(03-08-2020, 04:15 PM)MalabarJag Wrote:

(03-08-2020, 01:39 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: I didn't use the words "Republican" or "Democrat," and that is because the parties have switched sides on the subject of identity politics.  What I was saying was that identity politics in the United States originated with conservative white people.  Liberals have adopted it, starting around the 1970s, and that is reprehensible, but it didn't originate with them.  Liberals used to be in favor of things like having a "color-blind society," for example.  "Content of their character, not color of their skin" for example, was rhetoric that came from liberals.  Identity politics, rooted in racism, was part of the conservative philosophy.  It is ironic that conservatives and liberals now seem to have flipped on the issue of identity politics.  


Identity politics is bad, but I was just pointing out, it did not originate with liberals.  It originated with racist white conservatives who wanted to maintain the advantages they had in life, and exclude people of other races from full equality.

The terms liberal and conservative you are using do not accurately describe what happened in the early to mid 1900s, probably because the term "liberal" got turned around to mean Progressive, rather than supporting freedom with limited government like it originally meant, and "conservative" is now being used to describe everyone the Progressives dislike. True the 1960s version "liberals" wanted a color-blind society. The segregationist Democrat South was not Conservative, but they were progressives who supported the New Deal and opposed a color-blind society. It was lot more complicated than "liberal" vs. "conservative."

Most people don't really know history well enough to properly classify information. In a society that is relying more on rhetoric than truth, there is almost no way to have an honest discussion without pre-defining words and agreeing to an objective standard. I wish more people were trained in the art of the argument. I have more experience than most, and I still struggle sometimes to identify the premises and conclusions in more candid conversations. People are better at moving goalposts and muddying the discussion than they are at finding common ground.

---

(03-08-2020, 03:18 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(03-08-2020, 02:51 PM)Last42min Wrote: You keep saying that, but the progressives at the turn of the century used darwinism to justify racial superiority. I can't recall the party affiliation, but it was the academic elites that propagated this division. If Mikesez would Google it for us and pretend to be an expert, we could get to the bottom of this.

Social Darwinism was something that academics debated. I'm not aware of any prominent politician endorsing it.  The two Presidents who called themselves "progressive" at the turn of the century were TR and Wilson.  They were both racist.  TR held that black people were inferior but must be treated equally under the law regardless, but Wilson actually tried to re-segregate the post offices.

Ok Google, now tell me what time Knives Out is playing at an AMC theater in Jacksonville on Friday.

---