Afrojim Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 I've always been a left-wing liberal but I'm finding it increasingly more difficult to understand what the hell is going on with left wing politics with every passing day. My main issue is identity politics and the tremendous lack of logic that is used by those on the left to push forward the group identity agenda. The overwhelming issue for me is who the hell is it that decides? Who is making these decisions? I'll use the LGBTQ+ community as an example... If we take the LGB section of the community and analyse their underlying philosophical argument and then compare that to the underlying philosophical argument of the T section of the community then it's easy to see that the underlying philosophies that their basic life view and respective philosophies are predicated upon are fundamentally in opposition to one another. The LGB narrative generally argues that identity is an objective reality and the reason that they are attracted to those of the same gender or both genders is fundamentally rooted in biology. The transgender community generally argues that identity is purely subjective, transformable, not rooted in biology, and that traditional gender identity exists because of historical phallogocentric social constructionism. When it comes to general identity one point of view undermines the other. So if their points of view are in opposition to one another who is it that has decided that the LGBTQ+community does in fact constitute a community? Whether or not anybody has asked the individual constituents that make up this community if they believe it constitutes a community is anybodies guess. The problem with identity politics is that we need to make sweeping generalisations about individual people. Indeed, I've just made sweeping generalisations of the beliefs of the LGBTQ+ community for the purpose of having an example to use in regards to explaining the illogical nature of group identity politics. Not all LGB people believe that gender is an objective reality although, as far as i'm aware, most of them do and not all transgender people believe in subjective gender identity although, again as far as i'm aware, most of them do. But that's my whole point really, if the left continues to go down the road of identity politics then they have to ignore the inalienable rights of the individual and worse, they have to push the notion that their is no such thing as an individual. To keep pushing left-wing identity politics we have to assume two things - firstly, we have to assume that it is actually possible to identify an identifiable group and secondly, we have to assume that ALL the individuals that make up these groups are pretty much all the same and have roughly the same beliefs and ideals. We have to assume that all black people (as an example), regardless of their individuality, have roughly the same political, philosophical, societal, moral and ethical beliefs and ideals, which is patently absurd and far more discriminatory and inherently racist towards black people than anyone else is being - including those on the right of the political spectrum. The reason I used the LGBTQ+ example, and the disparity of belief therein, is not because I have any personal issue with anyone that identifies as LGBTQ+ (in case anybody thinks that) but because it is the perfect microcosm of the issues relating to identity politics. Namely, the debate about identity itself or what constitutes identity has not been settled and from any logical perspective, the debate must be settled before you can push on with identity politics - until the debate is settled it is logically impossible to identify an identifiable group. For the left to continue identity politics when two opposing strains of thought, the issue as to whether identity is objective or subjective, exist in direct opposition to one another will only result in the liberal left ultimately defeating itself. But it will only defeat itself after huge societal discord, upheaval and experimentation has taken place. So lets expand on the notion of objective versus subjective identity and apply it to certain issues that currently exist within the left-wing political sphere... If we take subjective identity as a starting point. If identity is purely subjective and transformable then it is logically impossible for identity politics to exist in the first place. There can be no such thing as group identity as identity is an individual choice. If identity is not rooted in biology then anyone can identify themselves as anything they wish. Let's assume that identity is objective and that it is possible to determine identifiable groups. The left organises these identifiable groups into a hierarchical system based on the level of oppression, victimisation and institutional discrimination they suffer from so that such injustices can be rectified. First of all these are highly complex issues and there are a multitude of variables that would need to be analysed and then weighted to determine which groups possess which rung of the hierarchical system. Which level of historical injustice should be included if any? How far back in time should we go to determine these historical injustices if a decision is made to include them? How do you weight historical injustice when compared to current injustice? Also, who the hell gets to decide what is is that constitutes oppression or victimisation in the first place? It is technically impossible to create a hierarchical system that can be used to create equality of outcome or social equity to begin with - this is why things such as affirmative action don't work in the long term, you have to discriminate against one group of people for the benefit of another based upon their objective, unvarying, inherent traits - there is nothing more discriminatory than that. Also, the irony of needing to create a hierarchical system in order to create social equity is something that shouldn't be lost on anyone. But let's continue assuming that even though it is technically impossible to do so with any genuine accuracy that someone does come up with a workable system that is agreed upon through consensus. Along comes the big ass elephant in the room known as intersectionality. Intersectionality requires us to fractionate those who belong to certain identifiable groups. So we have oppressed women, then we have oppressed black women, then we have oppressed lesbian black women, oppressed lesbian black women who also happen to be disabled single mothers and one sixteenth hispanic etc etc. The point being that after the left has organised the global population of identifiable groups into the hierarchical system of oppression and victimisation you then have to fractionate everybody down to the level of the individual anyway. So left-wing identity politics defeats itself but only after it has created catastrophic divisions between people