Why do people eat up identity politics so easily

fuck off nazbol

No

Some people like feeling angry

It allows a person to be a victim of something that can be defeated by whining at it.

Is it really that hard to see the appeal?

Because the subaltern groups represented within identity politics are more easily reintegrated into capitalism than any group opposing capitalism outright. It's somewhat similar to the religious right: "we'll give you this thing you want, status, and recognition, but in turn you'll support capitalism." As the identities are integrated into the power structure, though, the last part happens systematically rather than coercively. There's no need for coercion at that point, after all.

note to white americans:

"identity politics" is called "politics" in the rest of the world

No, that is what idiots the world ove call it.

It's actually the other way around

Just hope you guys know the more you shit on identity politics the more you lose potential allies. Oppressed people gotta stick together, if there's no unity it's giving Porky what he wants.

You're not a materialist.

It's literally the opposite.

Also, you do not speak for all whites.

Yeah, and Socialism has done so well hasn't it? Meanwhile the only socialist Revolution with any chance of success right now is Rojava which was founded because the Kurds weren't safe anywhere else.

FTFY

You are very gravely mistaken if you think idpol has ever actually helped minorities. Even slavery was largely an economic issue (albeit with extreme moral implications) and its abolition in the US banned ALL indentured servitude, not just owning black people as property.

It creates divisions, it does not erase them. What we want is to unify people for everyone's benefit.

And what has identity politics and "intersectionalism" done to overturn capitalism? Absolutely nothing, and nothing anywhere at any time. The identitarian groups are easily reabsorbed back into capitalism.

Shitting on idpol doesn't mean we don't support anti racist, anti imperialist, and proletarian feminist causes, it just means that we recognize that these issues stem from class issues and are a manifestation of economic trends.

Tbh tbh the approach to these issues is to simply regard race/gender as the spooks that they are, not "celebrate your blackness" or whatever deliberately divisive bullshit people who right op eds for the Guardian are spouting these days.

That is true, although it also means that we must be on guard against idealism that is prone to distract from class struggle.

because "capitalism is good because innovation and communism is where everyone is poor and equal and doctors are paid less than waiters" cold-war propoganda was such a cultural force that it is deeply ingrained into everyone in America's minds, regardless of age gender or race. You can't be an idiot and be a communist in America, it's physically impossible.

And the truth is most Americans are idiots who have never read a book in their lives but still want to make a difference so they fight for "feminism"

THAT'S MINE

inb4 muh private property

always good to see comrade nazbol.

it would be smarter though if you went to Holla Forums and turned some of your fellow "race realists" into people who see just how shitty capitalism is. go to Holla Forums and turn nazis into nazbols and you will be doing your part for humanity and COMMUNISM in a weird right wing way, but a way nonetheless

-Kim Jon Il

fuck you we invented feminist liberation/fight against racism. we are marxists and we will continue to shit on anything harmful to the proletariat cause, and idpol is one of them.

let every single bourgeoisie WOMEN and BLACK be raped hard. raped and gang raped over and over again.

This is identity politics Exhibit A.

does it upset you that i said bourgeoisie women should be raped to death?

does that upset your liberal brain?

White guilt.

I don't see how that does anything to help establish communism. Just seems cruel for its own sake.

People are going to do nasty shit during a violent revolution. Revenge is cruel.

This tbh.

Tribalism.

Because of a duty to have personal identity and to express it as much as possible. But personal identity is only a recent product in Western history, a way for power to manage and regulate behavior, thoughts, desires, etc., to individualize, thus preventing any collective opposition to the system. Read Foucault's History of Sexuality.

Foucault was full of shit. Previous societies may not have had trans-racial gender-fluid bi-romantic grey-asexuals, but there have always been people who felt compelled to distinguish themselves from their peers by behaving in an abnormal manner. Suetonius' biographies of prominent Roman citizens are packed with such characters.

Based Jesse Owens

Burzum, is that you?

Yeah, exactly, before it was always limited to muh privileged class. Furthermore, those Romans didn't have the notion that you have some hidden authentic identity within you, for them it was a social performance and display.

