According to the psychologist and author Jonathan Haidt, there are two kinds of identity politics. “Good” identity politics is the Martin Luther King-style “Take my hand and walk a mile in my shoes with me” of the Civil Rights era. The other, “Bad” identity politics is tribal, completely lacking in empathy for others. Over the last thirty years, the bad style of identity politics has replaced the good style on the American Left.
“[Bad identity politics is] based on the Bedouin notion: “Me against my brother, me and my brother against our cousin, me my brother and cousin against the stranger.” It’s a very general principle of social psychology. If you try to unite people: “Let’s all unite against them. They’re the bad people. They’re the cause of the problems. Let’s all stick together.” That’s a really dangerous thing to do in a multiethnic society.”
There is no substantive difference anymore between identity politics of the Right and what has developed on the increasingly regressive Left. They are both the “bad” variety. That is why I constantly say they are both poison. That both groups use the same “us versus them” black and white thinking is obvious. What is less obvious is that they use the same rationale for positioning the “other.” And they both go beyond mere hate to visceral disgust. The only difference is who they hate. The Right-identitarians hate Jews and non-whites. The Left-identitarians hate whites and males, with white males being the most hated group of all (the strangers). The “Me, my brother, our cousin” alliance at this time includes women, racial minorities, the LGBTQ community and Islam.
Continue reading “The Hateful Logic of Hitler, And Jana Shortal”
1. We have just had a week where one woman pointing her finger at a man over a 36 year-old misdemeanor has destroyed his reputation and likely his life’s work and much more (whether the accusation is true or not). We have also witnessed two shrieking, hysterical women emotionally coerce a Congressman into ordering an FBI investigation over said 36 year-old misdemeanor. How does the possession and use of this kind of power over men square with the idea that women are powerless and oppressed in our society?
2. Witch hunts, inquisitions and other venues (“I Believe the Women!”) in which the rights of the accused are ignored or drastically curtailed are the preferred means of “justice” for oppressive totalitarian regimes AND #MeToo feminists. If ending gender oppression is the goal of feminism and oppression itself is evil, the problem, doesn’t oppressing men mean you are doing it wrong?
3. If ending gender oppression is not the goal, but oppressing men is, haven’t feminists been lying to us all along?
4. Given that it is at the behest of women that he is being subjected to an oppressive tribunal, is Judge Kavanaugh justified in feeling oppressed by women? Is he justified in hating women should he chose to do so?
1. It doesn’t. It directly refutes it. Feminists lie about what power is, how much “men” actually have (as opposed to a few men) and how women have always had power and used it.
4. Yes and Yes.
This is an “Empress Has No Clothes” moment for feminism. They are what they claim to hate to anyone who will simply look.
This week the Bret Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation hearings were rocked by the allegation that Kavanaugh had committed an attempted sexual assault in high school, more than 30 years ago. This anonymous accusation was put forward by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-CA, who is on the Judiciary Committee and apparently sat on this accusation since July. Kavanaugh and a high school friend who was also implicated both denied the charge and the FBI has declined to investigate.
The fact that she sprung it at the last minute is neither here nor there. The fact that she sprung it at all reveals some very problematic aspects of “#MeToo” feminism and Feinstein herself, not to mention the desperation of Democrats to keep Kavanaugh off the Court.
A cornerstone of our justice system and a key human right is that the accused has rights. They have the right to know who their accuser is, to face their accuser in an appropriate venue and to cross-examine them. Those are key elements of anything that pretends to be “justice.” Dianne Feinstein, in the spirit of the #MeToo witch hunt, thinks it is okay to deny Judge Kavanaugh his human rights. After all, feminists like Feinstein apparently do not recognize that men have rights.
This puts her in some pretty questionable company historically. Anonymous accusations from a network of snitches was how the Stasi secret police in East Germany operated. It is also how Stalin put his political enemies in the Gulag. It is also the operating principle behind “#MeToo”—anonymous accusations and those past their sell-by date. Often both, as in this case. And the basic violation of human rights? Well that is emblematic of every genocidal, or in this case gendercidal, hate group in history.
Why should anyone trust Feinstein’s judgement about who should be on our courts when her sense of justice is so obviously twisted?
Yeah, yeah she was a friend of Harvey Milk back in the day. But what has she done for us lately? Stoked the hatred of men. She is a toxic feminist and needs to go. The Senate should investigate her questionable ethics and expel her.