Talk:Identity politics

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon politics.svg

This Politics related article has been assessed as SIGNIFICANTLY PROBLEMATIC in one or more ways. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

This article requires attention for the following reason(s):
  • The article only addresses identity politics used by the left, ignoring the way many right-wing movements also use identity politics
  • The last few sections are in need of a rewrite, they conflate liberalism with leftism and have a number of questionable takes
  • Overall, could use better sources

Archives for this talk page: , (new)

SPLC warns: far-right Identitarians on the rise[edit] Reverend Black Percy (talk) 13:57, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Food for thought: Is Atheism identity politics?[edit]

See the main article on this topic: Identity politics

Not necessarily — atleast not according to the Sokal-type leftist, naturalist analytic philosopherWikipedia Gary Edwards. (Edwards' introduction is available here).

Read more on the process of analytic philosophy here (though, the school of analytic philosophy is not to be confused with Edwards' particular conclusions drawn above).

As for my own views on the above discussed topic, well... They're much more complex and nuanced than this. Crucially however, that's not say that Edwards' train of thought lacks essential highlights.

I would argue that the attempt to reduce splittingWikipedia in one's own mind is prerequisite to the very ability to (potentially) form meaningful views on any topic — but hey, that's me.

I find his discussion interesting enough — though, as always in the case of YouTube videos, much remains to be said (both "pro" and "con").

Regardless, as far as mere food for thought is concerned, his talk is a most passable ten minutes. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 14:35, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Racial representation in the media is not a good example[edit]

Racial representation in the media and in acting generally, is not a trivial issue - it is an issue of equal opportunities: equal access to jobs based on merit, of role models for young non-white kids (an issue that both many non-white adults in general, and white conservatives, rate as important), and of deconstructing and banishing racial stereotypes. I think we need to find a better, less controversial example of the excesses of modern identity politics.--Greenrd (talk) 14:18, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

The article at present does not speak of actors in actual roles. It does talk of Hollywood style radical posturing, and discusses acting only in terms of the "actors and models" who appear in stock photographs and in advertising. I'm not sure those are actual role models. (Do people even have role models any more?) The point the text is trying to make is actually that cosmetic compliance with the demand for 'representation' and 'diversity' in those fields costs the corporations nothing, and as such does nothing to make a more just society where material resources are concerned. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 16:14, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
What? First of all, do you think that those actors and models are somehow not employed? Also, as someone who has worked with a decent amount of stock footage over the years there's been a marked change in how different ethnicities were presented, just 10 years ago its wasn't uncommon for the top results for 'black man' to include someone committing a criminal activity, or looking threatening. This is likely to be reflective of the culture, but its probably good that we stay way from reinforcing harmful stereotypes as our default. Honestly, this entire article reads like it was written by a disappointed Marxist, and needs to go through extensive editing. -User: Nabirius

What does the community think of this description of identity politics?[edit]

— Unsigned, by: / talk

Fox is a shitty source. I take anything from them with a mountain of salt. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 18:36, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Notwithstanding the shitty source, including this video in the article distracts from the text in the article. Cosmikdebris (talk) 19:23, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
@Cosmikdebris I understand the ulterior motives, but since that wasn't the question they asked I felt it was best to ignore it and focus on the question they did ask. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 22:00, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

I feel like this page doesn't mention enough about identity politics as a right-wing snarl word[edit]

I mean, it's all over the place, and it's getting obfuscated into the same near-meaninglessness as "SJWs"

Removed Quote[edit]

The recently removed quote was, in fact, from the SEP. The relevant paragraph has been removed by a subsequent revision of the article, but it appears in an archived version from 2012. Given that the SEP removed the passage from their article, though, perhaps nonetheless best not to add it back? 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 talk 00:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)