미국 놈

Having a biography written about you is still limited to the muh privileged class, generally.

We're not talking about having biography written about you but about this obsession with personal identity. The point is that even prominent romans didn't have this since their distinction was instead an expected social performance combined with epicurean and stoic ethics which was very popular in their circles (in a very watered down version).
Whereas today we have a generalized commandment to "find yourself" and "express yourself to others", to be "authentic", etc. This has become even more extensive with social media, which seems to be made precisely for identity politics and exhibitionism, so it's no surprising that, as OP claims, "people eat up identity politics so easily." The world today is made for it, and must be combated on that ground as well.

Actually, you were doing both. You were claiming that only "prominent roman citizens" affected a personal identity as those where what were recorded in the biographies mentioned earlier. What my previous post tried to gently point out to you was that only "prominent roman citizens" would have biographies, leading to selection bias in the evidence: only the muh privileged class would have left evidence of having had a personal identity. Therefore you are incorrectly using absence of evidence of plebs having a personal identity as evidence of the absence of such.

Of course, I think you actually have realized what I've stated in my previous paragraph and are just being a dickhead.

Yes, I understood your implied point very well, my point was precisely that we're not talking about having a biography written since biography was precisely used by user only as a source and not as social phenomenon itself. Social lives of average romans are documented well enough through other sources. Read the whole conversation again.

rrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Because people base their identities out of things that can easily be co opted by capitalism

Badmouse you do realize that the more identity politics the more likely that the working class will get turned reactionary right? Any ways all identity politics do is divide people. Do you want to know how I know this? Because a lot of the people who are turning to the right because they feel like that the left is excluding them for being white. And I think it's ironic that you Badmouse (unless I'm wrong and you're not Badmouse) accuse us of being middle class leftist who are sheltered from real life yet a lot of these people that want identity politics in leftism are middle class and sheltered. If you really think that you know about the world then come the South Eastern United States and just talk to those who are white and working class. You'll realize why we reject identity politics.

Because it's the most natural position.

Varg vikerness.

fucking Neonazi.

Who knows what the slaves and peasants thought? Nobody wrote anything about them. Hell, we do not even know what kind of Latin they spoke.

You're just repeating the same incorrect point and trying to handwave, now. The "other sources" explictly point the existence of identity politics in the empire, thus demanding that the common citizenry had a concept of personal identity:

bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2008/2008-04-25.html

The post-structuralist turns out to be nonsense blathering hipster, as usual.

Do you seriously think they were the one who were trying to find their hidden personality and express it to others?

You don't even know what we're talking about. Our identity politics has nothing to do with what the article is describing.

Because it appeals to human nature. People instinctively think of the world in terms of an in-group and out-group, and it takes a certain amount of intelligence and introspection to overcome that instinct.

Let me remind you of what you said in

That article clearly demonstrates such a concept existed hundreds of years ago and you are talking rubbish. Having been caught out, you are now trying to bullshit your way out of the situation. Typical post-structuralist.

I'm explicitly talking about personal identity, not ethic identity. My guess is that's the only identity you can imagine so you're projecting it on everything else. But if you carefully read that article that you posted, you'll see how far that is from our modern conception of identity, which is all about personality and self-expression.

...

Is that really possible? From what I've seen most of the people claiming to have done so have usually just replaced their previous in-group with another, i.e. white liberals envisioning themseves as part of the "Obama coalition" against white conservatives/"racist redneck sisterfuckers"

yiu're right, you guys clearly state that you dont support these because it's le idpol that gets in the way of our LARPing

go back to reddit

A redditor is you.

it's clear like most on leftypol you dont know your history. Your precious workers have always been right wing and reactionary. Even when whites accepted more far left policies they tried their hardest to make sure that blacks and other minorities were excluded. Fuck them

I know what you're talking about, I was one of those people. Most of those people were actually reactionary before the rise of le ebil ess jay dubyas that bully the poor defenseless white man. It wasnt uncommon to hear those people say things like 'racism is over!!!' and 'why cant THOSE people stop talking about slavery, i mean just get over it!' a few years ago. Nothing of value was lost

