When someone tells me to "check my privilege" it immediately shuts down communication and I don't even bother furthering the conversation.

@232nightowl

6 жыл бұрын

Breezy D which is what they want,That's why when it's said to me I say " go fuck yourself "

@cosbyshmoony4551

6 жыл бұрын

It's the modern equivalent of a racial slur. It's designed to irrevocably alienate you from the individuals around you based on race.

@GuileQwerty

6 жыл бұрын

Right, which is why I don't fall for it. Sometimes I just ignore the comment and go addressing the substance in question. Other times I ask them what they think my privilege is and then correct their inevitable false claims.

@TheGuiseppe90

4 жыл бұрын

That's the point!

@EmperorsNewWardrobe

4 жыл бұрын

BreeZ Place, why give up? We NEED you to tell them their rule-breaking error. It’s called an ad hominem, which is a fallacy attacking the messenger not the message. Just tell them this and ask whether a doctor needs to have had cancer in order to treat it or a poor person be wealthy in order to comment on the business of the wealthy. But don’t give up! Debate!

Not the slightest bit of importance to the working class. I claim that identity doesn't matter. Eating matters. Having a shower. Putting a roof over your head. Etc.

@altnarrative

7 жыл бұрын

If it didn't matter, at least unconsciously, we wouldn't have the identity movement. Thinking it shouldn't exist won't make it not exist. The ego is alive and well.

@Trobynski

7 жыл бұрын

Lou Weeze 😊 I realised as soon as I wrote the words "working class " I was making an identity statement. Anyway, it's a first world luxury is what I was trying to say. I know people who really need food and shelter. They are definitely not thinking about identity.

@iga27

7 жыл бұрын

Exactly! especially if your identities come and go, like the clouds in the sky;

@scoobydisney

4 жыл бұрын

@@Trobynski They may not be actively thinking about identity, but their identity - who and what they are: poor and/or homeless people (in the UK?) - is definitely shaping their existence. Who and what we are and how other people see and relate to us is crucial to the existence of just about every human that ever existed...

@albertolawncare5563

4 жыл бұрын

Does this not boil down to the crux of the matter that was decided in the 80s and 90s? That in the end everyone is both a victim and and perpetrator of their own lives and time lives around them? That at the end of the day the only fair way to treat anyone is as an individual, and (as well as we can manage) be conscious that we not attribute assumptions we might have? We are instinctively tribal. It is how we see, it is how we fight, and how we use shorthand to explain a topic. But using those groups to hide behind to justify actions or words today otherwise would not be granted to an individual... That is not equality. That is using PC to gain the upper hand, and is a form of bullying.

I've been working as a teacher in the UK for the last 16 years. For me this whole issue is intrinsically linked to a huge collapse in resilience. I see this clearly in children but perhaps it's true across society?

Perhaps identity groups will continue to fragment to the point where every group is a group of one member...?

@peps7721

5 жыл бұрын

That's kind of where the gender thing is going. Once we moved away from the 2 biological genders and started recognizing new variations, the list seemed endless. What was the last count? 72? Not many in the bigger scheme of things - but still more than I could have imagined. That's why there is a + at the end of LGBT.

@gentryroberts687

3 жыл бұрын

The ultimate minority is the individual.

This is the best, most balanced discussion on identity politics that I've seen. More discussions need to demonstrate the fine line that need be walked.

'I think the new politics of identity is built on the collapse of real identity and the weakness of people's sense of themselves' precisely!

@databang

7 жыл бұрын

peacerebelgirl, true-but ironically sometimes it comes out through narcissistic or egocentric importunates.

@jeviosoorishas181

7 жыл бұрын

When the root of your identity is political or anti-repression/anti-oppression, your actual identity does collapses. It collapses because your identity is no longer what you are as opposed to everything and everyone that exists, but rather what you are is what you are reacting to or fighting against.

@coreycox2345

7 жыл бұрын

In that case, maybe Portlandia is for you.

@scoobydisney

4 жыл бұрын

Yes. Collective ego crisis.

What about aggressive identities asking for special treatments and using this as a Trojan Horse to destroy other identities ?

