EPTOn July 30 2019 06:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
As I remember it, it was pretty literally ripped apart by state violence, not internal divisions (not that they didn't exist). I'd say there was a severe lack of class consciousness that contributed to it's fading into the "progressive"movement as well.
Show nested quote +
On July 30 2019 05:26 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Do the ruling class really care about lgbt or black rights so long as they are still making a shitton of money and have power and control?
Occupy Wall st was a good opportunity for people of all different backgrounds to come together and be united in saying people should have been jailed for misconduct for the GFC (More than just Madoff), that banker bonuses were excessive and the relation between wall st and govt was too cozy.But the movement was ripped apart by infighting and divisive identity politics.
And the people who benefitted from the movements collapse, the wall st firms, lobby groups and politicians constitute the most privileged people in the nation.
On July 28 2019 18:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Given that the lens is discussing privilege and discrimination, wouldn't previous examples of these so-called left-extremist-revolutions-using-identity-politics be things like the civil rights movements for the black community, for women, and for LGBT? It sounds like you're putting a pretty toxic label on something that historically has simply been a push for equality and equity in the face of systemic prejudice. I'm not black, I'm not a woman, and I'm not a member of the LGBT community, but I'm also not indignant when I hear about how they should be treated fairly.
Also, I'd argue that the opposite is true, historically: that, given enough time, it's the conservatives who fail when they play identity politics, because we continue to progress socially and culturally. They lost their fight to keep slavery, women and LGBT are becoming empowered despite socially conservative and religious norms, and even the Trump-magnified identity politics of xenophobia and white supremacy will eventually fade over the next few generations, just like how the KKK and Nazis no longer hold as much power as they once did. The conservatives don't fail due to in-fighting though; they fail because they're morally wrong and our ethics and understanding of humanity simply evolve.
On July 28 2019 17:21 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
If we go back to 2011 and the occupy Wall Street movement you will find the greatest example of a movement destroyed from within by this ideology.People with good ideas deplatformed due to their race, becoming disillusioned and stepping away from the movement.The movement collapses and the elite continue doing what they did before.
Luckily the video is still on YouTube.So if you have less than three minutes to spare you can see why revolutions led by the current far left extremists will always collapse in on themselves due to identity politics and infighting.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SCwhlZtHhWs
On July 27 2019 09:11 Redfish wrote:
1 - "what you are doing here is explicitly saying the term “privilege” is arbitrarily defined to only apply to whites for a host of historical issues."
White privilege IS only applicable to whites (though not arbitrarily). That's exactly it. There are certain privileges that only whites enjoy in America and many other nations. Congratulations, you passed the first test.
As for the rest of that first response, you're using a bunch of words you do not understand, or are (more likely) willfully refusing to understand or use correctly. Intersectionality, for example does not eliminate different individual aspects of identity. You can't just say "well gender privilege exists also, so racial privilege can't be a thing!" and vice versa - that allows you to dodge conversation about ANY aspect of identity. One can also be both privileged in some ways and disadvantaged in others (a white transgender person, for example). And, once again, because it bears repeating, because you're still using your definition of privilege as a set of outcomes, when it's NOT...it's a set of conditions.
2 - "honestly you can fuck off with this"
You know what? That was my first reaction when I got challenged with the concept of white privilege for the first time too. I worked my ass off in life, I earned a lot of what I have, I overcame some serious life-threatening shit, who the fuck are these assholes to tell me that the deck's been stacked in my favor all along?
But, I got over it and realized there was something to it. The evidence was there. It makes sense. And unlike your suggestion, I do plenty with my life other than "talking about anything but white privilege until the end of time."
Nobody's "tyrannically dictating" anything to you, and I'm not "sneakily shifting" anything by pointing out ways you're using terms incorrectly.
I'm one poster you don't know on a gaming forum. Lighten up. No reason to be disrespectful.