And that's were you get shit like the Progressive Stack. Whose to say who's "oppressed"? Do those more "oppressed" get issue priority? Is a black woman who makes $50k a year more oppressed than a white guy who makes $30k a year? They're all bullshit questions which lead people to drawing arbitrary lines. Fighting for the legal equality and worker's rights for everyone, regardless of whatever socio-politial-ethnic-gender group they belong to, is really easy and objective. Trying to decide who has it worse and who we need to take care of first is fucking hard and subjective.

actually it has, you should read(scary i know) about the cold war and the civil rights movement.

but people also do have a bad habit of ignoring the economic aspect

stopped reading there

i dont know why you people think pointing to a white person in the gutter and a black person in a mansion is an argument. Since we're talking about groups we must look at the conditions of the groups and whites are doing really well especially since they benefit from centuries of plunder.

Native Americans are an oppressed group of people, African Americans are an oppressed group of people, pre-1965 asian americans were an oppressed group of people, and you know this

wow, all 3 of them?

BLM detected

This user speaks gospel

It's explicitly what your theory states and how most of it's practitioners apply it when they're not busy denying it.

you'll find that many black nationalists that dislike the black nationalists that focus on nothing but symbolic gestures instead of doing anything effective

what theory?

...

"privilege theory"

say it with me now

NOT

My gott

Yeah, you're the exact person I was talking about. You get bogged down in bullshit issues that don't mean anything. The reason why black people are oppressed is they have shitty education and live in a society that punishes people for being poor, but that applies to just about every race in the country. You can't argue that Obama or Jay-Z are "oppressed" because some white redneck in arkansas called them a nigger. You need to stop viewing people in sectioned off groups and start focusing on the bigger pictures. You can't fight a forest fire with a cup of water. You can't fight racism by purposely singling out a "race" to fight against racism for, all you're doing is perpetuating an artificial society divide. This is why shit like affirmative action don't work. By targeting people based on arbitrary "race" you only upset the other "races" who aren't included in the preferential treatment.

Okay, let's say "black people" are oppressed more than "whites". Who is black? Is it about skin color or about genetic origin? Is Obama black? Is someone with only 1/4 african ancestry black? What about someone who's 1/8? 1/16? It's a fucking arbitrary question and it doesn't fucking matter. Again, we need to focus on making things better for everyone, not some artificially subdivided group you've deemed more "oppressed" than another.

I don't think it's possible to escape it entirely, but you can limit the power it has over you and overcome it when considering specific issues.

The biggest problem with the so-called progressives is that they have an extremely narrow and self-serving definition of "oppression". The most oppressed groups will never appear in that "progressive stack" because they know they'd get lynched by the so-called progressives if they dared to reveal their identities. In that way it serves merely as another means of oppression.
Of course the other problem is that it's grossly divisive and counterproductive to any real leftist movement.

...

oh wow that video really proves me wrong, I guess all those things I've read about white workers killing black workers because they had jobs whites wanted, going on strike over the hiring of black workers, and excluding them from things that benefited workers was wrong, thanks leftypol!

I was thinking of people like those with a necrophilia fetish and the like, but that works too.

stopped reading there, it's not simply because i said so. One only has to read to see that black people are oppressed, it's not a matter of opinion, jackass.

You dont have an argument, pointing to a black face in a high place is ridiculous.

Mind listing the books you're read about affirmative action or is you doing the standard leftypol
thing?

This image has never been more relevant.

Truly, those children in the Middle East who have lost their families to drone strikes will be glad to know you are stopping racism by defending Obama against the evil white anti-war oppressors.

do you have an argument? This isnt funnyjunk, 9gag, reddit or whatever site you cane from, pal.

not sure about that bud

Read again. The overwhelming source of oppression in the world is the gap between rich and poor. Nothing more needs to be said, and your attempts to refute those arguments are laughably weak.

Also since you're probably the samefag it looks like you didn't stop reading there.

If black people can be lifted out of oppression by money and education then why shouldn't everyone just get that? It makes no sense to focus on one specific group when you could target everyone at the same time.

