The religion of Identity Politics

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

This is by Sam Harris:

Sam Harris here expresses a view that it is a problem if you can predict a person’s views on a number of views, by hearing their view on one.

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[FrankOneParticipant 1417]

Good video. Identity politics is about many things — peer pressure to ‘fit in’. A lack of reasoned, disciplined thinking. It’s also about self-appointed ‘leaders’ of various identity groups getting rich.

Identity politics isn’t just about women and minorities, but about ALL special interest groups — businessmen that want to pass laws to decrease or discourage competition, promote subsidies to their industry, etc, as but one example. And there is identity politics associated with class.

Take an obvious instance of identity politics — Black Lives Matter. Black lives certainly DO matter. But what is ruining many black lives? The obliteration of the nuclear family, 80% illegitimacy, the War on Drugs/incarcerating high percentages of young black men, a dysfunctional public education system in the inner cities, multi-generational welfare, subsidizing unfit mothers to raise children, no fault divorce, and a number of other factors. Many of these factors equally impact the poor white community or underclass, so why even discuss it in terms of a ‘Black’ problem?

This sort of balkanized thinking is not appropriate for a free people.

Is police racism and violence against minorities a significant factor in these problems? Of course not. Objectively speaking, the vast majority of murders in the city I reside in, are NOT police officers shooting people that look different than they do, or shooting anybody for that matter.

Residing in a suburb outside the urban core, it is extremely unlikely I will ever be a victim of such violence. This has nothing to do with whether my neighbors are white, black, or Mexican, but more to do with the culture.

Similarly, building a ‘tall wall’ along the border to keep the brown people out really p~~~es me off. This is meant to appeal to Joe Sixpack and assumes an economy is a zero sum game (I win, you lose, or vice versa) instead of a dynamic system that expands. I have no problem with the immigrants AS LONG AS we aren’t going to give them social welfare and they integrate into the culture. Some immigrants where I reside ARE moochers off the State.

Usually identity politics, is a game of pitting ‘us’ vs ‘them’. A game in which everybody loses except the leaders (e.g. Jesse Jackson is a good example).

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

One comment I saw someone post did get me thinking though. If individuals operate under similar assumptions, and standards they use to determine truth, they can end up reaching similar conclusions. While each is acting independently, they end up being of like mind with those they haven’t even met. So, by changing what a person trusts, you can change their mind and worldview. Individuals who aren’t aware of what their baseline assumptions are, can end up getting played. For me, this is a core bit of awareness I feel that is needed for myself to walk more free. Maybe others don’t feel that, but I do. For me, being aware of this I find pretty scary actually. I see individuals with contradicting views, arguing like they have THE truth, my eyes end up rolling.

These assumptions do matter. For myself, I consider the elevation of the nuclear family as a cure all for society’s ills, and pushing it, to run counter to myself as a man who has never been married, and over-reliance on it to fix things, doesn’t really fix things. It has broken down for a number of reasons, and just saying it needs to be reverses is that. Understand my basis for this, is I consider extended families also important to sustain nuclear families, and as a man without a family, I also need support that isn’t based on it. I personally benefit if I connect with a church community who can support me, and whom I can find some commonality. I personally find also the whole elevation of nuclear family as savior as a basis of the whole “man up” BS I see about, that puts pressure on men to get married and have kids, whether or not they are reason, or it fits them.

I say this, because I have a different set of assumptions and things I look to, to make sense out of things. Because of this, I reach a different conclusion about the nuclear family, which is reasonable based on my views, but based on other assumptions, wouldn’t fit.

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[UintatheriumParticipant 1861]

Isn’t MGTOW a form of identity politics?

I don’t think that identity politics is necessarily bad. I just don’t want to be dragged into the politics of someone else’s identity.

That’s why I hate the phrase “Men should be feminists.” What the f~~~? Feminism is for women! F~~~ off! You don’t see me trying to “red pill” women.

MGTOW: because you can (and should) say anything about a woman as long as she isn't within earshot

[GnosticParticipant 2491]

Stereotype exist for a reason.

Inherently there is nothing wrong with stereotype, like AWALT is just another stereotype, but enough women behave that way so we should treat all women like that to prevent them harming us.

The problem is false stereotype, like the bogeyman patriarchy give women a bad deal and lift up the men. But looking at what men have to suffer vs women, what men contribute vs women, the claim is false, but feminist still keep up the myth.

