Delusional Democrats and Identity Politics
After LBJ's landslide in 1964, the Democratic consensus, according to Hunter S. Thompson in Songs of the Doomed, was that "The GOP was doomed, like the Whigs, to a cheap and meaningless fate."
Today we hear many of the same predictions concerning the Republicans demographic problems in the Washington Post, New Republic, NY Times and all over the political blogs.
The consensus is that all the Democrats have to do is wait, and the electoral victories will roll in.
There is no doubt that we will hear more delusional talk about demographics should Hillary win next week.
For forty years the Democrats have made a fundamental mistake, and there doesn't appear to be any effort to fix this problem.
Thomas Frank, author of What's the matter with Kansas?, explained it in no uncertain terms.
As I tried to make plain back in 2004, the big political change of the last 40 years didn’t happen solely because conservatives invented catchy conspiracy theories, but also because Democrats let it happen. Democrats essentially did nothing while their pals in organized labor were clubbed to the ground; they leaped enthusiastically into action, however, when it was time to pass NAFTA and repeal Glass-Steagall. Working-class voters had nowhere else to go, they seem to have calculated, and — whoops! — they were wrong.
White voters, loyal New Deal Democrats for decades, abandoned the Democratic Party when the Democrats abandoned them.
Why should millennials be any different? Especially after how the primaries went.
And, naturally, liberals backing the Queen of Chaos have conveniently ignored the release of DNC emails proving that the Democratic primary was rigged in favor of Clinton and against Bernie Sanders. There’s far too much cognitive dissonance created by simultaneously recognizing the reality of how this election has already been stolen, and still supporting Hillary Clinton. Orwellian doublethink seems to be a prerequisite for being a card-carrying liberal Democrat these days. Not only must they ignore how Clinton stole the nomination from Sanders, they must also ignore the steaming piles of evidence proving the entire election is a sham; Debord and Baudrillard would be so proud.
I've lately come to realize that the Identity Politics that have come to dominate the political landscape of late, looks suspiciously like the Lifestyle Marketing that dominates the consumer culture.
What got me thinking about this was the excellent documentary series The Century of the Self by Adam Curtis.
While the series is largely about marketing, public relations and how psychoanalysis fit into that, he also addresses how politicians have used the same tools.
Consider for a moment car commercials. I remember growing up that car commercials at least mentioned what was in the car.
Now its difficult to determine what product exactly they are selling.
The reason is because they aren't selling a product. They are selling a lifestyle. Simply put, you are what you drive.
Adam Curtis identified the moment that this idea of marketing lifestyles to voters was adopted by politicians - Clinton's 1996 campaign. Like you being the car you drive, you are now the skin color, or gender, or sexual orientation, or other lifestyle defining attribute that you vote.
Naomi Klein noticed this trend years before I did.
Once we'd embarked on a search for new wells of cutting-edge imagery, our insistence on extreme sexual and racial identities made for great brand-content and niche-marketing strategies. If diversity was what we wanted, the brands seemed to be saying, then diversity was exactly what we would get. And with that, the marketers and media makers swooped down, air-brushes in hand, to touch up the colors and images in our culture...
The shift in attitude was not the result of a mass political conversion but of some hard economic calculations. According to Rocking the Ages, a book produced in 1997 by leading U.S. consumer researchers Yankelovich Partners, “Diversity” was the “defining idea” for Gen-Xers, as opposed to “Individuality” for boomers and “Duty” for their parents.
It's easy to dismiss this thinking, but the simple fact of the matter is that it works and we need to understand it.
Identity politics enabled many formerly silenced and displaced groups to emerge from the margins of power and dominant culture to reassert and reclaim suppressed identities and experiences; but in doing so, they often substituted one master narrative for another, invoked a politics of separatism, and suppressed differences within their own 'liberatory' narratives."
- Henry Giroux
However, there is a natural limitation to what these groups can do, and even more importantly, there is a natural side effect from these movements: i.e. they are divisive by their very existence and definition.
What's more, they all exist on the liberal side of the political spectrum where there is more toleration for excesses.
And that's where the problem is, because the concept of the New Deal democratic tradition is based on a society of inclusiveness and working together for a common goal. Indentity Politics is incompatible with this idea.
Historian Arthur Schlesinger writes that "movements for civil rights should aim toward full acceptance and integration of marginalized groups into the mainstream culture, rather than...perpetuating that marginalization through affirmations of difference."
Yet solidarity is the exact opposite of what liberals believe today. In it's place is hyper-sensitivity to differences.
Identity politics provides cover for, and diversion from, class rule and from the deeper structures of class, race, gender, empire, and eco-cide that haunt American and global life today – structures that place children of liberal white North Side Chicago professionals in posh 40th-story apartments overlooking scenic Lake Michigan while consigning children of felony-branded Black custodians and fast food workers to cramped apartments in crime-ridden South Side neighborhoods where nearly half the kids are growing up at less than half the federal government’s notoriously inadequate poverty level.
It's fair to compare this pursuit of purity of thought as an echo of another age, when the target was heretics and the objective was to purge our society of sin.
The narcissism and Identity Politics go hand-in-hand. Statements that appear on face value to be about something entirely different, are actually all about you and something that offends you.
What's more, the hurt feelings of any one person becomes more important that any form of political debate by the greater society. Not only that, the offense doesn't even have to be real because the hurt feelings are real and that is the only thing that matters.
“People who think with their epidermis or their genitalia or their clan are the problem to begin with. One does not banish this specter by invoking it. If I would not vote against someone on the grounds of 'race' or 'gender' alone, then by the exact same token I would not cast a vote in his or her favor for the identical reason. Yet see how this obvious question makes fairly intelligent people say the most alarmingly stupid things.”
― Christopher Hitchens
This oversensitivity has gone to such levels that it is harming the people that want to support it. Consider this blog essay where someone who is genuinely progressive minded is emotionally torn by what can be described as abuses against "good people pushed out and marginalized in left-wing circles because they didn’t use the proper set of social and class signals to satisfy the world of intersectional politics."
“If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him”
- Cardinal Richelieu
The entire purpose of identity politics, and it's identical twin, cultural politics, is to serve the ruling elite.
My only reservation here as to the question of the candidates’ essential sameness is that, in opposition to my radical colleagues, I view cultural politics less as a test of fundamental civil liberties and civil rights than as a popular diversion from the democratization of structure, power, and the abrogation of imperialism, nuclear war, and racial discrimination.
I know how unpopular such a position is among radicals, and yes, as separate issues I’d of course favor abortion rights and those pertaining to the LGBT community as essential to the wider process of democratization, but (a) less so than equitable income-and-wealth distribution, and (b) on condition that, unlike Clinton, who treats them in a vacuum, the issues such as abortion are joined to wider issues on war and peace, corporate power, indeed, the retention of capitalism, especially in its present form. Conceivably, one could advocate for the full range of demands in cultural politics, and still favor centrist fascism in its systemic-structural-cultural attributes. Clinton embodies such a view, which is one reason I think she cannot be sufficiently distinguished from Trump. Wall Street can absorb cultural politics; it cannot, by definition, steps leading to the advent of socialism. Authenticity of, and gradations of, radicalism are matters of extreme importance, not simply for analytical purposes, but on the practice of capitalistic absorption of discontent. Currently, cultural politics are the help-mate of the status quo.