I don't need to read a book about the subject to see that being "reverse" racist to the group in "power" will somehow solve racism. It will only breed more racism. But if YOU have any books on the subject I'd be happy to read them.

Not that poster but

newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/mark-finkelstein/2013/10/22/henry-louis-gates-end-affirmative-action-affluent-african

He or someone else also mentioned that something like 3/4 of "African-Americans" at the Ivies are either only part black, or are from otherwise-wealthy West Indian/African (actual) backgrounds

I don't even know who's downboating who any more.

So what people in the past were racist. Does that automatically mean that white people would start becoming Neo Nazis and they will start burning crosses? No, we know better than that now. I agree racism hasn't ended however white people not as bad as they were, but you start running into problems when you start doing things such as police their language, constantly harass people, and tell them that they are over muh privileged that will make them stop racist right. That won't make them feel like somebodies trying to guilt them to death. Is it really worth it to try and get rid of the remaining racism in white people?

Oh yeah comedians constantly getting sued for telling an offensive joke that's a straw man.

Libertarian Socialist Rants telling Cult of Dusty that he deserves beaten by a black for saying nigger that's a straw man.

The media not reporting on Colene attacks that's a straw man because that won't make white people feel like the world is out to get them at all.

And I know a lot of the shit with the acception of LSR are things that are done by Liberals, but when leftist practice Identity Politics one this enables the behavior I pointed out and two again these Identity Politics run more people who could potentially help our cause.

Yeah nothing of value was lost accept the majority of people in Europe and North America. But that's okay because as long you appeal to people who are not the majority of people in Europe and North America you will totally have a revolution and not be just known as a group of people in the fringe who appeals to those who do not have a significant enough population to really do much other try to convince others.

*run off

because everything is "identity politics": everything is a religion/ideology.

Marxists think they're not, but even Lenin knew that was bullshit back in the early 1900's, which is why he emphasized the state's role in forcing Communism, whereas Marx expected it to just happen naturally. Lenin knew it wouldn't and thus used the state accordingly.

I am amazed how such a professedly "leftist" board is so clueless about such basics between Marx and Lenin and what these huge differences entail for what you stupidly call "identity politics."

Having a "religion/ideology" doesn't by itself make identity politics.

How about you figure out what "identity politics" actually means and come back here later? It doesn't mean forcing someone to believe something. I'd like to say I'm amazed by how clueless you are, but I'm really not. We seem to get the most boneheaded Holla Forumstards on this board.

Yeah, it had nothing to do with Russia being in the very earliest stage of capitalism at the time.

one cannot lift themselves out of oppression.

kek, typical leftypol user

"identity politics" is identities as such, battling each other. Identity is not restricted to race, dumbass, it can be literally anything, religion, ideology, even sports.

Lenin saw Marxism as simply another ideology, and thus merely another identity battling other identities with no rational conclusion as Marx thought. But he believed in Marxism, as a religion. That is why he used the irrational power of the State to force Marxism into power. This is totally contrary to Marx and Marx's rationalism, which predicted socialism would occur naturally and inevitably among the working class. The working class, not the state, would cause Marxism. How naive this seems now! And Lenin had already agreed so long ago…

I wonder if any of you morons have actually read the major books of Marx and Lenin.

when you're claiming that the left is what's making your precious workers racist or reactionary you show everyone that you do not know your US history. And please dont do the 'that's the past' thing.

No, overt racism fell out of fashion after all of the red propaganda, and pls stop the 'racist=kkk/nazi' mei mei. Jared Taylor is a racist and he does not act like your standard nazi or klansman.

None of the things you listed are meant to stop them from being racist.

does it really matter? Whenever someone wants to right a past wrong white people start bitching and whining about white guilt, white guilt to white people is bringing up any bad thing white people have done or continue to do. Now that's not to say that there are people out there trying to guilt whites, but it just isn't very hard to make a white person feel like someone's trying to guilt them to death.

I personally think it's something worth pursuing

Most of those people already leaned toward that side, you're literally losing nothing.

