Identity politics

I am surprised that schools taught this stuff in the first place... and had the surprising consequences of tearing society apart.

6 Comments

Post a Comment

That...

Mar 18, 2018 at 9:29am

... is what it is intended to do. After the revolutions of the early 20th century, Marxists had a problem: there wasn't a revolution in UK, Canada, USA, France, etc: broadly "the West." There was the Union movement, and some isolated skirmishes, some student uprisings, but there was no wholesale equivalent to the Russian/Chinese revolutions. What was to be done to defeat the "Evil Empire" of the Capitalists?

This led Marxists to adopt a strategy that dispensed with overt violent revolution. In its place, they would attempt to institute "revolutionary" policies through legislation and education. Much of this is how the Union movement solidified its position, through legislation and through contracts with Governments.

Identity Politics is, from 40,000 feet, a form of Neomarxism that applies the Marxist analysis of class (lord/serf, worker/factory owner) to as many domains of life as necessary to destabilize societies that will not ever have overt revolutions. So, you get straights vs. LGBQT, blacks vs. whites, men vs. women, all of these binary "imbalances" that the Neomarxists attempt to "fix" not through violent revolution but through legislation and compulsory education.

The problem is that, especially as this Neomarxist stuff filters into the K-12 system, it is not presented as a particular German philosophy in its particular historical context, it is presented as though "one day around 1970 all of the women decided they'd had enough and sexual harassment became a thing," which is false. Sexual harassment was introduced as a concept in Neomarxist legal studies (called "Critical Legal Studies") journals, and enforced by the use of journal articles in cases concerning the interpretation of USA's Civil Rights laws, which were another example of Neomarxist legislation. Sexual harassment was, in journal articles, said to be discrimination on the basis of sex, and, therefore, prohibited by the Civil Rights laws. But this was never legislated, it was brought in through "education."

So, it's only a surprise to those who don't know what it was intended to do. It was intended to tear society apart as much as any violent marxist revolution.

Not the issue

Mar 18, 2018 at 3:14pm

People have the right to express individual identity. Acceptance is the issue. Lack of a dictionary seems to be yours ;)

hey!!!

Mar 18, 2018 at 5:46pm

What about those Canucks hey?!

Ugh

Mar 19, 2018 at 9:42am

Society was already torn apart - literally apart into different classes of humans and associated rights or lack thereof - and consuming those at the margins. It just wasn't visible to those at the top of the privilege pyramid, i.e. you, apparently.

Anonymous

Mar 19, 2018 at 1:59pm

"People have the right to express individual identity. Acceptance is the issue."

Outstanding. I'm white, a man, and I basically hate everyone else.

Oh, and don't bother worrying about acceptance. I don't give a fuck what you think.

Yup

Mar 24, 2018 at 7:38pm

There you all go with your projection and hatred against the evil straight white male. Go fuck yourselves and your victim mentalities. You're weak.

Join the Discussion

What's your name?