Where Identity Politics, Political Correctness, intersectional politics, or whatever term you want to use for what is happening on the progressive side of politics today has gone totally off the rails:
It's lost its sense of humor.
This to me is a line in the sand. Any political movement that can't laugh at itself is not a political movement worth being associated with.
So what proof is there that Identity Politics progressives have lost their sense of humor? Ask almost any professional comedian out there.
Bill Maher and Dennis Miller
John Cleese
Jerry Seinfeld
That's just to name a few.
Oh, wait. Those are all white males, so that disqualifies them, right? No. What would disqualify them is if they aren't funny. They know comedy, so their opinions on comedy matter.
But in case that logic isn't enough for you, consider what Chris Rock said.
I stopped playing colleges... [it's] their willingness not to offend anybody. Kids raised on a culture of “We’re not going to keep score in the game because we don’t want anybody to lose.” Or just ignoring race to a fault. You can’t say “the black kid over there.” No, it’s “the guy with the red shoes.” You can’t even be offensive on your way to being inoffensive.
...This is not as much fun as it used to be.
I remember making fun of conservatives back in the 80's and 90's, and telling them how they were typifying the stereotype of the "humorless conservative". Progressives have shot themselves in the foot by giving away one of their most powerful weapons.
The old Daily Show crew should take note of this warning.
Many of the most effective ideas and weapons of the right were originally created by the left and then warped and twisted to be used against the people they were supposed to have helped. Don't be surprised when they censorious nature of Identity Politics and Political Correctness is adopted by the right and used against us before long.
The good news is that a Hillary victory will probably be the beginning of the downfall of identity politics.
The presence of a Democrat in the nominal top U.S. job can be usefully instructive for young workers and citizens. It helps demonstrate the richly bipartisan nature of the American plutocracy and Empire. The people need to see and experience how the intolerable misery and oppression imposed by capitalism and its evil twin imperialism live on when Democrats hold the White House. At the same time, the presence of a Republican in the White House tends to fuel the illusion among progressives and others that the main problem in the country is that the wrong party holds executive power and that all energy and activism must be directed at fixing that.
...
But there’s more good news here about a Hillary presidency. Not all Democratic presidents are equally good at shutting progressive activism down. As the likely Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein (for whom I took five minutes to early vote in a “contested state” three weeks ago) noted in an interview with me last April, Hillary Clinton will have considerably less capacity to deceive and bamboozle progressive and young workers and citizens than Barack Obama enjoyed in 2007-08. “Obama,” Stein noted, was fairly new on the scene. Hillary,” by contrast, “has been a warmonger who never found a war she didn’t love forever!” Hillary’s corporatist track record – ably documented in Doug Henwood’s book My Turn: Hillary Clinton Targets the Presidency (her imperial track record receives equally impressive treatment in Diana Johnstone’s volume Queen of Chaos: The Misadventures of Hillary Clinton) – is also long and transparently bad. All that and Mrs. Clinton’s remarkable lacks of charisma and trustworthiness could be useful for left activism and politics in coming years.
It's more than likely that Democrats will be eating their own in four years.
Comments
GREAT essay. Thanks.
I'm so desperately sick of identity politics I could scream. The personal may be political, but that doesn't mean that ONLY the personal is political.
Twain Disciple
What's more personal than being killed in a nuclear war?
I'm confused about all the things that are supposedly "not personal."
Just as I'm confused that racism and sexism apparently have nothing to do with allocations of wealth and power.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
For many of us, it's always been class identity and it's been
sad, and kind of a joke, to see identity politics entrench itself in the Democratic party. Identity politics divides wage earners instead of promoting solidarity. You don't see "System change not climate change" if you're het up about someone saying "colored person" instead of a "person of color." (Tell it to the NAACP).
Identity politics is a useful tool of monopoly capital to keep workers from realizing common cause and recognizing the enemy of both the 90% and a livable planet. Naomi Klein gets it, and radical economists have "gotten" it for the past decades even when Business Week was apologizing for the tough new phrase "multinational corporations" in the 1960s.
Alexander Cockburn believed in class awareness and was a fine reporter and when Navasky was editor of The Nation Alex got two whole pages for his reports - a lot for a small magazine. Editors change and Cockburn lost a page and was replaced by Patricia Williams, of Brawley notoriety, and a law prof who specialized in racial based jurisprudence and seems to think identity is destiny. Then, Cockburn was soon no longer in print at the Nation and he started Counter Punch so for the truth it was a net gain and the Nation sank into semi-irrelevance.
International worker and sustainable agriculturalist solidarity is needed to fend off climate change and to do so, in my view, people need to realize capitalism is obsolete and the exploitation of people and resources must end before we ourselves and most other species end.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
Have to second your statement. White privilege surveys
Have to second your statement "Identity politics is a useful tool of monopoly capital to keep workers from realizing common cause..." Just recently read about a high school in Oregon, part of the Beaverton school district in an area called Aloha. The name of the high school is also called Aloha.
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2016/09/white_privilege_sur...
Well, turns out white students in a literature course were sent home with a "white privilege" survey. Caused quite a stir. The high school has the lowest income white students in the local area. The whole push of this survey and comments by school officials defending it was essentially that your identity and world experiences are defined solely by your skin color. You are your pigment. And this is exactly what factory owners have told workers for decades to divide them--you are nothing but your skin color, and then proceeded to use fear and racial differences to divide divide workers against common economic destructive forces.
So what are white kids from families barely managing to keep their homes and feed themselves going to answer on these white privileged surveys. What are white kids who have seen their friends and their families evicted from homes to due to layoffs supposed to think and answer? The thinking behind this form of divisive identify politics completely eliminate class so that the white daughter of a Aloha truck driver is on the same level of privilege as say the white daughter of a presidential candidate or Wall Street CEO bankster.
There is no conspiracy here but it seems to make sense form a class war point of view that this divisive identity politics is prominently played out in a racially mix and working class school?
I used to think how utterly stupid when gop college students would put on bake sales where items were priced by the buyers skin color. There are similar types of political theater. I thought, great going young gopers, you have just alienated and driven away every future minority leader on that campus from joining the gop or even considering conservative economic ideas. Great outreach assholes.
And I believe the same as gop bake sales are happening with these white privilege surveys and others related to it. They are just recruiting future members of the gop and the right wing with their racial dog whistles of racial resentment.
Oh, in Germany it’s already happening
A Turkish-German columnist and a member of the Bundestag (federal parliament) are among the German progressives who — very unwisely in my opinion — have responded to xenophobic incidents in Saxony by calling on “Bomber” Harris to “do it again!”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2276944/I-destroyed-Dresden-Bomb...
A lot of people — “Wessis” — seem to think signalling one’s pro-diversity virtue this way is funny and edgy.
Ha ha ha — no.