On July 27 2019 06:57 IgnE wrote:
1) if you are going to define an Asian group which is defined by its differences from other groups, and some of those differences are such that they result in better group outcomes along certain axes, then such group differences can reasonably be called privilege. there may be a number of other dimensions in which privilege runs the other way or privilege doesn’t exist in such a group, but privilege is inherently a multidimensional concept. what you are doing here is explicitly saying the term “privilege” is arbitrarily defined to only apply to whites for a host of historical issues. intersectionality taken on its own terms explodes that definition, or at least situates it as merely a politically motivated tactic which puts blinders on itself to achieve a set of narrow ends
2) honestly you can fuck off with this. taking your demand to its logical end, we shouldn’t be talking about anything but white privilege until the end of time. it’s complete nonsense. i already granted all the presuppositions about empirically existing white privilege and you want to keep bringing the discussion back to how i am not repeating ad nauseum all the horrors of racism. but i am allowed, actually, to specify what i want to talk about, and the fact that i want to talk about something more narrowly right now actually says nothing about any of the wild conclusions you are lobbing at me about the lack of “work” i’ve done examining my white privilege and repenting and spreading the good word.
i will point out that you’ve rather sneakily shifted the focus of this conversation from “whites need to relinquish their privilege” / “equality feels like oppression” to “whites need to think about their privilege indefinitely”
those are starkly different framings, although i admit there’s a certain perverse connection insofar as when i ask “what do you mean by” the first two you can say the second, and even use my question as evidence that i must feel oppressed. and i admit, it is a bit oppressive to have someone like you come in and tyrannically dictate that, in fact, i am not allowed to talk about the phrase “relinquishing privilege” because i need to do the “hard work” of pondering Gospel passages i’ve already committed to memory
On July 27 2019 06:03 Redfish wrote:
From the perspective of an outsider to this conversation...
1) Racial privileges aren't something that can be given up for the simple fact that a person cannot give up their race. You say that "I already know all the things relating to differences in outcomes between whites and blacks" but if you think privilege = outcomes then you're using a bad definition of it which might be leading to your confusion. This is the same misstep Bill O'Reilly made a long time ago when asking Jon Stewart if Asian privilege was a thing because median Asian family income was higher than whites.
Privilege is more the set of legal, social and systemic advantages that members of a race have towards achieving goals such as education, housing, safety, financial well-being equal treatment under the law, etc., and it's also important to remember that even if certain racially discriminatory things have been outlawed over time, the privileges conferred by those things do not magically disappear when the law changes or when an exception takes place.
2) You might not want to hear this, but the mere fact that you are seriously saying that you don't want to have "a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture" shows how unused you are to being defined by your race. I know it's uncomfortable to be defined that way, but recognize that all nonwhite people in America and many other places don't get to decide whether or not to define themselves by their race or to avoid conversations about their race. It's done for them and to them whether they like it or not. That avoidance of discussion, in and of itself, is a privilege. And guess what? The "blind spots of white American culture" are where a whole lot of hard work needs to be done.
So, when the other poster says "you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it, so that it somehow gets fixed" - this is the hard work of thinking about and seriously confronting what it means to be white. It's not easy. You can avoid it if you want, but if you do, remember there's only one reason why you get to do that.
On July 27 2019 02:49 IgnE wrote:
No, see, I never said I wanted to have “a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture.” I originally asked you what privileges you’ve given up and you just keep hammering us with facts about systemic racism. I grant you all those facts, but they are irrelevant to the much narrower question I asked and the discussion I wanted to have.
You are projecting. I already know all the things relating to differences in outcomes between whites and blacks and grant you most of it. I don’t need an education from you about them. I’d wager I can give a better education than you can. But I am not the one here who claimed to have “answers” (to what? what are you talking about?). I had a question for you, which you’ve done your very best to avoid answering, but I think I know what the answer is. For you the answer to white privilege is to spread the Gospel of Privilege. Ok, that’s fine.
On July 27 2019 02:15 ShambhalaWar wrote:
If that's all you took from that post, I gave you wayyyyyy more credit than you deserve as someone who I thought wanted to have a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture.
"You're projecting" is just a cop out, I've made many valid points, none of which you are addressing.
My guess is you don't have any answers, but that it's so much easier to just ignore the whole thing... Which really does reenforce what I'm saying.
