"Identity politics is the handmaiden of neoliberalism"

[Costa Fierro]

It's a good question. I've seen it suggested that it might stem from the failure of the left to achieve its historical goals.

Perhaps it has to do with the rise of the social democratic state, whereby private interests are regulated but maintained and the state provides for its people in the same way a transitional state would in a communist or socialist system. And that, much like other ideological movements that had their genesis at a time where inequality between people was at it's zenith, in order to survive it has had to redefine it's goals and evolve with the society around it.

However that could be why identity politics has caught on within the Anglosphere but it can't explain why it would originate in said sphere. I view it, more or less, as an American political phenomena which (thankfully) hasn't spread down here quite yet, but I do not know of the close minded, neurotic political discourse that occurs in universities here.

So it may also be a product of our societies having encouraged selfishness and narrow individual self-interest, as opposed to broad collective interest, a lot more since the 1980s.

Was this reflected in Western society as a whole or country specific societies?

Also, the concept of multiculturalism as a public policy encouraging people to identify with their ethnic 'community' rather that with their nation or indeed with their social class didn't, I think, grow organically. It was pushed forward by intellectuals and political leaders from the 1970s onward. Making it coincide with the economic changes of the period, the atomisation of society, the new focus on individualism and consumer-identy, and the demographic decline of the traditional working classes. So it probably provided a new sense of belonging, for people who craved one in that destructuring context.

The thing is, the Anglosphere isn't the only country that has become multi-ethnic and multicultural since the 20th century, so why is it that we have this phenomena that is present in some countries and not in others?

[Nouveau Yathrib]

This is a great thread (I almost never say this) and I agree with the OP and the general premise contained herein.

I've argued multiple times (including in published articles which I won't be linking to so as to protect my identity) that the new political cleavage is no longer between left and right, or fought along economic/class grounds, but between populist/nationalist and elitist/globalist factions, or as Tony Blair (a man who is generally anathema to everything I stand for) described it "Open" versus "Closed".

It may or may not be the case that identity politics is an insidious plot by neoliberals to divide and conquer the economically disadvantaged, although if that is the case then the privileged have unfortunately divided themselves in the process.

Either way, I suspect we're actually going back to the 19th century political cleavage - "Whig" versus "Tory" rather than left/right or socialist/capitalist.

If this is the case, it's actually good news for the working class.

While throughout the 20th century the divide was between the rich capitalist class, and the socialistic working class, with both groups having to appeal to the middle class "swing voter" in order to gain or maintain power; in the 19th century the divide was between the aristocratic, conservative Tories and the capitalistic, liberal Whigs - with both groups having to appeal to the working class to maintain power.

As such, if identity politics leads to return of Whiggism and Toryism in the 21st century, I for one welcome it.

How would the Canadian Conservative Party fit into this Tory/Whig dichotomy? I've heard their differences with US-style Conservatism are due to a moderating Tory influence.

Interesting to think of left-wing populism in terms of Toryism.

[Bakery Hill]

Barely any of the left wing discussions on this forum pertain to identity politics. Aren't you some sort of self confessed sociopath anyway? Is that what an old school communist is supposed to be?

This has always been an odd insult/burn to me, especially coming from leftists. Sociopathy is compulsive and a mental illness that usually sets in early in life or is genetic (essentially, entirely it of the subject's control). By insulting someone for being a sociopath, you're being a pretty flagrant bigot.

Terminology aside I recently saw a thread where he was encouraging someone to manipulate people for his own sick amusement. Maybe that's compatible with liberty and equality, what do I know really?

[SD_Film Artists]

"Identity politics is racist" You're probably a cis white male who doesn't see the benefit of identity politics to minorities.

Identity politics does have benefits for minorities, but that doesn’t mean that there aren't fascist pockets within these groups. I've seen someone express their open hatred (not just frustration, but hatred) of cis people in a safe space and not only did they get away with it but anyone who made it known that they felt alienated by such comments were banned because they dared to question their Trans overlord; despite the fact that the group was created as a sanctuary for other minorities regardless of their gender identity.

They have also taken the concept of 'cultural appropriation' to an extreme level, effectively applying racial ownership to many things, even jokes and memes even though said memes have no relation to race. Except white people- by the insidious dogma of the holy church of Safe Space, white people aren't allowed to have any cultural symbol protected by anti-cultural appropriation because white people are inherently guilty and shameful. I'd say that's pretty racist.

