|
Traditionalist Conservatism Forum > Traditionalist Conservatism > The Limits of Identity Politics |
|
| << Prev Topic | Next Topic >> |
| Author | Comment |
JasonEubanks  Registered User (9/7/01 3:05 am) Reply 
|
The Limits of Identity Politics I've heard that the disgusting bigot Al Sharpton was going forming a presidential exploratory committee. He was quite unapologetic toward his penchant for racial violence. Sharpton has blasted every other liberal minority group in existence. Although he has absolutely no prospect of success in the Democratic primary; Sharpton has the potential to ignite a war between liberal identity groups. Hopefully it will remain political, but when dealing the likes of Sharpton, you cannot rule out racial terrorism and thugery (think Crown Heights). In my estimation, he probably more or less accurately reflects the mindset of most inner city blacks and militant black intellectuals; who teach or have been taught that all whites are racists. No doubt, his supporters will be quick to attribute his inevitable defeat to racism in his opponents triggering a tumultous fragmentation of minority solidarity. Maybe race-based leftist parties or outright racial violence is on the horizon. The left is victorious on all fronts. There is simply nothing left for militant minority groups to do except fight for political supremacy between themselves. Is the speculation about Sharpton, or something similar, the ultimate outcome of the emphasis on identity politics by the radical left? Maybe the NWO cannot come to fruition because it's political foundation rests on a powder keg. As Machiavellian as it sounds, two minority groups could be pitted against each other in the hopes that they'll destroy the solidarity of the left. Maybe in the end, there will be no need to because minority militance will simply implode liberalism from within. |
JimKalb  ezOP (9/30/01 4:34 pm) Reply 
|
Re: The Limits of Identity Politics It seems to me the effect, or perhaps function, of identity politics is to destroy social cohesion and so make comprehensive bureaucratic administration all the more necessary - without it, nothing can function, and besides, the alternative is bloody chaos. I don't think there will be a fight for dominance among minority groups. Minority politicians like Sharpton are no threat to the established political order, since their power is wholly dependent on their ability to get favors from that order. They aren't interested in running things because then there'd be no one to demand things from. Therefore they have no real interest in political dominance. And it seems to me people don't have serious fights over things they have no interest in. Jim Kalb |
|
JasonEubanks Registered User (3/3/02 10:27 pm) Reply |
Re: Re: The Limits of Identity Politics The thrust of my arguement was unclear. I meant that for an ideology that places a high value on minorities being militant will eventually run into problems when the militant minorities doesn't think the rest of the movement is militant enough. I think that racial and ethnic militancy is something that can not be cut off like a car engine. I agree the "struggle for dominance" theory was a reach. I think we have differing opinions on Sharpton's place in modern liberalism. He strikes me as a man not really interested in political power as such, but rather the trappings of power and personal celebrity within the leftist and black communities. While he maybe a bigot of the crudest kind, he's extrodinarily gifted at using leftist black militancy for his own personal gain. He's obviously a figure in "the rest is not militant enough" crowd. Black militancy is usually associated with strong personalities like Sharpton . MLK and Malcom X are examples (not quite a cult of personality, but the next thing to it). The danger for leftists is that because of this, attacks on Sharpton would be seen as an attack on all blacks. His own personal views on other ethnic and racial groups are problematic as well. Can you picture him ranting about "blood sucking Jews" , "faggot Greeks", or "degenerate spics" at a fund raiser at Berkeley University? The problem that the leftists if they decide to reject him on anti-racist grounds then it will appear as if they have slighted blacks collectively. If they coddle him, his views will get eventually become public knowledge and their anti-racism will revealed for what it is: hypocritical. |
|
JimKalb ezOP (3/6/02 8:24 am) Reply
|
Re: Re: The Limits of Identity Politics It's true that most "black leaders" I know of--I've had some personal experience in a small way--are more interested in the trappings than the substance of power. All the more reason to think they are no threat to the established liberal order. It's all for show and it's not hard to make payoffs. As to the risk that black leaders will discredit their cause or liberalism, if it were possible it would have happened a long time ago. The worse black leaders act the more it proves they're right, because it's a fundamental principle that everything bad about blacks--illegitimacy, crime, economic failure, whatever--is the fault of whites. Also, if black leaders are antisocial bigots then some overall supervisory power becomes all the more necessary to keep order among resentful irrational ethnic factions. Jim Kalb |
|
JasonEubanks Registered User (3/7/02 12:13 am) Reply |
Re: Re: The Limits of Identity Politics You're right of course that the media filters progressive rhetoric so that the most extreme left views are never given any scrutiny no matter what importance the left places on them. Not many have heard of Andrea Dworkin or Catherine MacKinnon and the horrible theories they promulgate; even though they are treated by academics and others as the leading authorities on all things feminist. I think it's the media acting as the marketer of leftist ideas that keeps their extreme elements from damaging the whole movement. It presents people only a highly polished product in ever shorter content deficient formats; perhaps keeping the more unpalatable things out of public view until social or political conditions have changed enough. Media handlers certainly know about leading leftist theories as they come from and keep in contact with prestigious universities dominated by cutting edge politico-social movements. An example would be the gay agenda; which started in the late 50's (almost exclusively limited to universities), grew, seemingly peaked in the 70's before it went when the most fanatical sections of the counter-culture went bust. It resurfaced in the early 90's when most people had been desensitized to the effects of liberal social policies. GLAAD has all ready classified pedophiles as an "oppressed sexual minority". Maybe pedophiliac affirmative action is in our future. It seems they keep the Al Sharptons from damaging the movement using the same methods. Now that I've had time to reformulate my thoughts on this, it does appear the progressives are very organized and it's unlikely that they'll get trampled by one of their own. |
|
<< Prev Topic |
Next Topic >>
|
 Topic Commands Click to receive email notification of replies  Click to stop receiving email notification of replies |
|
- Traditionalist Conservatism Forum - Traditionalist Conservatism - On to Restoration! -
| Upgrade your account to ezSupporter... |  | ...and never see another ad or pop-up again |
Powered By ezboard® Ver. 7.3u
Copyright ©1999-2003 ezboard, Inc.