(06-28-2020, 07:52 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2020, 05:55 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Identity based on immutable characteristics is not the same as ideology. He could have been more clear, but I think this is his point.
You're right.
Ideology is just a collection of causes that a political party can unify around for a time.
But you and JIB don't apply this knowledge correctly.
You both build part of your identity around your ideology.
And you both assume people have either the same ideology as you, or one that is opposite on nearly every point, the way you dismissively and pejoritively use words like "socialist" or "liberal" or "progressive" to describe other posters.
These identities you ascribe to others can become every bit as corrosive as the opposing racial identities we already see out there.
You are what you do. Not what you wish the government would do.
Do you post just to prove how ignorant you are? Identities based on ideology can be opposed, you twit, because ideologies are not equal. Human beings are. One can legitimately stand opposed to people who believe in ideas like cannibalism, sex trafficking, slavery, violence. One can not legitimately stand opposed to a person of a different skin color. That is based on ideology alone.
Truth be told, this identity movement is rooted in an ideology, one that I feel is diametrically opposed to American ideals. This is a movement that focuses on identities like gender, sex, skin color, sexual preference for the purpose of dividing humans by nothing more than immutable characteristics. However, the goal of this movement is not just to divide people into groups. The goal is to then link those identities to oppression that has been created by the American "system" and use that disenfranchisement to tear it down. Not only do I stand opposed to the principle of identity by immutable characteristic, I stand opposed to the ideology behind it.
I am very careful of the words I use, and, unlike you, I actually know what they mean. I know the history behind them. I know when and why they are being manipulated. You, on the other hand, only believe what you're told. You don't critically examine your sources of information.
Socialism is a pejorative. Not in it's theoretical sense, which its supporters hide behind, but in it's exhaustive list of failures, which has lead to destruction and massive poverty in every instance it's been tried. You have already proven you don't know what the word means, and, even when I posted a video that would educate you, you admitted you didn't watch it. Sorry dude, don't get to claim I'm using a word wrong when you won't educate yourself.
"Progressive" thought since the early 1900's has almost always come with major flaws. It's responsible for both the communist plague that is destructive by nature AND Nazi Germany. Those people thought they were quite progressive at the time, and referred to themselves as progressives. I wouldn't expect you to know this, because you don't know anything you didn't have to google to win an argument. The point is that progress is not inherently good, and the current iteration being used by today's left is not inherently good. If you don't believe me, look at what is being produced. Hate and discontent. Rioting and destruction. This isn't coming from liberal democrats, but from progressive thought leaders that are using identity politics to usher change in our system.
I almost NEVER use liberal as a pejorative, and if I do, it's out of habit since when I was a young man the left was typically associated with liberalism, but that is not true today. I will happily retract it from any post that is not specifically referring to liberals.
