Donald Trump and US politics
" Is it special treatment to notice that some groups have it considerably worse than others for various reasons, and to focus primarily on that worse case for a specific campaign or policy? Like, say, if a certain group faces proportionally ten times the violence of another group, would it be reasonable to tailor an anti-violence campaign towards that specific group? Alternatively, is it special treatment to notice that some prohibitions that are for everyone on paper tend to leave out certain groups in practice, and propose special prohibitions for those groups? I don't necessarily think so in either case, but I'd be interested in your take on it. " When someone says, "Save the amazon", do you immediately think, "So it's okay to tear down the Congo basin"? Luna's Blackguards - a guild of bronies - is now recruiting! If you're a fan of our favourite chromatic marshmallow equines, hit me up with an add or whisper, and I'll invite you!
IGN: HopeYouAreFireProof |
|
|
You know the answers to your questions. They are formulated in such a way, it's unnecessary to even ask. My issue is with identity politics in general. It's all blown out of proportion. Nothing is important nowadays if you don't stick a label, and this bugs me a great deal. I also think it creates a victim mentality and will often backfire.
Don't tell people they're more likely to be abused, bullied or targeted because of X characteristic. Don't tell others this group of people are more likely to be abused because of said characteristic. It's often a self-fulfilling prophecy. Tell people how to deal with bullying, and why they shouldn't bully. Although there's nothing wrong with Save the Amazon, why not Save the Rainforests? They're getting destroyed in Indonesia and elsewhere just as well as the Amazon. You have to be realistic about these things.
Logen Ninefingers | |
" Isn't that strange though? You are against bullying but wouldn't support policies to stop it because it help a specific group. Let's Just Help everyone. Except this diversify the resources so thinly it probably help nobody rather than the groups that need the help most. "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries." Just help everybody and I thought you are against socialism. |
|
|
@Deathflower: you and others in the forum assume a lot. I score leftist-libertarian in political affiliation tests.
Anyway, as I said, my main objection is against identity politics and the need to stick labels on everyone. This rubs me the wrong way. Although no single instance of sticking for a given group is bad per se, when the entire social discourse is centered around labels and nothing else, this is a symptom of a problem to me. The group commonly associated with "leftism" in the US currently seems to display leftist-authoritarian ideas. I disagree with them strongly on many topics. I've lived in a former leftist authoritarian state my entire life and I've seen the consequences first hand. You have to be realistic about these things. Logen Ninefingers Last edited by Bars#2689 on Feb 23, 2017, 8:06:49 AM
| |
" You seem to be under the impression that simply ignoring the specifics, and having gay kids just "not act like victims" will make it go away. Why? It hasn't been that long since the "gay panic defense" was still a viable defense for murdering gay people. We still have preachers who go up to the podium and preach the old testament view of homosexuality. In many cases, people aren't even bullied because people know they're gay, or they've claimed that they're gay, but because they "seem" gay. There is still a sizeable portion of the population who believes that LGBT individuals are sick, evil, and hellbound, and among those people, simply ignoring the problem will not help. I'm sorry, I keep hearing stuff like this - "If we just stopped paying attention to identity, all of these problems would go away!" And it just strikes me as dangerously naive. As if bigots and bullies would just stop caring if only we stopped labeling ourselves. As if racism and biases magically disappear if we stop talking about them. As if we didn't have racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc. before the advent of "identity politics". The entire reason we're talking about them is because that approach, historically, has not worked. The Anoka-Hennepin district tried something along these lines, and the results were infamously ugly. Luna's Blackguards - a guild of bronies - is now recruiting! If you're a fan of our favourite chromatic marshmallow equines, hit me up with an add or whisper, and I'll invite you!
IGN: HopeYouAreFireProof |
|
" What I actually said: " Also, the "protect the minorities" approach has one major issue. People are selfish. They don't care about problems which don't affect them directly. Do you know what happens when you run an anti-transgender bullying campaign? The majority of the population won't give a flying fuck. Replace that with any minority label and the result will be the same. Tell people, "your child has a one in something chance of getting bullied", "there were that many bullying-induced mass school shootings in the US last year", something like that, and they'll suddenly pay attention. It's an ineffective approach, when it's widespread it creates a spirit of division and distrust between people, it separates instead of uniting, it creates a self-fulfilling prophecy, it backfires. But, above and beyond all else, it bugs me. Because I'm a selfish bastard, and I mostly care about myself. At least I have the decency not to pretend anything else. You have to be realistic about these things. Logen Ninefingers Last edited by Bars#2689 on Feb 23, 2017, 8:25:21 AM
| |
" I am owe no allegiance, I can spout whatever. Who would have thought, Authoritarian Left actually exist. They aren't gonna magically disappear. Isn't it frustrating? Do you hate authoritarian left? |
|
" This barely makes any sense, apart from a weak attempt at trolling. You have to be realistic about these things.
Logen Ninefingers | |
" As usual, I can't help but disagree. Most people, fundamentally, are decent. They possess empathy. They care about the suffering of others, to one extent or another. I feel fairly confident in assuming you do too. Maybe if a close friend of yours was a transwoman you'd care more, I dunno. Although interestingly, this seems to me the most pure application of "identity politics" I've ever seen - "These people are not in my group and their problems do not directly affect me, ergo I do not care what happens to them". I kind of wish you'd start providing actual evidence when you make these claims, because when I go out looking for evidence, I find that the opposite is true. From the conclusions:
Spoiler
First, findings suggested that education is possibly the most essential factor in
protecting LGBT youth from peer victimization. All six panel members included educating students, faculty, staff, and school boards on LGBT issues and eliminating homophobia and transphobia in schools as one of their five priority votes. This education must be universal. Everyone from the top down must be educated on the impact that peer victimization has on LGBT youth and what their role is in preventing bullying. Education at every level is essential to ending the bullying and harassment of LGBT youth. Second, findings suggested that training all adults in diversity acceptance and bullying prevention is pivotal to protecting LGBT youth from peer victimization. Five of six panel members included training adults in diversity acceptance and bullying prevention as one of their five priority votes. Adults play a key role in learning, then teaching and modeling appropriate behaviors to students. When adults first understand and accept the individual differences of others and ensure their safety, students will do the same. Adults are capable of changing the school culture and creating a school climate that values diversity and ensures a safe learning environment for all students. [...] Seventh, findings indicated that implementing clear bullying policies that are inclusive of LGBT individuals is crucial to reducing the level of peer victimization experienced by LGBT youth. So when you say this: " I'd like to see some evidence. " But here's the thing. We already had anti-bullying campaigns. They did not have the desired effectiveness when it came to LGBT youth. That's the entire reason we had anti-bullying campaigns tailored specifically to address LGBT youth! " Please don't project your apathy onto me. Luna's Blackguards - a guild of bronies - is now recruiting! If you're a fan of our favourite chromatic marshmallow equines, hit me up with an add or whisper, and I'll invite you! IGN: HopeYouAreFireProof Last edited by Budget_player_cadet#3296 on Feb 23, 2017, 8:57:39 AM
|
|
" Why would you think I am trolling? Liberal left could very well be taken over by illiberal left. As scary and incomprehensible that is, It could very well be possible. Left libertarians strive for fairness and freedom. It is anti-competitive. In a "winner take all" system, they could very well be the dinosaurs in evolutionary terms. |
|