I live in Dresden now, so all I can say is, “Um, nice recruiting job there for the far Right, guys.”
Your posts are so educational and a pleasure to read.
Thank you so much!
In The Century of the Self, Short Run, Custom Manufacturing
combined with the VALs (Values AND Lifestyles) data driven predictive marketing techniques combined to coopt the hippies and turn them into consuming boomers.
I believe we're seeing the same thing develop with Democrats. The filter bubbles that have popped up given so many news outlets is similar to just in time and short run manufacturing that allowed VALs to be super successful. The participatory nature of these ideological silos and social media (SoMe) on the Internet is akin to the surveys that the hippies filled out, shocking the researchers with requests to offer more personal information.
I've been a big fan of this documentary for almost ten years now, and it just keeps gaining relevance and offering answers to big questions.
I just watched the Trap, another Curtis piece. It's equally as impactful as The Century of the Self, and, perhaps, more scary.
Hopping up to read the rest of the piece, gj. Thanks a bunch.
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
The Trap Talks About Game Theory and Positive and Negative
liberty.
I'm a big proponent of negative liberty, this equates to Identity Politics. I'm less excited about positive liberty, solidarity and sacrifice led by some authority, but positive liberty is necessary because we, as a group, as a people, should be going somewhere.
The big win of negative liberty has harmed our ability to seek progress. It's killed the American Dream. It's ended history and the march into a better future.
Great piece here, gj. I really appreciate it.
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
I was a typographer at one of the top
shops in NY the late 70s. We'd do a lot of seminar material for the major corporations and advertisers. The end-product often was to be, say, a print run of 200 books for a conference of the top five ad agencies in the world, or 500 books for ITT, etc.
The advertising conference attendees were taught the latest research: "sell the experience, not the product." Implicit in that: the Identity of the person desiring an experience. Take Yuppies, for instance.
It wasn't a year later that you saw a new instant coffee come out (can't remember the name), but it "had the taste of Old Vienna." Aimed at the yuppie crowd who a) found instant coffee unhip, and b) imitated European cultural practices, as a sign of their own sophistication. The coffee sucked, but the marketing was very successful.
Dylan sang in the 60s about "social clubs in drag disguise" referring to the politically hip of the day, and that's the fact of the matter. A lot of the time people are looking for someone to mate with, or a bunch of someones to dig their awesome selves as a much much higher priority than actually getting anything done.
Orwell: Where's the omelette?
We're to the point that 'Misogyny Trump Style'
is a bigger global threat than Climate Change, Cold War Part Duh, etc., etc. (see The Guardian and similar).
Nothing of real value has been discussed since one Bernard Sanders 'lost' his primary battle.
I notice that a recent Jessica Valenti (sp?) Guardian opinion piece has disappeared, after her name came up in a Wikileaks release with regard to collusion with the Clinton campaign.
(Edited)
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
Existential issues: climate change; endless wars for corporate
profit; the beggaring of the worldwide working class; Big Ag's attacks and confiscations of those lands that are used for sustainable agriculture and the dispossessing of the owners of said land; and fracking and other operations that poison the water are not to be discussed. Sure bias and hurtful speech should be suppressed but let's do it in the context of saving and honoring the earth while we de-financialize the political economy.
It's past time to say "Enough"
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
Actually, I’m now against suppressing “hurtful” speech because
who gets to decide what is bias and what is hurtful?
Ultimately? One guy at the top. Rupert Murdoch. Jeff Bezos. Mark Zuckerberg. Even at Wikipedia it’s one guy, Jimmy Wales.
It doesn't become okay just because a lot of us assume that, except for Murdoch, those guys are on “our” side.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-decries-wild-west-media-landscape-21464...
Bias and hurtful speech will be used as just one more excuse to step up “curation,” overt or stealthy, of what we are allowed to see, hear, and read.
If I had a chance to write it again, I would not use "suppress"
and would try and find a word(s) that carried the meaning to dissuade these usages but not in any legal or law enforcement sense. "Suppress" almost always carries enforcement with it.
You're right, I used a word that conveyed a meaning I did not wish to convey. Thanks.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
Much admire your writing and am glad you are here at c99. n/t
I appreciate that, and I find your comments incisive and
soundly expressed and am glad you choose to post at this site.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
Ads tend to treat us like children
The problem with advertising is that while it can be a lifestyle it's selling (see expensive car and jewellery ads), what is being sold is either fun or status. Status appeals to greed, and can be dropped from this comment as it doesn't fit my premise.
Fun, on the other hand, turns everything into either a toy (such as a car) or a party (casino ads, for instance). Life is a party, so get to partying. You're boss won't fire you for having a little fun which brings you in late and hung over, will he?
Think of all the fun you can have with that Glock or Smith & Wesson! Who needs paintball anymore!
And politicians are such party animals! Vote for Me, and We Will Par-Tee!
But if one is watching the business pages, many lines of business have become concerned that their desired customer base isn't buying. Non amount of ads will bring in the desired profits when the public isn't buying the message.
It's my contention that this can be applied to Hillary, who can't trust that her reportedly huge lead over Trump will be enough and could disappear. Hence the massive increase in high-pressure promotion. She can't take a chance that either enough votes or consistency of her support will hold against Trump's equally high-pressure attacks as the election date approaches. It only takes one lucky hit to turn the tables, and he's not going to stop trying - maybe even continuing his campaign after the election results are reported.
It won't change as long as people deliver the desired results.
Stay thrifty, my friends!
Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.
Capital used to hoodwink white workers into settling for less
by taking their side against black people--maybe you make shit money, maybe you have no future, but at least you're not one of them. Now they just do the opposite. The "Trump voter" is the new undesirable. Not a day goes by that there isn't at least one article in one of my newsfeeds that exists solely to tell me that I, as a non-Trump voter, am clearly of a higher caste than these angry, unwashed rubes raging at their own irrelevance. Hey, maybe I make shit money and have no future, but at least I'm not one of them.
Same game, same players, same rules, same result. I think all we've done is switch sides at halftime.
"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." --Noam Chomsky
They'll be eating their own words which will be
WTF?
Nice piece, gjohn.
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
I can't remember if I got this speech from another C99 member,
but wherever it came from, I have this saved in a visible place on my computer:
"'Progressive' is the new 'Liberal'
It's not a political designation, it's a lifestyle choice. It's someone who practices yoga and shops at Whole Foods and listens to NPR. Their stance on things like economic inequality and trade and war and police brutality doesn't factor into the definition at all. No, what makes them "liberal/progressive" is that they're secular, they're preoccupied with identity politics, and they hate people like Donald Trump. That's all the signifiers their tribe needs. This is the direct result of the Democrats expending so much effort trying to bring the "professional class" voters into the tent.
Well call it a job well done, because they're in it now. And it's not just that they don't care about income inequality--they are actively opposed to doing anything about it. Yet they embrace the term 'progressive'--they see themselves as broadminded and tolerant, at least as long as it doesn't cost them anything."
