• Triasha@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    That sounds like you are agreeing with my premise.

    When rights were being extended to (sexual) minorities identity politics was not needed. Did progress slow down because of identity politics or did identity politics form because expansion of rights slowed down?

    I don’t know your country, and I certainly know less about it’s politics than I do about my own in the US.

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      I do think progress slow down because identity politics indeed. And progress became more fragile, being easily erased by all the people who got pissed off by identity politics.

      Each year I see less and less people willing to support minority issues because identity politics let them out. Without that supposed the minority, by definition, is left in a minority position. And the only way it can change things is from a minority rule, which is not the best as it pisses off a lot of people this way.

      The thing about identity politics is that it’s useful for majorities. I don’t see the point in using identity politics for minorities, by definition they are doomed to lose. Wider interclass politics are needed for minorities to get rights in a sustainable way.

      I do think that identity politics got dominant not because of their usefulness to minorities. But because their usefulness to a few politicians (politicians as a wider term not only elected officials), which allowed them to gain short term power and privileged using them. But they doesn’t seem to do much to help the minorities. Isolating them from wider support to get a short lived iron claw over them feels not right to me.

      I might be wrong here. Once again, this is just my particular perception, and I do not have strong evidences for this claims, just feelings and personal experiences.

      • Triasha@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        “wider inter-class politics” we call that intersectionality. I support the interests of POC and the disabled and the neurodivergent and the working class because it’s the right thing to do and I hope they will do the same for me. Solidarity.

        You have more faith in majorities to do the right thing than I do. My country was founded on genocide and slavery. Some European countries were too but maybe farther back in history.

        • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          But you are not part of their movement, at most are a supporter. You get excluded from being part of it if you try. You need labels to be included. No labels no representation. That’s why we see people collecting more and more labels each day, because without a label you are nothing in the movement.

          And you may support, but you are not part of the decision making, you are not considered when decisions are being made. Solidarity is expected from you, but you should not expect nothing in return.

          This may suffice for you. You may need nothing for your selfless support. But most people are not like that. More people when they feel that kind of exclusion just move out ot the movement and do their own thing. Because everyone wants their voice to be heard. This explain a lot on what has happened with politics in the later years. Thus why I advocate for the end of identity politics, and return to class politics, include everyone as equals, without some being “more equals than others” if you catch my drift.

          Majorities might or might not make better or worse decisions that minorities. But democracy is the best system we know for a reason, and without including everyone, truly including them, minorities could not rule for long, and then other minority would take place and undo all that the previous minority did (as shown by recent events).