I personally dont care about a revolution because I know it will never happen, but you're right, if there was to be a revolution we would need the support of the majority, but even without le ebil ess jews(or any other boogeyman) the majority would still be be hostile to the bommunism and would oppose a revolution

Because - like the Soviet Union and the revolution - "righting these past wrongs" will never end, because those arguing loudest for the right to be wronged benefit from it.

Look at BlackLivesMatter, aka "If a white police officer shoots a black man, the burden of proof is on him to prove that he didn't do so out of a 'yearnin' ta shoot some naggers' "

by "benefit from it", I mean the race hustlers that have a vested interest in there being "racial conflict" (or at the very least the perception of it), because they know damn well they can browbeat well-meaning white liberals into showering them with gibs

on one side, guilt and social pressure. On the other side, power to be fair tho most of the time they are marginalized or were historically

How do people "right" a wrong committed by people who died before they were born against other people who died before they were born? Do they target their descendents who also had not been born when it happened as if they had any control over the circumstances of their birth? What kind of bullshit justice is that?

No he didn't. You mentioned Louis Althusser in the other thread. Then you should know that Louis Althusser(and Marx, AND Lenin) conceived of class as a systematic, material reality. Class was a material relationship between people - how surplus value was distributed.

Ahh yes, most of us have. If you're really so confident in your vast knowledge of leftist thought, please cite where Lenin treats class struggle as a struggle of identity primarily, rather than one of material reality.

Bullying.

I don't really think bullies will ever understand that starvation isn't an identity.

Bullies do not comprehend individual responsibility, especially in the case of their own actions during their lifetimes.

Bullies just recycle cultural marxist conspiracies they hear on Holla Forums.

Yes, it will end if both parties sit down and agree with a list of what is owed to the oppressed.

yea, if we ignore BLM(or their supporters) trying to bring attention to white people killed by cops or getting angry and rioting when a black cop kills a black man.

by addressing and fixing the problems that are a direct result of the actions of the past.

What do you mean when you say "target"?

It's justice for the VICTIM, you know, the people that are affected by the actions of the past?

It makes money

No it won't because who will decide who owes what? A Grand Council Of Representatives Of The White Race and a Majestic Conclave Of Senators Representing The Black Race?

And even "if" those conditions are met, what's to stop one or any of those oppressed claiming that this still isn't enough? What, will you get every black person in America to sign a document relieving all white people of any further reparations to black people?

Ignore my idpol friend, the only true solution is communism. MLK didn't want reparations to infinitum - he wanted socialism

LISTEN TO THE CRIES OF THOSE DEAD PEOPLE WHO DON'T EXIST ANYMORE

WE WOULD BE ALL LIVING LIKE CAPITALIST PIGS IN SPACE IF IT WASN'T FOR THE DESCENDANTS OF THOSE OTHER PEOPLE WHO DON'T EXIST ANYMORE

IT IS TIME TO SHOW THOSE OTHER DEAD PEOPLE WHO DON'T EXIST ANYMORE HOW TO BREAK THE CYCLE OF REVENGE FOR GOOD AND WHO WE TRULY ARE

this is a non-argument and must be ignored

...

What impressive ideas and plans must you have - why, tell everyone in this thread about your sins of the father theology, and how would you know your oppressors are in my family tree.

The superficiality and wanton environmental abuse modern capitalist society produces resounds through the whole of society. Children are raised without hope for the future, told in their very schools that the future is fucked. Adults languish between cycles of social anxiety and depression, drug abuse and deprivation. Fed by club and tavern culture which teaches us the only way to be social is to destroy ourselves in creative manner while the world around us burns.

Escape is limited, and reducing every day. There's just not enough space to go around anymore. The bourgeois can escape to the shrinking nature reserves and pretend this Earth isn't fucked, but for most crammed into the swelling cities, there is no place to run. Paranoia and conspiracies develop, transmitted by increased interpersonal contact.

Some people accept this brave new world, and turn into hardened solipsistic monsters as a result, casting aside untold billions because the cognitive dissonance is too great a burden to bear. For others, however, the longing for greater produces desire for change.