Basically, identity politics are the perfect distraction. Democrats can hang out little shreds of progress on just these items while still continuing all the regressive policies that were the bigger underlying issue in the first place. As long as these shreds don't interfere too badly with the mad grab for money and power, it costs Democrats nothing to do this. The perfect cover for endless war, endless oil and endless giveaways to corporations.
I don't know. It seems to me that we're only at the very
beginning of getting this political correctness/intersectionality thing right, and here come the spoilsports to smear and sneer at "identity politics". Or why is the Washington team still using the R word as its team name? You think it's cute, or not reflective of a lack of respect for Indians? Things are better now, Indians are totally respected Americans? Then why is law enforcement being allowed to run roughshod over prayer circles at DAPL? You think language, thought, disrespect, and intolerant actions are all unrelated? You think a private security company would have been allowed to sic their dogs on children to bite a little girl in the face if she was white skinned, blonde haired and blue eyed?
Or Clintonites happy about breaking the glass ceiling of the Presidency when far more women than men still make minimum wage? Yay women! As long as you're a privileged white woman. We can't talk about white privilege, yet those of us struggling to make ends meet are supposed to celebrate on November 9? One small step for a woman, one giant step for womenkind, even tho She won't push for any minimum wage increases (I'd bet, which is probably the only way I'm going to make more money)?
Is it oversensitivity? Or the regular type of sensitivity that we ought to have toward our fellow human beings but still far too often do not?
Is the problem that I don't want you to say the B word? Or that those who insist on saying the B word make an undying issue out of it and refuse to give up their privilege to insult?
Would sensitivity be an issue except for certain people's refusal to be sensitive to how others feel? You're not insensitive, I'm oversensitive? Says who? Would "identity politics" derail the conversation if everyone would just say, "OK, you don't want to be called that, I'll stop calling you that" and then we could move on to the rest of the conversation? Why is it so difficult for some people to stop using names others don't like? There are 1,025,109.8 words in the English language, http://www.languagemonitor.com/number-of-words/number-of-words-in-the-en... No, I don't know how there is 0.8 of a word. But I'm pretty sure you can do without a pretty big handful of derogatory words without running out of words to use.
Why is the solution to ignore those using derogatory language so we can tackle the rest of the "real issues," rather than telling those using derogatory language to STFU already and get a clue so we can tackle the rest of the issues?
You may be right, GJ, but we won't know unless everybody (or at least those on the left who are supposed to be on the same team) stops using insensitive language, will we?
I come from a comedic tradition. I get that there are times to push back and say the "7 dirty words". But I think that time has passed. Everybody can say bad words now, congratulations, you have the right to a potty mouth. I think we can be hilarious without being derogatory, or at the very least punch up, not down or sideways. Some people manage to think I still have a sense of humor, even tho I respect requests from men not to use derogatory names toward them and therefore don't call men richards. Sorely tempted tho I might sometimes be.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Not a chance
1) the pronouns keep changing, so it's a moving target
2) there will always be someone who will offend you, and personally, a world without offenses is not a world I want to live in
3) comedy without offense is usually not funny
4) when liberals think the opposite of "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me" become the way to go? when did liberals lose touch with what actually matters in life?
PC needs to die. Yesterday.
When the Injustice Collectors take over the entire conversation, the way they have completely done so in the Age of Political Correctness.
I ask my readers to remember that an "Injustice Collector" is not a good thing to be. Injustice Collectors are narcissist assholes who hurl their little turds into everything they encounter, wrecking all.
The linked Comment (and yes, it's only a Comment!) contains a list of characteristics of life with an Injustice Collector. Consider the following items as they are known to run loose in the liberal/progressive political community:
Now, consider these characteristics as they appear in the liberal/progressive world. What do they remind you of, especially #10 above? If your answer is or includes Daily Kos, you've got the right idea. And the same applies everywhere else that PC is practiced and identity politics fostered. Advocates of "don't say that, it might happen" or "we must frame every word we say or write to avoid all possible offense" want all the rest of us to march on nitroglycerin-filled egg shells so they don't get their little feelers hurt.
All PC and identity politics ever do is the old divide et impera (divide and conquer). The oligarchs know that, like any other community, we've got enough narcissistic dicks running around to make the plot work, too.
It's high time we deprived them of their platform. Changing the labels to avoid offense accomplishes a grand total of nothing, and wastes time, effort, and other resources that we can and should be expending actually fixing stuff.
And that's before we even approach the fact that current people/planet oriented (i.e., leftist) politics are really class politics, as you demonstrated so very well, gjohnsit!
For all of these reasons (and doubtless more), PC needs to die. Yesterday.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
This needs to be an essay in and of itself.
I love that these topics are finally being discussed.
Ever since my political epiphany the one thing that has always irked me the most (and I feel been the biggest "excluder" of potential allies ) is the whole damn PC thing.
While in principle it seems like a sound, even a good, idea in practice all it is used for is to stifle discourse, divide an already weakened group as well as making the left appear to be a humorless bunch.
I probably would have become "Liberal" many years earlier if it wasn't due to the huge amount of judgmental assholes telling me how privileged I am and how many of the worlds problems are my fault because I was born "White" (which ironically enough not too many decades back I wouldn't have been considered such being of Sicilian descent)
It's no more accurate, or appropriate, to blame me for shit done by other people sharing my skin tone that it is to say, "Well, look at all the crime committed by (Insert x group here), it just proves that all "X's" are criminals."
It's fucking bullshit, but useful bullshit for TPTB...
As far as privilege goes, yeah there is a lot of it out there, but it ain't White Privilege, it's green. Turning it into literally a black or white issue only serves to distract us from where the real problem lies, and it's not with us, it's with the greedsters.
This PC crap is probably the most effective tool that our controllers could hope for, and we placed it squarely in their hands with a nice note saying, "Please use this to bludgeon us further and keep us divided."
We may have done this to ourselves, but man where they quick to take advantage of the opportunity we presented them.
I guess their willingness to do such things in the first place is what allows some people to reach such vaunted levels of wealth and power...
Sometimes I wish I was more of scumbag... Being poor is getting old.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
This discussion gives me hope
I have considered myself a libertarian for a long time, because I didn't like what I saw from either "side" and just wanted to be left alone.
The older I get the more pragmatic I become, and I realize there are just some things that even I must admit that we share this world and we're better off working together on some things.
But I simply haven't been able to fully embrace the left, even if I want to. I like many progressive policies. I'll most likely be voting for Jill Stein in a couple weeks. But I just can't past the identity politics of the modern left. I consider myself an open-minded person who tries to treat everyone I meet with respect regardless of their gender, race, sexuality, religion, etc. But identity politics makes me their enemy simply because I'm a white cis-het male, a "shitlord" if you will, and nothing I can do will change that.
Modern PC has turned even the most minor offense into a cause for civil war. Intersectional feminism and all related -isms have turned people into whining children who need protection from every triggering micro-agression, rather than strong people who can build a better world.
It wasn't that long ago that manspreading was a plague on the world. Really? Men sitting with their knees too far apart in public is oppressive?
Minorities now get their own separate "safe spaces" on campus where whites aren't allowed? The modern left is doing a better job promoting segregation than the KKK ever did.
