Just watched News Corp. journalist Andrew Bolt interview P.J. O’Rourke here during which, inter alia, identity politics was discussed.
I’ve never really thought much, if at all, about identity politics dismissing it is some progressive inanity. Then clarity appeared.
If, as a political movement, the progressives reject individual rights, and all that this idea implies, then how to deal with rights? By creating collective based rights such as ‘human-rights’ or a right based on one or other identity, whether race, skin colour, sexual orientation or some other differentiating characteristic.
The creation of the idea of human-rights was a necessary policy by the Progressives for it then enabled them to support ‘rights’ without needing to involve the individual in the idea.
The net result is the Balkanisation of humanity into competing identities, thus creating perpetual civil strife as one identity group competes with another. And a cynic might muse that this balkanisation was purposefully engineered to divide and conquer the masses so that they might be more easily ruled.
And of course as P. J. O’Rourke pointed out, the rejection of personal, or individual, responsibility is part and parcel of the identity political meme.
And then logically it follows that the progressives must reject the notion of individualism inherent in the Christian religion.
Yet the Progressives then admonish us to ‘innovate’; nothing other than the social engineers expecting their robotic creations to suddenly think for themselves.
Allied with this policy is that of the freedom of speech right. But the greatest abusers of the freedom of speech are the Progressives themselves, since conservatives watch their verbal P’s and Q’s as a simple matter of good manners. So who are the foul-mouthed haters expressing their opinions on Facebook or Twitter? The Progressives of course as they dominate the social media outlets.
The stupids really are in charge and this is not good.