@Nexustonothing

7 жыл бұрын

How?

@krileayn

7 жыл бұрын

Amish?

@Johnconno

6 жыл бұрын

The C Word Druids...

@EmperorsNewWardrobe

4 жыл бұрын

That’s a GREAT angle! I’m always looking for arguments that don’t simply defend but counter attack, and I think you may have cracked it. Which examples are you thinking of?

I was gob smacked by the fascinating and erudite panel . They addressed the topic from several angles I had never thought of .

All I know is that our beliefs dont define us. I may be a woman, Feminist etc. but those are just my experiences of being human. They are not really who I am. Who we all are is just consciousness having an experience and we all just have different points of attention. Why our beliefs are not really who we are is that they can change. They are not concrete like you are. So basically all we really are is awareness. Thats what it all boils down. We are awareness having an experience.

I'm giving this 10 outta 10....what a stimulating and interesting discussion. Thoroughly enjoyed.

Keep your identity, but keep it out politics. I think politics is more about what you want, than what you are.

Brilliant that this is recorded and available here

The 3rd speaker is right about setting aside differences and unifying. And it was brilliantly put to say "wounding is not inherently ennobling", however I think she is wrongly assigning belife in ideals and standing up in those ideals being based on identity, the abolitionists weren't abolitionists because they had a particular identity that predetermined their disposition to slavery, rather their belife in an ideal and a moral code transcended their various identities and they rallied together over a cause. It is just flat out wrong to lay such victories at the feet of "people setting themselves aside based on an identity characteristic" as the speaker said.

Identity doesn't equal values. People of all 'identities' have and develop all values. The way to make society work is to achieve the widest possible acceptance of shared values. Identity is only important in private life, the way you interact with family and friends, or when you are denied participation in society because of your particular identity/identities.

Identity requires assumptions based on the defining aspects of said identity. Then when those assumptions are made there are accusations of stereotyping. What does race, gender etc tell me about a person ? Absolutely nothing

@libertasdemocratiam887

5 жыл бұрын

Absolutely nothing! I thought the whole civil rights movement was built on the premise that we are all equal and it's our character that matters not our race, sexual orientation, gender ect ect. I HATE where politics has gone with this. I don't want to be judged solely for being a lesbian, i want people to judge me on my character and my abilities. Person find it homophobic to prejudge gays and lesbians, apparently being a lesbian means i shouldnt have voted to leave the EU. What my sexual orientation has to do with brexit I'll never know. It goes totally against the ideology of the original civil rights movement, the whole idea was that we gays and blacks are no different to anyone else, and we should be judged and treated not on our sexual orientation or race but our abilities. ... meanwhile the media is wondering why we're now seeing homosexual attacks, actual violent physical attacks, maybe if we stopped focusing on "identity" judging a peoples like books by looking at the cover, we wouldn't be seeing this rise in unrest. Lastly I'm sick to the back teeth of folks claiming homophobic abuse and attacks, when someone shouts a homophobic slur or something, that's not homophobia, it's not nice but for gods sake, being treated by society as a second class citizen, facing jail for who you love, being hung, that's homophobia. Some tut on the street shouting dyke is a moron who sadly is entitled to their views, so long as they keep it to words and keep their hands of me, i couldn't care less what someone says to me. If i did I'd never have come out. People seem to think we gays and blacks are weak and unable to stand up for ourselves and take a but of verbal crap from some muppet in the street, apparently we're so weak that we need laws that force people to deal with us... basically doing what was done to gays and blacks last century and prior. It's so wrong and against everything the civil rights movement sought to achieve. Sorry for the ran, totally agree with you though. It's a sick twisted joke.

Lovely intro on identities by the first speaker - ‘check your identity’ & beyond sort of thing

When an identity like "straight white male" can encompass nerdy Dungeons & Dragons enthusiasts, meth dealing motorcycle gang members and everything in between, it doesn't really seem like a very useful distinction.

What kind of bloody intro was that? I will remember that for years to come I have no doubt!..

Great discussion.

1:23:10 Really, useful clarification on universalism. Thank you for that. That really made something click.