And from there it only gets worse. The "left" has gone full circle and now discriminates openly against the very people they claim to embrace and protect.
http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2016/10/14/peter-thiel-shows-us-there...
Until the left can go back to true inclusiveness, it will only get worse and people will continue be more divided, leaving the elite to run the world as they please.
Right now I wish I was born with more thumbs...
Because the two I am holding up for you right now seem inadequate.
I think we are close to moving past this insane period, and if we do the 1% are screwed because the "Left" and "right" share a lot more common goals than either group does with the oligarchs, and the walls they have been building to divide us seem to be getting thinner every day and we are starting to see through to the other side and finally realize that we really do mostly want the same things on about 80% of the real important issues...
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Here's how you know it's nuts
I would gladly vote for a candidate that slandered white men like me every single day in the crudest, most vile terms possible, IF he/she had the right policies on civil rights, war, foreign policy, the environment, trade, and wealth inequality.
I'd vote for him/her twice to be called a white c*cksucker daily, if I could get those policies.
I'd just turn off the TV. Problem solved.
But to mainstream liberals, the policies are of secondary importance.
The pronouns are more important than what will actually impact them.
Thanks for the link. Although
Thanks for the link. Although I find it distressing that one rich guy with power who happens to be gay and support discrimination against the relative poors who happen to be gay has been treated as an overwhelming thing.
The politically/control-freakery-minded hetero 1%ers don't typically ally with those of us poors who are hetero either, because they typically place their values on money and power, rather than sexual orientation.
Gay people had to get 'loud and proud' to make society realize how incredibly ignorant and intrusive it was of any of (the 'royal us', lol) us - in or out of government/law enforcement - to try to intrude our own personal tastes into their (or anyone's) personal lives, these obviously being none of our business but, in every case, we are all people with a right to make our own personal choices/do what suits us best and that's what has to be recognized.
People raised in religions who think that sex itself is dirty/shameful and to be done only for purposes of procreation within marriage or in some specific manner need to get therapy and a more sane religion or at least keep it to themselves. That's caused so many problems and so much discrimination against women and gays...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
I'm not drawing judgment
I'm not drawing judgment of anyone for their support or lack thereof for Peter Thiel. It's certainly people's right to criticize him for his support of Trump.
What I find disgusting is the acceptability of othering when it's someone you disagree with. "Gay is OK! Unless you disagree with us, then we're going to tell you that your identity is false."
The purpose of identity politics isn't about equality or acceptance, it's about creating a controllable hive mind driven by fear of being cast out of the in group.
Edit: Just to add another thought to this...
Peter Thiel is a billionaire. He can protect himself, I'm not worried about him. How many people are supporting Hillary because they fear being othered by the Clinton machine? How many minority people are intimidated into supporting her for fear of losing their support systems? Being cast out of their group of friends?
It's truly evil behavior.
There's certainly a lot that
There's certainly a lot that's right about protecting people/groups from discrimination/libel/slander, but this has to be viewed reasonably, because (all of us having had varied experiences and often developing different mental perspectives/associations) virtually everyone at some point will have either bad associations with, or see connotations to, words or phrases not intended in the manner taken - and because certain factions will use the very effort to de-normalize abusive behaviour toward vulnerable groups/persons against its intent, specifically in order to defeat that effort.
A divided people carefully made wary of/angry at/dismissive of each other/squabbling among themselves is so much easier to control...
A balance must be struck - although where people have been less-attacked/oppressed, offense/hurt is less likely to be assumed as the purpose in the use of what may be common phrases or words, such as bitch/bitching, typically used very lightly around here but apparently having a more serious meaning in other areas/among other groups, making it difficult to determine/remember that some might find such terms offensive.
In further example, people in various other countries may find it very difficult to understand how people in the US can be brainwashed into thinking of poverty as a shameful 'fault' issue or into thinking that the wealthier a person is, the wiser and more competent they are, even in areas outside their competence, such as in governance.
But this seems to me to be due to the 'American Dream' becoming warped from a vision of democracy to a 'get rich quick' mentality imposed by those placing human value only in relation to what valuables they owned or were likely to, right up to this point of our non-billionaire selves becoming chattels, whether disposable or currently useful to Those Who Matter Because Worth Real Money.
Other countries not at the time suffering the (typically corporate/1%-interest-created) same issues as the US have placed reasonable limitations on specific types of abusive/discriminatory terms without impeding anyone's freedom of speech (hate speech/slander/libel directed against/in describing the more vulnerable/abused is nobody's right) and positively altered society's overall perception and treatment of various groups, but a lot of protections have been destroyed and very ugly social engineering has been spread around the world by self-interests, as a part of their corruption/take-over of governments and attack upon the very concepts of society, democracy, and basic human rights...
But the general US population has been so incredibly divided into so many arbitrary and carefully separated categories by massive and ongoing media and other propaganda campaigns for so much longer than various others, that their task in overcoming this is much more difficult...
Framing affects perception and even falsifies memory, when continually done by an army of propaganda specialists, and it's impressive that so many have overcome/resisted it in so many areas after so very much of it for so long, lending hope to the rest of us.
But I suppose that all I can say is that the regulars here have very often deeply impressed and have certainly never themselves used words or terms which offended me, so, what do I know, lol?
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
1) Who cares, is it really so difficult you can't keep
track? I find that hard to believe.
2) Just because people get offended doesn't mean you have to go out of your way to deliberately cause offense.
3) Seinfeld, DeGeneres, pootie diaries, etc., etc. Heck, Obama has had some pretty good lines. Not your thing maybe, but pretty successful (yes, I know, Seinfeld is one of those objecting that things have gone too far, but usually he's pretty inoffensive). Carol Burnett. Mary Tyler Moore. Lots of old comedians were inoffensive as required by censors at the time and still pretty funny. I would not assert the opposite - that comedy with offense is not funny - sometimes it is. But being outrageous or juxtaposing the unexpected can certainly be funny without being offensive. So I disagree. In fact, sometimes being funny without offense is pretty clever and original.
4) I remember saying that when I was a kid and it was not entirely true then, and it is not entirely true now. It is bravado. Not the opposite, but not entirely true. No one is losing touch with "what actually matters," but again, says who? There is a reason people use derogatory language in association with lynchings, beatings, rapings, wars, etc. There is a reason bullies start with name calling and end with schoolyard fights. The Role Language Plays in Social Behavior
I still say there would not be a giant issue-derailing discussion of PC language, if those who refuse to be PC would simply stop refusing. It is not those who request respect, but those who refuse to give it who are the problem.
Being well aware that there are other important issues, I am ending my engagement in this one. We will have to agree to disagree. But your post needed more challenge, less me-too-ism.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Re:
1) Yes, it is difficult to keep up with the changing pronouns if you don't travel in those circles.
2) You obviously aren't Irish. Yanking people's chain for no other purpose than to get an emotional reaction is the point. That's how you "win".
3) The point is that liberals now insist on self-censorship. Lenny Bruce is no longer welcome. Only politically-correct, sterile humor now. Oh, joy.
4) And the point is that beatings, rapings, wars, etc. need to be stopped. Those are important.