and ushered in an era where everyone identifies themselves as victims. You can already see the societal divisions beginning to manifest themselves. You can see organisations and groups such as Antifa, BlackLivesMatter, radical feminism, the MeToo campaign etc. morphing into totalitarian organisations - their rhetoric is vitriolic and the tactics they employ are fascistic in nature which is so ironic that it would be funny if it weren't so tragic - if you don't agree 100% with what these organisations/groups say then you are by default an oppressor. The issue with that though is once the blame of oppression has been applied to other people and other people view themselves as blameless and oppressed then those who self-identify as oppressed will believe that they have the right to rise up against those they view as their oppressors. But if everyone is simultaneously oppressed and oppressor then how long will it be before these groups on the left turn in on each other? At the moment the left is a loose coalition of various interest groups who view themselves as fighting the greater evil that is inherent on the right. But how long until the obvious differences between these interest groups manifest themselves? I'll give you an example, BlackLivesMatter is an organisation which has self-appointed spokespersons (a tad fascistic that) who claim to be speaking on behalf of the wider African-American community as a whole. BlackLivesMatter has aligned itself with other left leaning movements at the moment in a bid to further their own various causes. There is a very obvious problem here though, the majority of African-American people are socially and religiously conservative and economically neo-liberal. So, the underlying beliefs of the majority of African-American people are in direct opposition to at least some of the underlying beliefs ensconced in the Antifa, Feminist, Gay Rights, Transgender Rights etc. tradition. So if BlackLivesMatter continues to push its rigid non-malleable perspective and genuinely represents the views of African-American people (regardless of their individuality) then it has to eventually come into direct conflict with the other groups on the left. There is a very obvious solution to these problems on the left though and that is for people who claim to be left-wing liberals to stop being so f*cking illiberal. Liberalism is the belief in the inalienable rights of the individual to do and say as they please so long as what they are doing brings no direct harm to others. These inalienable rights transcend all else. If you believe in group identity or identity politics you are, by definition, not a liberal. I have this crazy idea about what the left could do to actually implement positive, genuinely progressive change - we could leave behind all this group identity nonsense and go back to focusing on pushing forward policies that create equality of opportunity and then leave individual people to take advantage of these opportunities or not take advantage of these opportunities as they see fit - individual rights and individual responsibility it's almost as if that's what that whole liberal enlightenment thingy was all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTG_03 Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 [emoji102] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 So, I'm thinking maybe a roll and links for breakfast today? Bit radical, but you've got to push your boundaries now and then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Quote So we have oppressed women, then we have oppressed black women, then we have oppressed lesbian black women, oppressed lesbian black women who also happen to be disabled single mothers and one sixteenth hispanic etc etc. Ha Ha! PC gone mad. Major Chumley Fotherington (Retd.) Dorking, Surrey P.S. I'm a rampant homosexualist and so is my wife, but we don't go on about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 I just had a delicious margarita pizza at an Italian bar in town. Perked me right up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Boiled egg and toast and a cup of tea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Bacon sandwiches. Smoked bacon of course because I’m not a weirdo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tongue_tied_danny Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 I'm just tucking into the remains of last night's munchie box. These meals are far better when served at room temperature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suspect Device Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Did anybody read all of that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Just now, Suspect Device said: Did anybody read all of that? I read the most of it. Didn't realise it was so long, just kept scrolling down. Must have taken ages to type out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Did anybody read all of that? Nope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 What the fucking hell is this pish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DublinMagyar Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Someone needs a cuddle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fullerene Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 1 hour ago, Suspect Device said: Did anybody read all of that? Oh yeah. Not sure if I agree with him on point 47 or point 102. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 2 hours ago, Jacksgranda said: Boiled egg and toast and a cup of tea. Boiled toast? Sounds rank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 3 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: Boiled toast? Sounds rank I imagine it would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob the tank Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Tl:dr. Had muesli earlier, now going to have a gourmet sandwich with brown sauce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Sanchez Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Shredded Wheat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 1 minute ago, bob the tank said: Tl:dr. Had muesli earlier, now going to have a gourmet sandwich with brown sauce Gourmet sandwich sounds impressive, but you may have spoiled the image by the addition of brown sauce. Bought some blue cheese last night (stiltonesque), thinking of having some of that with krackawheat shortly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRob72 Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Did anybody read all of that? Yep, it isn’t an easy read without going back over a couple of sentences a few times however. The gist of it is clear though, with regards to the relentless pursuit and rigidity of modern identity politics and how it is the complete opposite of the basic tenets of liberalism. 3 Weetabix and a Sainsbury’s fruit pot btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.