It was nobody’s best night for discussion. Period.

Its all about entitlements vs earnings and self respect. Current generation is very fragile !

Negotiation is all fine and good but BULLIES are NOT INTERESTED in NEGOTIATING. And the media normalizes bulling and puts it forth as a morally correct way to be. So doesn't feminism. This is TAUGHT, and not only is it taught, it is taught with money taken from citizens whom they are teaching some people to go out and BULLY.

By the way, why does the "you have never lived life as a such n such so you can't possibly understand my difficulties" never apply to the so called priviliaged classes? A white woman can never understand what a native American woman goes through, but the African American woman knows exactly how it feel to live life as a white male ( universally great despite class, health, social situation etc)

I liked what the second speaker was saying, though I have to say I think policy should be based on FACTS not feelings. Those policies should be guided by ideals, and based on a solid foundation and mutual recognition of hard facts.

Gender fluidity being called 'insane' and 'ridiculous'. So much for an unbiased debate. Identity is both something we discover about ourselves as well as something we create and choose for ourselves. To discover what is evident about ourselves and recognize it as something that can be validated by others is important.To create and choose our identity, to tailor what is evident about ourselves.To experiment and alter it to suit our specific desires is equally important. Identity demands an interplay of the two not just one of these two two aspects. If what is defined as 'male' is restrictive to one's identity then the inclusion of a 'female' identity as well is liberating. James Baldwin..."In the one contains the other."

I find it interesting that some people are so arrogant to presume that it is correct, and in fact necessary, to assign VALUE to OTHER PEOPLES identity. The KKK does it, Feminists do it, ANTIFA's do it, and differing ammt's of people from other groups do it. They also presume to have the RIGHT to control the speech and other non violent behavior of people in these other groups whether or not they actually belong in said group (i.e. assigning strangers they know nothing about into the Nazi group). I'm good and your bad because I say so and if you deny it that is proof of you being bad and therefore I have the right to impose my will on you and to direct violence toward you and doing so is proof of me being good.

@1mol831

5 жыл бұрын

Everyone's a nazi.. Xd

For a long time I have, when filling out forms that list several different races, I would check off 'other' and write in HUMAN. As I watch this video I'm thinking that when I encounter such forms in the future I should write over all of these types of sections "F you you F'in bigot'.

@zxyatiywariii8

6 жыл бұрын

Lol I often write "human" too. I don't know what country you live in, but here in the US, there's a movement to make the 2020 Census add a new race: If enough people check "other" and write "Kekistani", the Census will have to document it as a real race. Which belies their whole identity politics agenda.

I like Brendan O'Neill's thinking on the cause of and cure for identity politics.

Negotiation is all well and good so long as neither party has a bat or a gun. And also, I live in the USA and we are a constitutional republic... with a first amendment for example.... which you don't get to 'negotiate' on.

Brandon is one of the sharpest commentators in the UK? Jesus wept. Christopher Hitchens (I miss him, RIP) would be rolling in his grave hearing that. This guy is a intellectual lightweight.

30:11 Aero gender?! Next there will be Snickers gender, Kit Kat gender, Reeses gender. Call me a cannibal but they sound delicious!

54:20 No class politics in the USA? Is the AFL-CIO a Spanish or Chinese invention?

I am, obviously, late for class.

1:06:00. Spot on!

The lady looks like she could be related to Snoop

'slaves benefited from opera' is his response to cultural appropriation. LOL.

IDENTITY POLITICS BASED ON RACE & RELIGION WILL CREATE FEAR, DISUNITY, HATRED, INSTABILITY & ECONOMIC REGRESSION...

1:18:16 - Hi, Ella.

Sanity. Ironic that this event happened the same day that Donald Trump was elected president here in the USA. Really liked O'Neill's comments.

But the personal IS always political, because the polis - that is, the citizen body/body politic - whose organisation, management and relations politics concerns itself with, is composed of individual persons. Unless you want to go and live alone on a virgin island, you always exist in relation to other people. You cannot truly be an individual in a society. The very fact that we are each photographed by CCTV an average of 70 times a day in the UK is a political fact; there is no getting away from the reality of other people and the existing political order, which shape just about every aspect of our lives.