Not using the correct pronoun is not important. If that isn't obvious then I don't know what else to say.
Have to agree with you
Yes, the 1% sometimes uses identity politics as a distraction and a means of turning groups against each other.
But discrimination and bigotry still exist and we would do well to learn the difference between 1% manipulation and addressing valid problems people in our society still face.
It makes me really uneasy to hear liberals/progressives talking in terms of racism, sexism, etc. not being a valid issue. Of course it is. Just because the 1% is exploiting it for their gain doesn't mean bigotry should be ignored.
"If you can't eat their food, drink their booze, take their money and then vote against them you've got no business being in Congress."
That's not the case
No one is saying that racism/bigotry should be ignored.
But we also shouldn't be falsely accused of saying that, for the crime of pointing out the truth that identity politics is a useful tool of TPTB, and they are pushing it on us.
Thanks for clarifying that
No, people shouldn't be falsely accused of that. It's terribly unfair to use those kinds of false accusations for political gain.
"If you can't eat their food, drink their booze, take their money and then vote against them you've got no business being in Congress."
No one said . . .
. . . racism, sexism, etc. are not valid issues. Identity politics has become a way of keeping people who have economic and class interests apart. Concentrating on what 99% of us have in common will do more to reduce racism, sexism and all the other manufactured divisions that keep us apart than insisting that a 25 year old white clerk in a hardware store making nothing because the factory that gave his father a working life and a pension closed declare his admission of white privilege before he can join in the struggle for a better life.
Identity politics has become a contest. The one who takes the greatest offense in the most innocent comment wins.
Racism, sexism, homophobia and other isms are real. Identity politics uses these real problems to keep people apart. Do you really think it's OK for a woman to be driven from a room in tears because she used, with no intent to hurt, the word disabled? It's infinitely more important to get people who are (Select the politically correct synonym for disabled of your choice.) the kinds of assistance that will improve their lives than it is to shame someone who wants to improve their condition, but uses the insensitive word "disabled".
I believe "they" say
"alternatively abled" these days, but who can keep up with what's "acceptable" anymore?
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Indeed, this is why I am pushing back so much harder lately.
I have decided that I am done playing that game. I will use the words I use and if people try to read something into them that isn't there I just reply, "Well, if you want to sit there and attack me for my choice of words rather than the intent behind them I think that goes to show more about you than me and I doubt we could actually engage in a serious discussion on the matter."
People really need to learn that intent matters MORE than verbiage, and while we are at it we need to relearn the old, "Sticks and stones" thing.
Words only have the power that we choose to imbue upon them.
The more people tell me how offensive I am the more I have this twisted desire to offend them further. It might not be right, but it sure as hell is there.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Exactly. n/t
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
those who are easily offended
-- various attributions, including the Almighty
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
the boy who cried "Wolf!"
Bigotry should not be ignored -- I don't think anyone reading here would dispute that. What we're talking about is very much akin to the old folk tale of "The Boy Who Cried Wolf". The gist of that tale is that the boy cried "Wolf!" to get attention to himself, rather than because he sighted a wolf. (Exactly like the PC-insisters, race baiters, etc., we all have encountered as liberals/progressives/leftists.) Finally, when the boy really did see a wolf, no one paid any attention -- and the wolf inflicted major damage before anyone believed it was even around.
Likewise, for three generations now, we've had PC filtering on all of our language. Has it resulted in a fairer world (or better in any other way)? It has not! If anything, it's now easier for real bigots to get away with real crimes, because all the PC language nonsense has de-sensitized John Q. and Jane Z. Citizen to the real bigotry that is really going on out there. The real wolf is now happily munching on the members of our flock.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
"Is it oversensitivity?
"Or the regular type of sensitivity that we ought to have toward our fellow human beings but still far too often do not?"
It's bull$h!t.
Sure, we should strive to "be nice" toward our fellow man.
But most p.c. alternatives are drivel. Or eventually reach driveldum.
I don't see how replacing "black guy" with "African American" is any more "sensitive" or "nice." It's just five more syllables I have to beller to describe the same thing.
Stupid.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Suppose I want to call you Wanker instead of Wink?
Is your request for me to go back to calling you Wink just PC oversensitive drivel on your part?
It's just words. Not an issue. Stupid to bring it up. Right?
It's not the chosen words. It's the respect that goes along with acceding to someone's request to be called what they want to be called, and not to call them something that for whatever reason they find offensive.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Well if Wink is anything like me, I imagine he would chuckle and
add such a person to the "Pay no mind list".
My years in corrections thickened an already thick skin and made me realize that when it comes to words it's mostly mind over matter.
"I don't mind what you call me because you don't matter" if you are just some random asshole on the internet. (This isn't directed at you, but your fictitious writer)
The input or criticisms of or about me from the ignorant are at worst a mild annoyance, but usually just a source of amusement.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Exactly. n/t
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
So name-calling is the same
as not using the correct pronoun to you?
Really?
But if someone called me names then I know that I've won the debate. I wouldn't be offended at all.
Gay instead of fag?
No problem. Some p.c. actually makes sense. But p.c. has long been a runaway train. Seems the P.C. Police can't find enough words or expressions to change into something almost unrecognizable in order to not offend some person, persons or groups practically nobody's heard of.
You can't call them That, Wink, it's offensive!
To whom? And, Now what are we calling them?
Huh? We're now using (a word, expression) that 90% of us won't recognise as a word or expression that describes what we once called (them) so that we don't offend (them)?
Got it.
No thanks.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
I understand why you might disagree with gjohnsit
on identity politics itself, but have a hard time understanding how you could think that "we're just starting to get it right" when identity politics has been used for the past 6 years as the moral alibi for endless war, austerity economics, and the police state. Basically, Barack Obama was black, therefore identity politics dictated we couldn't oppose his policies of endless war, austerity economics, and the police state (also confirmation of the three-tier justice system and the idea that the rich are above the law.)
Now, the same applies to Hillary Clinton, because she's female and a lot of Black people support her, and that's all it takes to justify a vote for her.
So while I understand your supporting identity politics in its original form--just as I might support the idea of a free and independent, truth-seeking 4th estate--that's obviously not the conditions under which we live. The powerful have plucked the movements against racism and sexism out of our hands like I would pluck low-hanging fruit off a tree. As for being oversensitive, here's the fact of the matter: all it takes is one Black person or one woman--or someone online who claims to be Black or female--saying that they've been hurt by something racist or sexist and the only acceptable action that a liberal can take is to stop everything and agree with them on everything and give them everything they want. Because that's the ethic under which we live: if someone, anyone, who belongs to an oppressed group says they're being hurt we have to do whatever they say will remove the hurt. Or we're collaborating with the oppressor.
The problem with this, of course, is that not all oppressed people are perfect, honest, saints. There are actually Black people, Latino people, women of all colors, and people of all manner of oppressed groups, who are corrupt and willing to deliver lines for a dollar. After watching John Lewis and Dolores Huerta lie for Hillary "Bring 'em to Heel" Clinton, it should be obvious that the old ethic of "If you're a member of an oppressed group, anything you say goes" is fundamentally flawed.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Bing!! "here's the fact...