On July 26 2019 08:11 IgnE wrote:
[quote]
quite simply, you are projecting
your last paragraph is totally devoid of content. it amounts to talking about talking about something: “you have to actually exert yourself [...] you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it.” well, mission accomplished then. we’ve done that.
[quote]
quite simply, you are projecting
your last paragraph is totally devoid of content. it amounts to talking about talking about something: “you have to actually exert yourself [...] you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it.” well, mission accomplished then. we’ve done that.
If that's all you took from that post, I gave you wayyyyyy more credit than you deserve as someone who I thought wanted to have a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture.
"You're projecting" is just a cop out, I've made many valid points, none of which you are addressing.
My guess is you don't have any answers, but that it's so much easier to just ignore the whole thing... Which really does reenforce what I'm saying.
No, see, I never said I wanted to have “a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture.” I originally asked you what privileges you’ve given up and you just keep hammering us with facts about systemic racism. I grant you all those facts, but they are irrelevant to the much narrower question I asked and the discussion I wanted to have.
You are projecting. I already know all the things relating to differences in outcomes between whites and blacks and grant you most of it. I don’t need an education from you about them. I’d wager I can give a better education than you can. But I am not the one here who claimed to have “answers” (to what? what are you talking about?). I had a question for you, which you’ve done your very best to avoid answering, but I think I know what the answer is. For you the answer to white privilege is to spread the Gospel of Privilege. Ok, that’s fine.
From the perspective of an outsider to this conversation...
1) Racial privileges aren't something that can be given up for the simple fact that a person cannot give up their race. You say that "I already know all the things relating to differences in outcomes between whites and blacks" but if you think privilege = outcomes then you're using a bad definition of it which might be leading to your confusion. This is the same misstep Bill O'Reilly made a long time ago when asking Jon Stewart if Asian privilege was a thing because median Asian family income was higher than whites.
Privilege is more the set of legal, social and systemic advantages that members of a race have towards achieving goals such as education, housing, safety, financial well-being equal treatment under the law, etc., and it's also important to remember that even if certain racially discriminatory things have been outlawed over time, the privileges conferred by those things do not magically disappear when the law changes or when an exception takes place.
2) You might not want to hear this, but the mere fact that you are seriously saying that you don't want to have "a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture" shows how unused you are to being defined by your race. I know it's uncomfortable to be defined that way, but recognize that all nonwhite people in America and many other places don't get to decide whether or not to define themselves by their race or to avoid conversations about their race. It's done for them and to them whether they like it or not. That avoidance of discussion, in and of itself, is a privilege. And guess what? The "blind spots of white American culture" are where a whole lot of hard work needs to be done.
So, when the other poster says "you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it, so that it somehow gets fixed" - this is the hard work of thinking about and seriously confronting what it means to be white. It's not easy. You can avoid it if you want, but if you do, remember there's only one reason why you get to do that.
1) if you are going to define an Asian group which is defined by its differences from other groups, and some of those differences are such that they result in better group outcomes along certain axes, then such group differences can reasonably be called privilege. there may be a number of other dimensions in which privilege runs the other way or privilege doesn’t exist in such a group, but privilege is inherently a multidimensional concept. what you are doing here is explicitly saying the term “privilege” is arbitrarily defined to only apply to whites for a host of historical issues. intersectionality taken on its own terms explodes that definition, or at least situates it as merely a politically motivated tactic which puts blinders on itself to achieve a set of narrow ends
2) honestly you can fuck off with this. taking your demand to its logical end, we shouldn’t be talking about anything but white privilege until the end of time. it’s complete nonsense. i already granted all the presuppositions about empirically existing white privilege and you want to keep bringing the discussion back to how i am not repeating ad nauseum all the horrors of racism. but i am allowed, actually, to specify what i want to talk about, and the fact that i want to talk about something more narrowly right now actually says nothing about any of the wild conclusions you are lobbing at me about the lack of “work” i’ve done examining my white privilege and repenting and spreading the good word.
i will point out that you’ve rather sneakily shifted the focus of this conversation from “whites need to relinquish their privilege” / “equality feels like oppression” to “whites need to think about their privilege indefinitely”
those are starkly different framings, although i admit there’s a certain perverse connection insofar as when i ask “what do you mean by” the first two you can say the second, and even use my question as evidence that i must feel oppressed. and i admit, it is a bit oppressive to have someone like you come in and tyrannically dictate that, in fact, i am not allowed to talk about the phrase “relinquishing privilege” because i need to do the “hard work” of pondering Gospel passages i’ve already committed to memory
1 - "what you are doing here is explicitly saying the term “privilege” is arbitrarily defined to only apply to whites for a host of historical issues."