[Purpelia]

Barely any of the left wing discussions on this forum pertain to identity politics. Aren't you some sort of self confessed sociopath anyway? Is that what an old school communist is supposed to be?

It's more that when ever I hear "left" these days its actually SJW's. And I have simply lost the will to poke my head into yet another place only to be disappointed again. So I tend to just not partake in these things by default unless its a situation exactly like this when its explicitly spelled out that the sort of thing is bad.

Concerns about racism and sexism have been big in communist thought for over a century.

Not in the same sense as they are today though. Used to be the notion of race, gender etc. was about removing actual real institutional discrimination that was written in law. Now it's about exploiting these groups to get your self into power even if it is outright at their expense.

What on Earth are you talking about?

You are on a roleplay centric forum. You are just going to have to accept a bit of flowery language.

[Arkolon]

even jokes and memes based on the colour of your skin.

To be fair, deep fried memes, "Real Nibba Hours", "smashing the MF like button" and the use of the B emoji - however ironic, meta-ironic and post-ironic these memes eventually get - are enjoyed as entertainment at the expense of the black Internet community. As much as I enjoy these memes for their ironic quality, I have to admit the notion of race becomes pretty perceptible as you go on.

[SD_Film Artists]

even jokes and memes based on the colour of your skin.

To be fair, deep fried memes, "Real Nibba Hours", "smashing the MF like button" and the use of the B emoji - however ironic, meta-ironic and post-ironic these memes eventually get - are enjoyed as entertainment at the expense of the black Internet community. As much as I enjoy these memes for their ironic quality, I have to admit the notion of race becomes pretty perceptible as you go on.

Sorry I should have explained that more clearly; I meant that the 'safe space' groups apply racial ownership of jokes and memes just because they are thought to have originated from a minority culture even if the meme (or the new take on that meme) has nothing to do with race.

*edits previous post*

For example, there's a meme (and I realise that I could be killing any humour in it by virtue of over-explaining it) where people (African Americans) will say something like "Well I enjoy wearing clothes from my native Africa, Sharon..." with "Sharon" or some other name supposed to be representing the typical white person which the person making the meme is opposing, the joke being that white people are typically trying to suppress their culture. Hilarious.

There was then a twist on that meme by some autistic people saying "We can't all be neurotypical*, Sharon...". Whether this was funny or not, the SJW wing of the autistic community actually went full-circle by word-policing themselves by saying that they can't use that autism joke because it was originally something for black people to use and thus we can't use it even though it's not talking about black people in any way. Autism is evidently lower on the minority pecking order.

*Neurotypical = non autistic

[Lauchenoiria]

I'm autistic, and I had to leave some autism Facebook groups because I didn't agree with them on absolutely every political view they had. It's not even like I'm some right wing traditional conservative or something, I just wasn't anarcho-communist enough for them. I criticised anarchism and they attacked me and said I wanted the continued oppression of autistic people under capitalism and was probably a neurotypical troll. Nope, I have a diagnosis and I can be anti-anarchist if I want.

Also I've seen "We can't all be neurotypical, Karen" used more than Sharon? There was a picture a few months back that had it on a cake going around the internet?

[MERIZoC]

You literally that "liberal idpol" is racist. With no evidence whatsoever. You're trying to hide your very obvious brocialism and failing miserably.

When used to erase black and brown leftists? Yeah, I don't know what you'd call that except racist.

Grow some balls and stop pretending to be a leftist. It's pretty pathetic to try and hide your beliefs on an anonymous internet forum.

[Republic of the Cristo]

It's a good question. I've seen it suggested that it might stem from the failure of the left to achieve its historical goals.

Perhaps it has to do with the rise of the social democratic state, whereby private interests are regulated but maintained and the state provides for its people in the same way a transitional state would in a communist or socialist system. And that, much like other ideological movements that had their genesis at a time where inequality between people was at it's zenith, in order to survive it has had to redefine it's goals and evolve with the society around it.

However that could be why identity politics has caught on within the Anglosphere but it can't explain why it would originate in said sphere. I view it, more or less, as an American political phenomena which (thankfully) hasn't spread down here quite yet, but I do not know of the close minded, neurotic political discourse that occurs in universities here.

So it may also be a product of our societies having encouraged selfishness and narrow individual self-interest, as opposed to broad collective interest, a lot more since the 1980s.

Was this reflected in Western society as a whole or country specific societies?