Thus I see nothing wrong with identity politics, the thing wrong is false identity politics.

There is no magic in MGTOW, just recognition of the truth and logical decision how to avoid dangers. The red pill is but the truth, it is no magical potion. Do not think in this modern world men have no longer have natural enemies, men are prey to women and government.

[FrankOneParticipant 1417]

IGMOW: The nuclear family is one form of social organization that worked (to the extent that it produced children that were able to contribute to society), but certainly not the only one. The Shakers adopted children and raised them as a group in a structured environment. This is but one of many examples of alternative social organization. The nuclear family doesn’t work well in Western countries due to the prevalence of divorce, and the inability to raise a family on the TYPICAL salary of a single earner.

Whether the nuclear family maximizes people’s happiness, is CERTAINLY up for debate; in modern society, I’d argue definitely NOT; however, the Amish are as happy as the Forbes 400. And huge percentages of them aren’t taking anti-depressant drugs.

One of the key issues of poverty and crime is MOST of these single-parent ‘hoe-solds’ in the inner city, with government as the Daddy, have no structure. This view has nothing to do with racism; government enables these unfit single parents — whites, blacks, hispanics and others, through income transfer. Now I’ve known some good single parents, and they do provide this structure.

The ‘nuclear family’ is actually a relatively NEW term, added to the OED (Oxford English Dictionary) only in 1925. Before the industrial revolution, the extended family, was a common form of social organization due to the high cost of householding.

The industrial revolution broke up the extended family and the nuclear family replaced it. The post-industrial revolution we are in now, has broken up the nuclear family. The nuclear family worked in an era of high incomes relative to expectations.

Uinatherium: I’d say MGTOW has some features of an identity group, but is missing critical ones. For instance, the ‘mainstream non-MGTOW society’ view is NOT that men are victims, and most of us are NOT seeking some political redress of entitlements where we receive inequal/favorable treatment, as other identity groups are engaged in. This victim mentality, is the lifeblood of most identity groups, and forms their basic narrative. Think feminism and ‘patriarchy’, or Black Lives Matter and ‘Racism’. One of the problems with the ‘victim’ mentality is it avoids you looking inward at SELF-IMPROVEMENT. We aren’t just cogs subjected to external forces. We drive ourselves. When I’m lectured about ‘patriarchy’, I ask why no wall with 50,000 dead women’s names on it. When I’m told women don’t start wars, I ask ‘you mean the Queen of England or Thatcher never started one’?

Those MGTOW that DO want political change, typically want marriage and divorce equality. I know ‘marriage equality’ is code-speak for gay marriage, but I mean equality in a different sense: if a divorce occurs, custody defaults to 50/50, the woman is not always awarded the house, etc. I haven’t seen MGTOW advocating for a system the reverse of what we have now, wherein women would pay 90% of alimony and go to jail if THEY didn’t pay child support — i.e. asking for entitlements like a ‘normal’ identity group. I’d say a significant fraction of MGTOW are disinterested in politics.

MGTOW does have the feature of an identity group in that it is engaged in consciousness-raising, basically, making people aware of the plight of men under the current social and legal systems that comprise the s~~~ sandwich of Marriage 2.0 AND the what we would term ‘red pill knowledge’.

I’d say a significant fraction don’t care about the political and legal system, and view advocating reform, as MRA thinking, since due to the biological nature of women, marriage is a raw deal for men even with such reforms, albeit, less of a raw deal.

Men are certainly ‘victims’ of Marriage 2.0; I know dozens of divorcees; but we aren’t seeking to reverse the roles through law, to where the woman is the ‘victim’ and we force a s~~~ sandwich down their throat, expecting them to earn more, keep getting married, divorce in a few years, and the man gets the kids, house, retirement, and monthly checks, and the woman lives in a tent and goes to jail if she can’t pay. That is the system an identity group would demand.

[Nathan R. JessepParticipant 1102]

Uintatherium wrote:

Isn’t MGTOW a form of identity politics?

I don’t think that identity politics is necessarily bad. I just don’t want to be dragged into the politics of someone else’s identity.

That’s why I hate the phrase “Men should be feminists.” What the f~~~? Feminism is for women! F~~~ off! You don’t see me trying to “red pill” women.

I believe in equality – as in equal, period. The problem with identity politics is that they want special treatment and absolution of responsibility instead of equality. Look at BLM – most of the black people killed by police are career criminals who were a danger at the time they were killed. BLM ignores this and blames cops when in fact there are less than 20 unjustified shootings a year despite there being over a million police officers in the U.S.

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

Uintatherium wrote:

Isn’t MGTOW a form of identity politics?

I don’t think that identity politics is necessarily bad. I just don’t want to be dragged into the politics of someone else’s identity.

That’s why I hate the phrase “Men should be feminists.” What the f~~~? Feminism is for women! F~~~ off! You don’t see me trying to “red pill” women.

If one sees MGTOW the “their” in Men Going Their Own Way as something done collectively, which I believe fit the original MGTOW Manifesto, and which I call MGTOW Together (to clarify) then it will be prone to forming a collective identity and a community, with set assumptions and standards you need to comply with to hold that identity and use that as a label, and identity politics will then come out of it. Identity politics is a way also for individuals to cut through the noise of data in the world, to get a coherent world view, that works to some degree, without having to think out everything, and fit in.

On the other hand, if you approached MGTOW and adopted it as a label, as the Their part, referring to each man individually deciding which way he goes on his own, independent of others (I believe MGTOW.com speaks of this in the title page), and it isn’t dependent on what anyone else is thinking. This type of view of MGTOW will not lead to identity politics, because it is too prone to autonomous thinking. For myself, the IGMOW (I Go My Own Way) take is preferable to me over about anything else out there, and particularly with the MGTOW Together view of MGTOW, which drives men to hang around forums and argue over definitions and guard a label and making getting a degree in the nature of women essential, when I find it isn’t, if I am not going to pursue woemn.

I use IGMOW (short for I Go My Own Way) now as a label, instead of MGTOW, due to the fact it more clearly states where I am, and identifies me as a person who has my own thoughts, and own way, that evaluations things on its own merits for its own advantage. I want no part in any sort of collectivist thinking and identity politics. I own my own assumptions and align with these on my own level, and let others do whatever else they want to do, and get out of their way. I am focused on myself, and trying to find the best way to navigate through life, without getting bogged down by things that drain and distract.

FrankOne wrote:

IGMOW: The nuclear family is one form of social organization that worked (to the extent that it produced children that were able to contribute to society), but certainly not the only one. The Shakers adopted children and raised them as a group in a structured environment. This is but one of many examples of alternative social organization. The nuclear family doesn’t work well in Western countries due to the prevalence of divorce, and the inability to raise a family on the TYPICAL salary of a single earner.

I figured I would cut it here, to save some space. I would hold here, particularly men who have their own way because the social norms don’t work, they need other patterns and need to find other things. It is possible with MGTOW, they would need to find something besides the nuclear family to help fill in the gaps. I would add the nuclear family is some sort of 20th century freak exception that started to break down late, and isn’t sustainable now in this century. MGTOWs are running into a ton of reasons why, which have led to the rise of MGTOW as a label.

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

Nathan R. Jessep wrote:

Uintatherium wrote:

Isn’t MGTOW a form of identity politics?

I don’t think that identity politics is necessarily bad. I just don’t want to be dragged into the politics of someone else’s identity.

That’s why I hate the phrase “Men should be feminists.” What the f~~~? Feminism is for women! F~~~ off! You don’t see me trying to “red pill” women.

I believe in equality – as in equal, period. The problem with identity politics is that they want special treatment and absolution of responsibility instead of equality. Look at BLM – most of the black people killed by police are career criminals who were a danger at the time they were killed. BLM ignores this and blames cops when in fact there are less than 20 unjustified shootings a year despite there being over a million police officers in the U.S.

Identity politics believes, first and foremost, the group one belongs to should be the dominant group in society, because it collectively possesses a set of values that is superior to other groups. In this, you get ahead by not your own virtue in a marketplace, but how well your group collectively advances. Individuals who are good conformists, and work to fit in, end up having identity politics work better for them. Individuals who don’t fit in, and think different and value integrity in this area, or are particularly gifted in certain areas, don’t benefit from this.

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[The Missing ManSpectator 342]

Uintatherium wrote:

Isn’t MGTOW a form of identity politics?

When I first came to know all about MGTOW I could see what your saying.

Now that I’m at the actual MGTOW HQ website, MGTOW is just the name of the website.

There is no organised movement here, we are like a male speak easy all at different tables

[The Missing ManSpectator 342]

I had a thought but you can kinda exemplify the point of the video when you draw a swastika and show it to some SJW.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

[Author]

Posts