37 thoughts on “Are identity politics dangerous? | The Economist

  1. The right hates identity politics, unless it involves hateful ethno-cultural nationalism then they are all for it.

  2. I'm not sure that this hits the nail squarely. The video repeatedly says that rights are the issue, and it brings in the concept of zero sum with regards to rights. I think the identity issues are largely outside of the legal structures where rights reside. This is about culture and what lies in the hearts of humans and the discourses of speech that believers say cause Injustice and harm. Rights are relatively easy to measure and rectify, and there is much more universal support for rights. But the identity movement focus on concepts that cannot be measured or reasoned on and takes as dogma that power and privilege is not unique to the individual's circumstances but can be divined by what relevant identity group the individual falls within as defined by the current progressive academics in the sociology and humanities departments. As such, progress on equality can never be made as inequality is nearly impossible to measure and the chosen identities and hierarchies are often based on historical injustices, not present ones. It is hard to view this as anything other than educated progressives finding power and influence, not through merit and constructive leadership and new ideas, but by becoming priests of a new religion.

  3. When will the left stop judging people on
    the content of their character and instead
    focus on what really matters: identity politics,
    skin color, and whether or not you got a ding dong?

  4. This video gets the definition of identity politics incorrect. Idpol is not simply vouching for policies to protect certain groups, rather it means policy that judges individuals based on their group identity. You can still have laws that vouch for equality without identity politics, simply by making sure those laws don't denigrate the individual in any way. Progressive are pushing this idea that Idpol is required to achieve equal rights, which is an extremely stupid and dangerous way of thinking.

  5. Quotas & affirmative action is clearly privileges for some ….Family laws meant for women only otherwise civil laws r already in place b/w humans.-.if family laws then y not parents laws, sibling laws etc too….rape is just a forced pleasure y strict penalties..way milder sentences for inflicting same damage by women over men….Own Childcare taken as sufficient activity for welfare but computer games not…female sexuality celebrated & male suppressed….Many countries force men to provide family but not women – extreme discrimination against men

  6. DATA CLEARLY PROVES SUPPORTING WOMEN'S INTERESTS HAS TOTALLY UNDERMINED MEN'S
    Pro feminine family laws have rendered 10 times post devorce suicides in men than women – a rate much higher than even rape victums clearly men getting raped by family laws….MEETOO has meant that avg TESTOSTERONE LEVELS IN MEN HAVE DROPPED BY 20 % Men r raped & stripped of their sexuality

  7. The worst identity politics in the uk is the muslim ghetto, where muslims band together in large numbers and enforce their beliefs on any westerners wandering through or passing by. The UK so called government denies the existence of muslim no go areas, but written evidence form reputable sources as well as existential evidence in massive abundance proves the government to be, yet again, disgusting liars. Google has removed all references to muslim no go areas.

  8. Newsflash, humans are not equal, we are all very different, any mechanism to try and force similarity and stifle natural differences will only damage societal structure.

  9. Quotas are brilliant. My friend says at his company they are obliged to interview every numpty who meets certain minimum right-on criteria. They're mostly useless.

  10. So "supporting" one group´s rights does not "undermine" the other group´s rights, what the hell!! They even say there is no question about if this is fair or correct (or "should exist"), but about "in which form" it should exist, which means we have to accept it and watch whoever is going to dictate the rules of this game of supporting and not undermining this group or the other. The most hilarious thing is when they propose to go to the next step: So quotes are not good enough yet, we need to force public institutions and universities to make their "diversity" data public so they can push this nonsense much efficiently. They completely omitted a small detail that contradicts all this lie: our civilization has been built successfully on COMPETENCE. There is just one way to protect the future of our civilization and it is supporting equal opportunities for everyone and competence at all cost. If we play the animal farm, saying all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others, we are doomed. It was written with blood during the 20th century, the most violent in history! This video is reprehensible, to say the least!!

  11. Terrible definition that panders to the left. Watch fox news' description of Identity politics. I never thought I would say this, but fox has a less biased video than this garbage.

  12. “The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English- Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian- Americans, or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality than with the other citizens of the American Republic.” T Roosevelt

  13. Identity Politics allow for a preprogrammed checkoff list of talking points against each group.
    No longer do we hear individuals and their arguments. Instead, we immediately label; Then according to the label, start traversing the corresponding checklist. Both participants ignoring one another, both not reaching any substantial understanding of the other. After which, all that's left is undiluted toxicity.

  14. This video is horribly wrong, policy should not be designed around sex or ethnicity. Rights should protect individuals and when they dont push back, but trying to make equal outcomes is socialist in nature and evil

  15. Identity Politics can be summed up in one word…TRIBALISM….The worst kind of society to have

  16. Since all pointless Liberal ideas attacked the world. Everyhing turned from bad to worse than never before.

  17. Identity politics is racist, sexist, and preferential to whatever group you are excluding or including. Identity politics is the most regressive piece of shit thinking in the western world.

  18. My problem isn't that it's a "Zero Sum", but rather in the political process, people are poisoning the discussion with identity, generalizing and reducing it to how it affects a group than how it affects the population.

    MLK had a dream once, that his kids will be judged not by the color of their skins, but the content of their characters. What Identity Politics do is exactly is by the color of their skins, as opposed of the content of their characters.

  19. The right and the left went in bad directions during the cold war and the modern politics of the time are a product of this.

    The right fumbled by showing a greater value for social cohesion than protecting a a person's individual rights. The left fumbled by pushing for group rights instead of individual rights, and now we all suffer.

  20. You made a mistake. You said supporting female interests may not undermine the interests of men. This is false. See any divorce lawyer.

  21. Oh, Lord Rothschild, isn't the win-win openness argument Xi Jinping's too? I'm sick of identity politics and think it's win-lose.

  22. Don't compare India with west ideology. We are far better then u ppl.we don't colonies other nations & loot them.u ppl still do this.🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓

  23. To make identity politics constructive and open is the biggest challenge. So many people are turning the fight to equal rights into hate for the "normies" or the majority. We have to be very careful about how we go forward because everyone's way of life is under threat.

  24. TRUMP is a bad example thats why I down voted; I think It was popular choice to dis on TRUMP so The Economist just went with it, thats why it was the first name mentioned too. 
    I believe he has the skills to run the country and don't care about disagreements, because I have not heard one yet that would convince me otherwise; yet people are to afraid to admit Obama was a shit president; that'd be a better example.. A president that has actually run his course and has evidence based results. 
    Another good example would be that Cortez woman, she's fucking INSANE.

  25. Hindu is a geographic term for people from all denominations who belong to the land of Indian Subcontinent. And Hindu Nationalism is equal to Indian Nationalism in that sense. Islamists are a threat to world, not Islam and the party which you defamed negatively here has many Muslims as active members of it and it has been opposing Islamism and Evangelism of all sort, conspired to destroy everything perceived by the Semitics as Pagan and Heretics! "The Economist", moronic research doesn't suit you brand.

  26. Individuals have no political power. This is why they push individualism.
    Diversity replaces affirmative action as whites become a minority. Diversity initiatives reward groups that are politically organised by races, religions against an unorganized white minority. White women and gays are starting to realize they are now in the same boat as white men.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *