Identity Politics Debate

Dog-whistle racism has no place on HN.Poor communities of all races have been underserved since long before whenever you imagine "identity politics" started to "rise" in the USA. Was "identity politics" not enshrined in the US Constitution, which protected racial slavery while giving more-slaveowning states extra voting power over less-slaveowning states<a href="https://blackpast.org/aah/three-fifths-clause-united-states-constitution-1787"

Couple of thoughts and questions:- The difference between discredited and threatening is academic, since both lead to the same mindset and course of action- A large swing towards Trump was noticeable amongst minority voters, the poor, and whites without a degree[0], groups who would be expected to be harmed by competition from illegal immigration- A large swing towards Hillary was observable in the rich, retirees, and whites with college degrees, groups which are generally believed to b

RE: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28980707 Race is really a distraction. As someone pointed out, the real meat is rich vs poor. Imagine if on the last census, everyone in America identified as some other race. This would immediately squash the debate. But then we'll get something else. Perhaps democrates vs republicans will be the new headline .... "Many republ

Identity politics at its finest. Making people lives hard because they aren't in the flavor of the day minority group.

Racism in 21st century is a misleading term for social problems. It is barking against the wrong tree.Some people, because their education level, would accept and believe whatever their info source pour to them. I’m from China. I know how aggressive the “little-pinks” would behave online and in real world.Unfortunately, for some reason, this population can roughly map to some races. The political industry is using this issue to rake in their own internet. They are preventing this problem t

There are no two people in the world with the same beliefs - nobody is suggesting that.There is however a very broad movement of people who believe that unequal outcomes are a manifestation of racism and so they act accordingly in their roles in government etc..Many of these people are in the civil service and so this will influence their view.It would be 'insane' to ignore this movement, it's one of the most powerful social forces in the US right now.

I'll add the people that promoted it often said that amongst themselves while more publicly just talking about "diversity." They usually believed in imtersectionality, redistribution of wealth/power, etc. Their fix is systematic discrimination against specific groups to redistribute power to achieve the outcomes. And, if other groups become dominant, they still favor them over white people.We've seen that these ideologies are conflict-oriented, racist, and less effect

I don't see how skin color is relevant but since your comment enjoys assigning responsbilities based on skin color - I am a brown immigrant. Divide and conquer has been used for centuries and is what’s being used as usual to get political points. Nothing new about it.Your comment is doing the same racism which you claim to be against. Usually the next response is to call me an Uncle Tom for not falling for the boogeyman and going along with the narrative. Anything which doesn't fit

Our political establishment has no interest in ending racism; each "side" benefits from dividing Americans into identity-based groups and pitting them against other Americans on wedge issues. The hypocritical irony now is of promoting these identity-based groups for the purposes of some vague "justice" when doing so will necessarily widen the divides and propagate hatred further. It's a cynical distraction from the reality that the actual institutionalized racism predomi

Identity politics hides issues like this more than anything. A poor black person in a ghetto and a poor white one in a trailer park should be the same voting block but they've been polarized by both sides trying to lock down their demographics.