We should not be staring so hard at the content of the radical's word, for they oft do little more but to restate the long trodden speeches of movements prior, but the intent behind their action. There is widespread discontent with the way our civilization has developed, and the direction it is heading. A discontent that is exploited in many forms by many fanged interests.

Kek.

Fail.

Like your every other friendly neighborhood brainless idpoler thug, 99% of a Holla Forumsyp's sworn enemies are proles, much to Porky's entertainment, and his alleged anti-capitalism extends no further than his antisemitism.

Aren't most Holla Forumsacks either pseudo or outright fascist? Doesn't this mean they're automatically capitalists whether they know it or not?

Lenin actually had the same exact idea. That's why he divided the USSR into nations with they own traditions, language and the preservation of the heritage.

That's why Lenin created Ukraine and Stalin created the Jewish Autonomous Oblast - every nation has to have it's own land to preserve it's heritage and tradition and mutually work with other nations.

geez, it's people like you are easily manipulated as well

They will tell you that they don't just hate 'black' people, they "hate bankers too!", but it's a "capitalism is okay when 'whites' are doing it" kind of thing.

Or rather, it's a "capitalism is okay because it ends up making countries that presently have a 'white' majority richer", so it's good for the Holla Forumsyps' nations.

Holla Forumsyps would even accuse what they would call newfags over there of being "just a leftist that happens to be racist", should they not toe the capitalism line to their liking.

Fascism is controlled capitalism, where the state acts as a major corporate shareholder and has the power to block or push any decisions.
Pretty much what China and Russia have now.

As opposed to the "free" capitalism, where the corporations have the power to lobby or appoint their own political figures.

You heard the man, State officials being capitalists are much different than capitalists being State officials.

…in case you were wondering what might be the Holla Forumsyps' real stance on censorship and freedom.

Now China is a scammer's wonderland and a nightmare for anybody working in the secondary sector, and a Russian guy on IRC let me know that Holla Forums's darling Putin wants internet providers to always record everything sent (e-mails, etc.) by all citizens in the last 5 years and pay for the mass surveillance memory banks with their own pockets, meaning the internet will cost 4 times as much. And there's the part where they proposed a law for arbitrarily seizing land for State reasons, they don't actually have dairy products in their food that is supposed to have dairy products, the country has none of the freedom of speech Holla Forums claims to love, etc.

There's a reason you're getting Chinese immigrants flooding in constantly (because Holla Forums loves immigrants who hardly assimilate, and form enclaves, like the Chinese often do, right?), and read of depressed Russians wanting to leave that neo-feudal, Best Korea-lite shithole in any imageboard you go.

that why the rest of his sentence included how they'd require education and money

The officials don't have any stake in the corporations under Fascism.
The shares belong to the state, as in to the people.

The scheme merely exists to keep the corporations in check and stop unfair practices, like outsourcing and overcharging.

Booo hoo, because every other country doesn't do worse. Because there is no NSA or PRISM, because Google doesn't collect your personal data including your calls and locations and Faceberg doesn't report you to the German and UK government if you criticize muslims in your private messages.

Now that's a lie. Only 8% of Russians are discontent with Putin and they are western traitors who will be dealt with when the new MGB agency launches next year.

...

I didn't know that George Benard Shaw's ghost browses Holla Forums

Okay, that ruse cruise lasted a while, but you just got a little too obvious with it.

again, you can not lift yourself out of oppression, oppression is a systemic.

Yess-s-s…

Take Russian stories with a pinch of salt. They have a fair share of drama queens there: at least half of EU was trying to do the same thing with providers since 2009 (in some cases it was "reasonable" 2 years, though). IIRC it's only IP addresses that are to be (or are already being?) recorded now.

Putin is a regular Capitalist scum, maybe a bit behind the times.

Which is why less than half of them went to elections this years (and that's with all the falsifications).

...

Gee user, it's almost as if massive immigration results in a common sense of purpose being fractured, and thus reduces any common ground on which to rally and organise

Way to attack the symptom instead of the cause.