White privilege IS only applicable to whites (though not arbitrarily). That's exactly it. There are certain privileges that only whites enjoy in America and many other nations. Congratulations, you passed the first test.
As for the rest of that first response, you're using a bunch of words you do not understand, or are (more likely) willfully refusing to understand or use correctly. Intersectionality, for example does not eliminate different individual aspects of identity. You can't just say "well gender privilege exists also, so racial privilege can't be a thing!" and vice versa - that allows you to dodge conversation about ANY aspect of identity. One can also be both privileged in some ways and disadvantaged in others (a white transgender person, for example). And, once again, because it bears repeating, because you're still using your definition of privilege as a set of outcomes, when it's NOT...it's a set of conditions.
2 - "honestly you can fuck off with this"
You know what? That was my first reaction when I got challenged with the concept of white privilege for the first time too. I worked my ass off in life, I earned a lot of what I have, I overcame some serious life-threatening shit, who the fuck are these assholes to tell me that the deck's been stacked in my favor all along?
But, I got over it and realized there was something to it. The evidence was there. It makes sense. And unlike your suggestion, I do plenty with my life other than "talking about anything but white privilege until the end of time."
Nobody's "tyrannically dictating" anything to you, and I'm not "sneakily shifting" anything by pointing out ways you're using terms incorrectly.
I'm one poster you don't know on a gaming forum. Lighten up. No reason to be disrespectful.
If we go back to 2011 and the occupy Wall Street movement you will find the greatest example of a movement destroyed from within by this ideology.People with good ideas deplatformed due to their race, becoming disillusioned and stepping away from the movement.The movement collapses and the elite continue doing what they did before.
Luckily the video is still on YouTube.So if you have less than three minutes to spare you can see why revolutions led by the current far left extremists will always collapse in on themselves due to identity politics and infighting.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SCwhlZtHhWs
Given that the lens is discussing privilege and discrimination, wouldn't previous examples of these so-called left-extremist-revolutions-using-identity-politics be things like the civil rights movements for the black community, for women, and for LGBT? It sounds like you're putting a pretty toxic label on something that historically has simply been a push for equality and equity in the face of systemic prejudice. I'm not black, I'm not a woman, and I'm not a member of the LGBT community, but I'm also not indignant when I hear about how they should be treated fairly.
Also, I'd argue that the opposite is true, historically: that, given enough time, it's the conservatives who fail when they play identity politics, because we continue to progress socially and culturally. They lost their fight to keep slavery, women and LGBT are becoming empowered despite socially conservative and religious norms, and even the Trump-magnified identity politics of xenophobia and white supremacy will eventually fade over the next few generations, just like how the KKK and Nazis no longer hold as much power as they once did. The conservatives don't fail due to in-fighting though; they fail because they're morally wrong and our ethics and understanding of humanity simply evolve.
Do the ruling class really care about lgbt or black rights so long as they are still making a shitton of money and have power and control?
Occupy Wall st was a good opportunity for people of all different backgrounds to come together and be united in saying people should have been jailed for misconduct for the GFC (More than just Madoff), that banker bonuses were excessive and the relation between wall st and govt was too cozy.But the movement was ripped apart by infighting and divisive identity politics.
And the people who benefitted from the movements collapse, the wall st firms, lobby groups and politicians constitute the most privileged people in the nation.
As I remember it, it was pretty literally ripped apart by state violence, not internal divisions (not that they didn't exist). I'd say there was a severe lack of class consciousness that contributed to it's fading into the "progressive"movement as well.
I can't help but wonder how far right revolutions go in terms of 'falling apart due to infighting and identity politics'. Methinks that nettles' net, as usual, is weighted to fly in but a single direction.
