Why Identity Politics Hurts Liberalism

[Writer]

Is every Hispanic offended by Cheech and Chong?

Is every Black/African-American offended by Dave Chappelle's skit using pork ribs as a sleep aid?

Is every Asian offended by the large Chinese warrior statue outside of your local PF Chang's?

I could go on...

Words are only symbols, but it is the intent behind those symbols that provide them meaning. If a person uses a word to convey hate, it is just that - hate. If a word is used merely to imply an innocuous message, or even more so to enrich our understanding of the universe, then it is just that and NO MORE. The situations I've mentioned above are opportunities for someone to get offended by stereotypes, but note the lack of protest on the part of the racial groups highlighted.

Identity politics has its pluses - in some cases it recaptures vocabulary which assists those groups in attaining civic power, but when greater liberal circles begin championing "on behalf" of other groups, a whole new type of stereotyping occurs. Who is to say that you, liberal and world-minded, really ARE speaking for those groups? How do you know? Does everyone in that group agree? You likely don't know the answers to these questions, and that's only patronizing to these groups. And here is where identity politics fails.

I wish some would think twice before they attack another person for apparent racial or gender insensitivity that likely does not exist.

[Writer]

1. Kick for another go around...

I wish I could scream this from the rooftops.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

4. I absolutely agree...

:kick:

I will not be force-fed what someone else determines to be personally objectionable. I find it as oppressive and self-righteous as any other form of attempted censorship.

[lumberjack_jeff]

2. Does the absence of malice behind the mascot "Washington Redskins"...

... make the stereotypes that led to its creation okay?

I think that there are some terms that are not generally used as an insult that should be discouraged.

However, I do think that pc language has gone too far. Terms like "nanny state" are descriptive, useful and should only offend those who think that government should preclude personal risk.

[Writer]

3. Redskins: There's a history behind that, though, isn't there?

When was that name created? Perhaps it was during a time when we WERE a little less sensitive about it. But more importantly, what do Native Americans think of it?

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. There is history behind many terms

that at one time were not considered pejorative.

Most objections to sports mascots comes from native groups. Do they speak for all native americans? I don't know.