Waffly Ivan, woolly Julian, token black woman (who doesn't quite understand the UK scene) Michele, sitting-on-the-fence Sunder. That leaves good old Claire and Brendan. Shame we didn't hear a lot more from them and a lot less from the others!

When I am told to check my privilege I ... oops. not allowed to tell you.

Any experience in life that needs constant affirmation is far too fragile a thing for me to pay any mind. Even when my kids were small they didn't need a constant validation of my feelings for them. When I was younger I had girlfriends who needed a constant check-in with how I felt about them; we didn't stay connected for very long. I don't understand people who are so psychologically fragile, so low on self-worth that they need others to define and enforce their conception of who they are. If I see such a strange bird walk in my direction I willfully and mindfully make myself as repugnant as possible to said person so they will leave me the fuck alone. Grow up.

@pulsaran

6 жыл бұрын

Indeed you cant build (character) on quicksand.

Reconciliation. Yes.

Like clever people

why she stand up?

I don’t know if it’s so much of a problem with people ignoring working class identity (whatever that is), but more of a problem with nothing but pure hatred and venom being spat toward the working classes by many campus & political elites on the far left, for decades. It continues the get worse each year. I recently watched black woman who makes millions a year go into a Twitter diatribe about about our whole political system needing to be reworked to exclude parts of the population because the rural, white, working class is a threat to democracy and our very existence. As if all are racists. All are republicans.... You can find multiple articles on southern culture needed to be eradicated because progressive city life coupled with excessive/divisive identity politics is the only way to live & grow. These are the rambling of privileged people who spend too much time sitting on their cushy butts, ripping everyone and everything that isn’t exactly like them down. That said, It’s interesting to watch this again after the recent Wilfred Laurier debacle. Unfortunately it’s nothing new but at least the public at large got to hear it. How absurd it is that these professors (if you can call them that) claimed a student/teaching assistant was transphobic & committing acts of hate speech because she played clips of a discussion (televised by Canadian public broadcasting) that raised concerns over confusing wording, incoherent inconsistencies and egregious compelled speech policies within a piece of proposed legislation. They are acting as if 18 year olds and the public at large can not handle a discussion about legislation, that should be discussed by all it will effect. Discussing problems with legislation allegedly creates unsafe spaces and hateful environments for trans students/people. Bull! Learn context and how to separate discussions about problems with legislation from harm being done to trans people at large. Especially when many trans people objected to it as well. They are trying to shut down any and all objections and concerns while enforcing questionable policies. It’s something radical feminists have done to men and women at large for decades, and is the reason why very few women will call themselves feminists anymore. It only seems like the majority agree because a small % of the largest generations are used to push legislative agendas. At the same time they push the same, frail 18 year students the make up and repurpose new genders and pronouns that their professors, and other trans activists, will then attempt to institutionalize and put the full weight and force of the law behind. 18 year old new voters in gender studies classes (not biology or medical fields) are not equipped to discuss legislation that will effect all in their classrooms, but they are equipped to create legislation, and new genders out of thin air.... You have to love the lack of logic and sanity on that one. It’s blatant indoctrination. We currently have 2.84 million American students under investigation for protected speech and expression. Investigations headed by Bias Response Teams that act just like the professors at W.L.

You can have 30 people all different in every way except, experience, thought & ideals... so where is the diversity?

Here's some food for thought: I am a straight white male. I have privilege and power and am part of the patriarchy. I have also been finding that I am power fluid. Some days I feel like Thor and some days I feel like Zeus. Sometimes I feel like a soldier and sometimes I feel like a King. So, while I find it helpful and respectful that feminists, for example, recognize my privilege as part of the patriarchy I feel that it is appropriate for me to be recognized correctly based on where I am on the power fluidity scale on any particular occasion. So I am sure everyone will be in agreement to call me King or Sir or Your Majesty or Lord or All Powerful Man. Sometimes I will feel like a 'hey you' to be appropriate, but not often because I tend to identify toward the top of the patriarchy hierarchy most often. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

@Gastonian616

6 жыл бұрын

I see what you did there. Thank you Your Majesty.