Also, the concept of multiculturalism as a public policy encouraging people to identify with their ethnic 'community' rather that with their nation or indeed with their social class didn't, I think, grow organically. It was pushed forward by intellectuals and political leaders from the 1970s onward. Making it coincide with the economic changes of the period, the atomisation of society, the new focus on individualism and consumer-identy, and the demographic decline of the traditional working classes. So it probably provided a new sense of belonging, for people who craved one in that destructuring context.

The thing is, the Anglosphere isn't the only country that has become multi-ethnic and multicultural since the 20th century, so why is it that we have this phenomena that is present in some countries and not in others?

Hyper individualism is distinctly Western, and in my opinion the culture of said thing has it's beginning following the anti-war protests of 1968.

[SD_Film Artists]

I'm autistic, and I had to leave some autism Facebook groups because I didn't agree with them on absolutely every political view they had. It's not even like I'm some right wing traditional conservative or something, I just wasn't anarcho-communist enough for them. I criticised anarchism and they attacked me and said I wanted the continued oppression of autistic people under capitalism and was probably a neurotypical troll. Nope, I have a diagnosis and I can be anti-anarchist if I want.

That's exactly it; you can be a liberal, progressive, pro-LGBT autistic person and they'll still make you feel like an alt-right homophobe.

Also I've seen "We can't all be neurotypical, Karen" used more than Sharon? There was a picture a few months back that had it on a cake going around the internet?

Karen, Sharon, I forget which one it was exactly but the premise is the same.

[Liberalter]

I'm autistic, and I had to leave some autism Facebook groups because I didn't agree with them on absolutely every political view they had. It's not even like I'm some right wing traditional conservative or something, I just wasn't anarcho-communist enough for them. I criticised anarchism and they attacked me and said I wanted the continued oppression of autistic people under capitalism and was probably a neurotypical troll. Nope, I have a diagnosis and I can be anti-anarchist if I want.

That's exactly it; you can be a liberal, progressive, pro-LGBT autistic person and they'll still make you feel like an alt-right homophobe.

Since when did anarchists populate autistic communities? And yes historically capitalism has been oppressive of autistic people.
Being a liberal doesn't protect you from systematic bias based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion.

You literally that "liberal idpol" is racist. With no evidence whatsoever. You're trying to hide your very obvious brocialism and failing miserably.

When used to erase black and brown leftists? Yeah, I don't know what you'd call that except racist.

Grow some balls and stop pretending to be a leftist. It's pretty pathetic to try and hide your beliefs on an anonymous internet forum.

Again, no examples. Plus, somehow me not comforting to your views makes me a non-leftist. Proving my point that many brocialists seem to have the idea that it's only leftist if it's approved by white men.

Although to be fair, I don't know your race or gender identity.

[SD_Film Artists]

That's exactly it; you can be a liberal, progressive, pro-LGBT autistic person and they'll still make you feel like an alt-right homophobe.

Since when did anarchists populate autistic communities? And yes historically capitalism has been oppressive of autistic people.
Being a liberal doesn't protect you from systematic bias based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion.

I thought it's more the far-left, American university politics wing of the LGBT community rather than specifically anarchists, but either way they found another group of identity activists (the autistic rights movement) and decided to co-opt it and roll out their flat-pack brand of segregatory politics onto it.

The autistic rights movement, the real one, has historically looked up to scientists, entrepreneurs and general activists rather than socialist working class heroes. There is the fact that alot of autistic people rely on state benefits and thus there is a left-wing interest there, but beyond that the average autistic person is no more left or right wing than the average non-autistic person; infact I personally know an autistic UKIP supporter.

[Sovaal]

That's exactly it; you can be a liberal, progressive, pro-LGBT autistic person and they'll still make you feel like an alt-right homophobe.

Since when did anarchists populate autistic communities? And yes historically capitalism has been oppressive of autistic people.
Being a liberal doesn't protect you from systematic bias based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion.

I would imagine for as long as there have been anarchist autistic.

[Lauchenoiria]

Since when did anarchists populate autistic communities? And yes historically capitalism has been oppressive of autistic people.
Being a liberal doesn't protect you from systematic bias based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion.

I would imagine for as long as there have been anarchist autistic.

Some of the more extreme SJW autistic people have criticised me before as I am not an anarcho-communist. But then I guess that was probably just the group I was in at the time. I've also seen it on twitter although that's less anarchists and more just two factions arguing over everything they can get their hands on to argue over. I've been trying not to openly take a side on it cause I don't want to get involved in the arguments but I know some of them are really extremely intolerant of people with different political views, and it's these ones who are also pro-self diagnosis.