"As for being oversensitive, here's the fact of the matter: all it takes is one Black person or one woman--or someone online who claims to be Black or female--saying that they've been hurt by something racist or sexist and the only acceptable action that a liberal can take is to stop everything and agree with them on everything and give them everything they want. Because that's the ethic under which we live: if someone, anyone, who belongs to an oppressed group says they're being hurt we have to do whatever they say will remove the hurt. Or we're collaborating with the oppressor."
Exactly.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Exactly
Just want to say I always love your posts CSTS, you always have such great insight.
Thanks!
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Great essay, good links.
I've been thinking about this for a looong time. Identity Politics isn't really politics at all. It's more like theater and it distracts us from actual politics which are all about economics and not "identity," whatever that is. I have volumes more to say about this but it's late and I am tired. Thanks for the essay.
We wanted decent healthcare, a living wage and free college.
The Democrats gave us Biden and war instead.
'Push your button' politics.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
What About Civics?
Our current politics, and I do believe it's politics, have no civic component to them.
About 10 years ago I suggested at dKos that we try to revive the word civics, as our politics seemed to have been polluted and bore no resemblance to the civic nature of citizenship.
Civics and citizenship are not germane topics in the election this year. Side with the winner and then consume to your bank account's ability. Congratulations, you're a winner. God Bless America.
Anyway, my point is that identity politics, IMO, are politics, but are not civics.
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
Let me answer your question.
Edit: @ elenacarlena. I think I messed up with indents so not clear who to respond to.
I get your point on using language, and yes, we should not be using derogatory language. But that language is not the root cause, but only a symptom. But you posed a question which is critical in how identity politics will be played out.
You pose the question: " You think a private security company would have been allowed to sic their dogs on children to bite a little girl in the face if she was white skinned, blonde haired and blue eyed?"
I gather you think not. My answer: "depending on the circumstances and your class absolutely yes."
Does this question and the implied answer assume that "white privilege" is something absolute and every white person holds that privilege absolutely? Are we talking away class, and I mean totally out of the question? Here are some pictures of white women having state forced used against them:
https://www.google.com/search?q=new+york+city+ows+woman+pepper+sprayed&e...
When whites challenge the economic order, they get their asses kicked, and not nicely unless of course they are famous and upper class.
This is not to deny that racism disproportionately effects people of color, but at the same time this does not mean every white person is automatically immune to police brutality and injustice. We are in a mix of racial and class struggle. Neither can be ignored.
(Sorry, but who brings a child to a protest they know it has almost a certain chance to turn violent?)
Bullies go after those they
Bullies go after those they perceive as vulnerable, or have been led to believe are 'safe targets' unable to fight back or not likely to be given the protection of the law or, in such cases, 'authority' rather than law created and exerted in the public interest.
America was intended to be a land of laws, not men, with a Constitution designed to safeguard rights, including those of the pursuit of happiness, to be guaranteed to all citizens throughout the country. They have been ignored, but they and that Constitution still exist, just as all truth/reality does in the face of those who attempt to deny it to try to create their own reality and to force this mad concept on everyone else.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Democratic party and magical minority voters
If Democrats proposed sound economic policies they wouldn't have to wait for these magical minority voters to appear in the future. They are just trying to get through another election cycle pitting people against each other, hoping they eke out a win. Democrats are becoming a minority party in this country because they don't offer the "little guy" anything anymore. In the meantime, Republicans just take over more of the 50 states.
The Republicans use to cheat
The Republicans used to cheat more. How times have changed!
Edited, since I missed a letter.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Media welcomes another "humanitarian" war
link
Brilliant essay!
Brilliant essay!
Except that Obama was another pretend-democrat in for 8 years of worsening conditions, so it's already known that a corporate Dem will merely more gently than the Republicans screw the people over, although the Clintons do seem to lack the 'more gently' idea... and why waste lube on the peasants, anyway?
But in any event, once the Clintons get back into renting out rooms and services in the White (Boarding-)House, domestic law will have been off-shored to a for-profit corporate/billionaire-only 'law' court under the Bush-initiated, fracking Secretary of State Clinton-globally-promoted and Obama-pushed 'trade deals', where the public interest will have no standing and there can be no pretense of the people having any voice or democracy - under the now rather Orwellian 'Democratic' Party 'brand'.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
This illustrates the sole difference between the Repubs and Dems
at the party level at least in my eyes anymore.
(Profanity laced rant to follow so you may want to just scroll down past this.)
With both parties we are gonna get fucked, but at least the Democrats used to take the time to wine and dine us first.
That the wine was watered down Boons Farm and the dine may have been the expired hot-dogs from the mini mart's dumpster seemed almost ok because at least it was something and if we were gonna get fucked anyway may as well get at least a little something out of it.
Now they don't even uphold the pretense anymore, like an abusive spouse they figure we will just keep on taking it because what are we gonna do, leave them?
In their arrogance and sense of superiority it never occurs to them that we may actually do so, right up until we do, and like any abuser, the minute we question them or start heading for the door the attacks start...
As one great person once said, "Fuck the fucking fuckers!".
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Profanity evolved with
Profanity evolved with humanity to be used in situations like this - much like the use of fermented beverages, natural recreational drugs and tobacco. It's the situations calling for high levels of profanity that I, at least, find offensive.
Although I really don't believe the fucking fuckers deserve fucking, which is a damn sight too good for them - un-fuck them and leave them unfucked to the day they rot in the hell of their making or, better yet, a prison cell for their damaging/hazardous/traitorous acts with their completion miraculously averted at the last moment. Especially Bill (ick!) and Hill.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
As a left-handed Irish-Anglo-Russian-Pole
I just don't feel safe in this space.
Then again, maybe that's because my cultural heritages demand I both oppress and rebel against myself.
Orwell: Where's the omelette?
Oh Jesus, thanks a lot!
You just made me shoot Mt. Dew on my brand new keyboard!
At least it's sugar free, but damn, you guys are hard on my keyboards and monitors...
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
left-handed Irish-Russian-Pole
I attempted to imagine a "space" in which your cultural heritages would permit you to be comfortable with yourself.
I now have a headache for my troubles!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Just grateful it never occurred to me
to devote my time to join with others of my heritage. I'd be totally alone.
Orwell: Where's the omelette?
A friend of mine
answered his doorbell one day. It was a little girl, who said that she was lost and could he help her? Fearing an accusation of pedophilia, he refused to let her in, but he did call 911. It turned out she was a special needs child who had wandered away from her class.
That is what identity politics has done to us - it's filled us with so much warped thinking that we cannot help a lost child.
When I was in college in the late 70s the "proper" response to "hello" was "GET AWAY FROM ME YOU PERVERT!!!" At the time I thought it was me; I was a puppy dog, my neediness of friendship was coming across as creepy. True enough, but also an entire generation of women were so indoctrinated to fear men that they literally appeared paranoid. Way to go feminism! Alienate everyone who has the curse of being born male! But wait, that was the plan. Hillary's greatest contribution to humanity will be by being so blatantly hypocritical she will discredit her version of feminism for generations. If we're lucky we may drive a stake through identity politics and actually eliminate misogyny and racism, at least as tools of capitalism.
