Live data from Hacker News

The End of Identity Liberalism

nytimes.com

71–73 of 73 posts

Re: The End of Identity Liberalism

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spencer is not a white supremacist (he says) but a white nationalist. He was the one who coined the term alt-right. I'm positive Milo is a patriotic Yiannopoulos Supremacist. I don't think either of the two would be eligible to join Aryan Brotherhood or any group of genuine article white supremacists. I think the distinction between 'nationalist' and 'supremacist' should be sharply defined. Mixing the terms is like u…

> I'm positive Milo is a patriotic Yiannopoulos Supremacist. Oh, to be sure! All gay men are narcissistic to some degree, and Milo I think more than most. He uses the trait, though, rather than letting it use him, and he's been doing God's work since before it was cool. > Note the paradox of nationalists working together across borders, classical nationalism is going meta. Is that so paradoxical? History is replete w…

> Is that so paradoxical? History is replete with examples of nations allying for mutual benefit without dilution of anyone's sovereignty.

Yes it is. However those examples will nearly always be specific instances and special circumstances with a few exceptions like the Hapsburgs.

What I see now is sustained transnational political collaboration. That suggests the formation of a larger political unit based on shared ideals and an external threat (this is always true). I don't mean that this networking is equivalent to the EU's attempts, it is more organic than that.

The analogy I would use is TCP/IP vs the OSI. The EU is doing OSI. The nationalists are doing TCP/IP.

> As far as in-group determination goes, I'm not sure I see why it can't be made to work on roughly the lines of the classical American model - that is, a privilege earned in exchange for bringing specific and substantial value.

Right. And/or ideological terminal goal continuity. The Sikh and western Chinese are very much aligned with us, they are almost never a problem. This is one of the problems with the 'integration narrative' the center-left/right don't want to consider. There exist examples of non-integration and zero conflict.

The American experiment proves that Europeans can work together. That's the good news. After centuries of ethic and religious warfare no less. A larger political unit was successfully forged, which is still remarkable in historical context. Australia is another example just to show it isn't luck.

I also foresee no real political problems with Hispanics and Asians, I think this election has shown that.

The problem is that, especially in Europe, large portions of some subgroups have decided to reject the West and desire to establish a parallel state. The evidence for this is overwhelming, everything from secret courts to large caches of guns being discovered.

There is also a considerable number of native born citizens who are a real problem. To understand why take a look at this article by Charlie Stross:

http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2016/11/playtime...

In my view they are like RINOs, except that they are Westerners In Name Only. These people are contributing to a very dangerous polarization between the Muslims and other inhabitants of our territories. I believe that if civil conflict breaks out they will work against attempts to unify and establish civil order and this shall have horrifying consequences. The blunt end of the State, the army, the police, the intelligence, are all right wing to a man. I've seen sectarianism before, it's not a pretty sight.

> It is sharply defined. But in a political environment where nuance is anathema, no one pays the distinction much heed ... What matters is culture, not race. Regarding the latter as metonymous of the former indicates a failure to have fully thought the matter through.)

I know that, but the newspapers are very attached to their caricature of reality and that exerts influence. In Germany and Sweden the Pravda-ization is out of control. There is 'progress' and there is 'hitler'.

> Well. Their narrative had such hegemonic power, anyway. That's taken quite a blow in the last couple of weeks, and whatever else comes of a Trump presidency, that by itself strikes me as worthwhile ... Let us comport ourselves so as to earn the favorable judgment of history, and the rest will attend to itself. Let us do otherwise, and a generation from now our kids will be fighting the same damn war in the same damn trenches.

I think America will have indigestion but ultimately be fine. I cannot say the same about Europe. It is a horror show unfolding in front of us, a few more attacks and reprisals are sure to start.

The only solutions that would prevent this are deemed politically impossible and so we shall deal with the political inevitable.

Re: The End of Identity Liberalism

#72
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably just hoping the Obama coalition would just automatically flow over to her, with no specific outreach on her part. Most of them did (the biggest share of popular votes) just not quite enough to win the Electoral College.

Clinton was down over 5M votes compared to even Obama in 2012. Either the voting machines were hacked, or she did an abysmal job in outreach... her hiring of David Brock (of Correct the Record) to essentially character-assassinate Sanders supporters might have had something to do with her loss - she won the battle then lost the war.

Decades of scandals and corruption might have had something to do with it, too. The Democrat nomination process was rigged from the beginning which was necessary for Clinton to win given her high negatives and the fact that there was a candidate who was largely scandal-free that had generated a huge groundswell of support (Sanders). I personally think Sanders is an idiot, but I respect that he is a principled person in a way few other politicians on any side are.

Then there's Clinton's penchant for insulting large sections of the country every time she opens her mouth (much like Obama). On top of that, the naked prostitution of much of the mainstream media for her campaign. The media has long stopped pretending to be impartial, but this time around they didn't pretend to be anything other than in the tank for Clinton.

Then there's the fact that Clinton simply isn't a likable person. She's old, ill, has a shrill voice and tons of baggage with substantially more coming out every week during the final months of the campaign season with Wikileaks.

These are all things that Obama lacked in 2008 and 2012. There are a lot of lessons for Democrats to learn from this election, but I'm not sure they will learn them. (Ditto the Republicans for that matter.)

Re: The End of Identity Liberalism

#73

I wish their were a labor wing of the Democratic party. The sooner we lose the identity bullshit the better. Of equal rights need to be championed, but so do classic thing like safety, consumer protections, public education, minimum wage etc. Oh wait, Bernie won my primary...

There is a labor wing of the Democrat party: the unions. The problem is that this time around a lot of the people they represent voted for Trump.

The identity nonsense is a major problem, including the fact that by claiming anyone who disagrees with them is a racist, or that the only reason people didn't vote for Clinton is that they are sexist, but I don't see that going away. The sad thing is that it does the most harm to the idea that there is still is racism in this country. The problem isn't anywhere nearly as bad as it's blown up to be, but by constantly crying wolf, they are taking away any meaning from the charge.

When the only thing you complain about is racism, people start tuning it out. Worse, when people are dealing with the drumbeat of constantly being accused of racism, especially when the majority of them are not, they are bound to not take the accusers or the problem seriously.

Post reply on HN