In a multi-racial society all politics is identity politics, and the marxist conception of identity politics is all about serving the best interests of everyone except Whites.
From Wikipedia’s article on Identity politics:
Identity politics are political arguments that focus upon the self interest and perspectives of self-identified social interest groups and ways in which people’s politics may be shaped by aspects of their identity through race, class, religion, gender, sexual orientation or traditional dominance.
The term identity politics has been applied retroactively to varying movements that long predate its coinage. Historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. discussed identity politics extensively in his book The Disuniting of America. Schlesinger, a strong supporter of liberal conceptions of civil rights, argues that a liberal democracy requires a common basis for culture and society to function.
In his view, basing politics on group marginalization fractures the civil polity, and therefore works against creating real opportunities for ending marginalization. Schlesinger believes 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.
Still other critics have argued that groups based on shared identity, other than class (e.g.: religious identity or neurological wiring) [ie. the ideologic half], can divert energy and attention from more fundamental issues, such as class conflict in capitalist societies. Even those who support gay rights, ending racism or freedom of religion, for instance, may consider these side issues at best.
[Eric] Hobsbawm, in particular, has criticized nationalisms, and the principle of national self-determination adopted internationally after World War I, since national governments are often merely an expression of a ruling class or power, and their proliferation was a source of the wars of the twentieth century. Hence Hobsbawm argues that identity politics, such as queer nationalism, Islamism, Cornish nationalism or Ulster Loyalism are just other versions of bourgeois nationalism.
Eric Hobsbawm – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hobsbawm was born in 1917 in Alexandria, Egypt, to Leopold Percy Obstbaum and Nelly Grün, both Jewish, and he grew up in Vienna, Austria and Berlin, Germany.
Bourgeois nationalism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bourgeois nationalism is a term from Marxist phraseology. It refers to the alleged practice by the ruling classes of deliberately dividing people by nationality, race, ethnicity, or religion, so as to distract them from possible class warfare. It is seen as a divide and conquer strategy used by the ruling classes to prevent the working class from uniting against them (hence the Marxist slogan, Workers of all countries, unite!).
Identity Politics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy), from the section titled Liberalism and Identity Politics:
Critics charged that the neutral citizen of liberal theory was in fact the bearer of an identity coded white, male, bourgeois, able-bodied, and heterosexual … This implicit ontology in part explained the persistent historical failure of liberal democracies to achieve anything more than token inclusion in power structures for members of marginalized groups.
The central guiding principle behind today’s social and politcal zeitgeist is that White = bad, non-White = good. “Liberal democracies” are best characterized by the endless making of excuses for non-Whites and blaming Whites. The roots of this are in the emancipation of jews in Europe.
The podcast will be broadcast and available for download on Tuesday at 9PM ET.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
On “Identity Politics”. The speaker is right on concerning “what is going on”, but is totally incorrect about “force”; he confuses force with persuasion. The only federal entity in the U.S. with power (force) to legislate (make law) is Congress; Article I, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution. The only “force” to choose Congressmen, or not choose Incumbent Congressmen, every two years is the U.S. citizenry; Article I, Section 2, clause 1.
All other entities in the political arena have no legitimate (other than perhaps that of a criminal nature) force but only persuasion.
What are you talking about?