On to Biden since 1973
I can't quite go there.
You are mistaken if you think women fear men because feminists have indoctrinated them.
Plenty of women who aren't feminists fear men, mainly because there's a chance of getting beaten, raped, or killed. The chances of a man being beaten, raped, or killed by a woman, while not nonexistent, are much, much lower.
The reason you think feminism is responsible for women's fear of men is that non-feminist women who fear men don't do anything about that fear that men are likely to notice. The non-feminist female approach to fearing men is simply to try to avoid them, to be quiet, to dress down or even gain weight in an attempt to deflect attention from oneself. Having gone this road myself in the far past, I'm familiar with it.
What feminism used to teach women is not fear of men, but resistance and action that pushes through the fear.
However, that's what feminism used to be. What feminism is now is a form of moral catsup that can be thrown over any number of evils committed by purportedly left-wing politicians. Also useful for squirting in the face of any political opponent.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Haha!
Immediately after writing that I turned on the local news and saw the latest Clarence Thomas groping scandal. Assuming the story is real (an easy assumption) It should be clear that an 18year old puppy dog is not Clarence Thomas, but not yet.
On to Biden since 1973
Chris Rock is right.
Excellent essay! I've never been a fan of p.c., believe it to be about watering down the language to the lowest inoffensive common denominator totally lacking of color. Wink, we can't say marijuana becuz it is an African American slur. Use cannabis or pot instead. What about marahootch? Nope! Cannabis or pot.
I don't know how Chris Rock and other comedians make a living these days. Someone using Richard Pryor's old routines would be booed off the stage for violating the p.c. code. Wink, it's about being nice. No, it's about watering down the language to a nice pale gray.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
I thought "marijuana" was a *Latino* slur?
I mean, it's literally two Spanish female names run together: "Maryjane". So how'd it become a slur on African-Americans (and what are they going to do when/if they decide that expression doesn't describe them properly)?
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Barack Obama: The Triumph of Neoliberalism & Identity Politics
Please keep foremost in your mind that the election of Barack Obama froze progressives in their tracks for 8 years -- until Bernie decided to challenge. There has been so much white guilt and exclusivity in identity politics that he was assumed to be good because he was Black. People who taught me revolutionary theory in the university told me that I could not criticize Obama because all criticism of him reinforced the racist reactions of the Right. His administration began with the rejection of the public option -- a rejection that came from the White House not from the Republicans. Blind PC advocates have actually convinced themselves that he was blocked from enacting what he wanted. No, Schumer came on television to say that they had the votes for the public option and from the White House, Rahm whacked that offer on the head and we never heard of it again. So now Obamacare is collapsing -- as any one who understands healthcare economic knew it would. But when I stated these things at meetings of health care advocacy groups and Move On I was treated as someone who didn't get it -- who didn't understand that Obama could do anything wrong because he was our first Black president. Wall Street and the insurance companies were laughing all the way to the bank when he required people to purchase coverage with no cost controls whatsoever included, having plighted his troth with Big Pharma. As this chicken comes home to roost, use these lessons to avoid the same traps again. My 'progressive' friends are saying that at least HIllary will have progressive policies on women. As Hillary said at Benghazi hearings, "What difference does it make? -- if she first subverts the democratic process, takes left opposition out at the knees and then asserts the primacy of identity politics to obscure this corporatist takeover. When the primary election was stolen she showed that she will undo the democratic process at the very root in order to consolidate the power supported by the Saudis and the big banks -- all the while convincing people that Russia is trying to interfere with our "free" elections! It's a very serious time and people have to learn these lessons quickly because Trump has taken a great deal of deserved popular anger and directed it also against preserving any semblance of democratic process. Only the left can lead us through this and the left must get its lessons straight very quickly -- as in yesterday.
race, gender and civil rights
I think this cleaving of white working class voters from the Democratic party started around 1964 or earlier because of the civil rights laws the Democrats enacted, and the racist attitudes of a lot of working-class whites in and out of the South. They weren't accepting of change in this arena, and still aren't. They left for the Republicons. From that perspective, I suppose the Democratic Party did abandon them. I know, I grew up in such a family, and only after I was educated out of such attitudes did I see that the Republicons were not the party for me and not representative of my best interests. Why? Because I saw that trying to maintain the privilege of straight white males was harming every other group in society, and ultimately results no hope for a better world.
I think Bernie Sanders' candidacy was an attempt to inject economic populism back into the Democratic Party; only time will tell us if it worked. I think it's a real stretch to say that identity politics are a "help-mate of the status quo". Organize, educate and fight for both economic and social rights-- that is the answer.
For at least another hundred years we must pretend to ourselves and to everyone that fair is foul and foul is fair; for foul is useful and fair is not. Avarice and usury and precaution must be our gods for a little longer still.
John Maynard Keynes, 1930
That *is* the answer--
but you're talking about what should be, not what currently is.
The powers that be have co-opted all those social movements against bigotry, because those movements don't necessarily require any adjustment in economics, military action, or the police state here at home. Thus, the movements against racism and sexism and homophobia are excellent moral catsup that the powers that be can pour over their many sins, and appear to be moral while they are actually wrecking the world.
We currently have no way to take those movements back from those people, especially since those who have fought those fights appear to be falling to their knees before Hillary on all sides.
As far as I'm concerned, feminism is now dead. It has no more significance than a flag pin on a politician's lapel.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Democratic Primary and Identity Politics
I would venture a guess that almost everyone on this site is here because of identity politics. Bernie Sanders had the better platform, and had he been able to pursue his agenda from the White House, it would move this country toward a better life for everyone of all races, religions, and creeds.
But Hillary chose identity politics, and a large portion of the left embraced it fully. She attacked Bernie and his supporters calling us bros and misogynists. Her surrogates shamed women who dared support Bernie. She talked about how Bernie didn't care about or connect with black people, even as she considers them super-predators while Bernie would have pursued providing higher minimum wage and affordable or even free college to lift them out of poverty.
Make no mistake, identity politics is the cancer that gave us Hillary and Trump, and the left would do well to excise it from their ranks.
I thought they
already were eating themselves THIS election.
And 'any movement that can't laugh at itself isn't a movement worth having' is Absolutely Spot Fucking On! I always thought comedy was funny Because it offended someone! The true test of whether or not You had a Real sense of humor was when You got put under the light! So many people fail this test at times(me included) that it's not even funny.
I'm working on it though, the things I laugh at now days tend to horrify people.
My reply to their horror is laughter or tears 'cause I'm tired of crying.
peace
Ya got to be a Spirit, cain't be no Ghost. . .
Explain Bldg #7. . . still waiting. . .
If you’ve ever wondered whether you would have complied in 1930’s Germany,
Now you know. . .
sign at protest march
Social justice warriors
LoL! I could get behind a lot of what he said. :)
His delivery kinda reminds me of Lee Camp's for the snark level if nothing else.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me