hirohito. Force them to explain why Asian imperialism is different with the goal of poking holes in their race theory.

"But they only did that because of white people. Before white people came China and Japan were prosperous progressive nations that took care of everyone, unlike the evil opium pushing British."

Bring up feudal Japan and China. That the Chinese Empire proudly recorded its conquests just like the Roman Empire.

idpol was created in the frankfurt school by leftists for leftists. You can't be a leftist and be against idpol. It's literally 90% of your gameplan.

you are a fucking retard

Critical theorist right here.


or maybe feminism just coaxed out and uprooted the toxic masculinity and chauvinism that feminism constantly warned about but everyone ignored. can't believe ppl here still talk about feminism like its some monolithic liberal borg hivemind of "i haet men"



why stop there pal, why not blame Marx and Lenin for creating nazis since they spawned from reaction to bolshevism.

Even if there was no blow back and bourgeois feminism got its way, it would have just resulted in fortifying US capitalism. Hillary would be bombing women half way around the world while helping capitalists exploit women at home because Hillary don't care about women, she only cares about the capitalist class (like all capitalists). The feminist movement should have realized this with Thatcher but it keeps denying class.

I like to start with Bacon's Rebellion and the Virginia Slave Codes.

that's already been done :^)

industrial civilisation created both nazis and bolsheviks

modern feminism has become embedded within neoliberalism. Notice how it's all about a very narrow ideal of 'choice' and a very narrow standard of neoliberal 'success' and 'empowerment', plus an internet panopticon that only allows you to want the 'right' things. Everything has to be laid out in the open, made public and judged by the right thinking crowd. The recent me too ansari controversy shows the limits to that, imo. 'Liberated' sexuality is purely contractual and thus alienating like everything else under capitalism. Once people realise contractual freedom doesn't satisfy them or allow them to create real human relationships (which are always something beyond a merely rational contract), the only thing they have left is a feeling of powerlessness and victimisation. It really has little to do with sexuality, in a 'liberated' society were people remain unfree in all matters except sexual ones, sexuality is no longer repressed, rather it is everything else that is repressed through sexuality.

Idpol in the contemporary sense is not an ideology or even a coherent vision of the world, but a pattern of emotional responses. We live in a world in which people are constantly told to express their 'authentic selves', a world in which enforced self expression has replaced politics. In the worst of cases, identity politics means spending all day getting mad at internet content designed to make you mad while ignoring the rest of human experience. It is precisely on the remainder, that which is not identity politics, that we must focus on. Once you have developed a sense of self beyond internet discourse and pop culture, you can aspire to a coherent vision of the world.


Identities are either spooks (use "social constructs" instead) or real things (like race) that are only issues because the system we're living in make them into issue. If there is still widespread racism, it is because the system itself promotes it. Ergo, in order to end these identity-related issues (the ones that actualy exist, obviously), one must attack the entire system, which is to say, capitalism. Attacking these isolated issues (racism, sexism etc.) is largely a waste of time, like treating symptoms instead of the cause. Putting an end to capitalism absolutely requires a focus on class struggle and the recognition that identities are, again, either fictitious or harassed by the capitalist system, and thus must be relegated to the status of lesser concerns or, in the case of spooks, forgotten altogether.