Brendan O'Neill crushes it again!!!

I am a Chinese majored in Computer Science. I think the gender study major in the west should never exist as an academic department, and it is toxic to the entire intellectual atmosphere in the University. Note that I strongly support women rights movement in the past centuries. In the Universities in mainland China, we have a department called "School of Marxism studies." They apply model social science theory to research on "Marxism with Chinese characteristics". Their publication is also nice looking, in a serious tone, with all the model social science theories, but their entire goal is to prove: "1. Marxism is right." "2. Marxism with Chinese characteristics is still Marxism." "3. China is still a socialist county on the road to communism." There is tons of Ph.D. and professors in the "School of Marxism studies," however, I think they are so ashamed of their pseudo-science research that few of them dare to speak to STEM student to say: "Look, I am a scientist as well." Awarding that subject with the Ph.D. title is a shame to the entire academia. Why, because if they want to do real research in Marxism, they should do it in a proper philosophy, politics or economics department. Their research can be challenged, disputed, proved or disproved by peers of a different view. In "School of Marxism studies," your conclusion is already there, what you need is to prove it with an eloquent essay. As a rule of thumb, an academic subject should not be established as such that its research (or pseudo-research) is revolving around an orthodoxical ideology. Whether such political ideology is just or unjust is another matter, science and research are entirely about Truth, not ideology. In scientific research, we need to report our funders so that other scientists can know that if there exists a channel of interest to cause potential bias. Confirmation bias and vested interest are fairly common issues in STEM researchers. However, in each STEM field, different sides can argue and dispute over the publications so that any hypothesis is attacked, examined, and finally prove or disproved over time. To summarize: every researcher has his own belief and his own bias; To arrive at truth, in STEM we ask the opposition forces to attack each other vigorously so, in the end, we found the truth that withstands the challenge. In physics, you can prove Newton Classic physics is wrong (or flawed). You will have a huge outcry in the circles, you will have both allies and enemy, but your career and physics research goes on. The simple matter is: the entire field of physics (or any STEM subject) do not depend on the orthodoxy of one particular set of theory or ideal. The subject that is founded on one particular set theory or ideal is religion/political ideology. In women study (or any other other identity politic pseudo-research), the entire founding structure is wrong in the first place. I am not arguing about whether today's women study is good or bad, rational or irrational. I think any Ph.D. in STEM major will realize the fact that the system design of current women studies as an academic research system will cause a massive confirmation bias and industry of vested interest in the field itself. Do you believe some Ph.D. in women study can publish a research hypothesis that white males are the disadvantaged social groups? Do you believe some Ph.D. in women study can publish a research hypothesis that male are inherently more intelligent (by whatever particular measure) than the female, so that men are better at some jobs? The above hypothesis is false IMO, but it is an important thinking game. It proves that there is a "right answer" and "wrong answer" of morality in the research, so some hypothesis will never be raised, and some conclusion will never be drawn. Moreover, graduates from women study virtually cannot find any job except being a teacher of women study or an activist. So if their researchers find that women are under institutional discrimination, the entire field benefit from it by collecting more funds and secure more teaching positions or jobs like "chief diversity officers in google"(As a CS student I burst into tears when I first heard of such title :P ). I am not arguing whether "women are under institutional discrimination" is true or false (I believe the claim is justified in someplace in China), I merely point out that there exist a chain of vested interest here. Most importantly, if someday, someone proves "women are under institutional discrimination" is untrue, if would dis-establish the entire field. Can you imagine the severity of it? The entire field of study will be demolished, that will be equivalent to proving Allah does not exist to Muslim. That is to say, hypotheses or research to disproving an certain argument in “women's study” will be an existential threat to all the Ph.D. in the subject and getting everyone so mad at you because their entire life, entire research, and future career will be fertile.With such a closed loop of positive feedback without negative review, it is therefore never a wonder for me that women study become an echo chamber and radicalized. Looking back in history, we would know that such moral ideal is a bad idea in reach science theory. Darwin theory which portrays a cold-hearted evolution by natural selection is not a welcoming thought in many religious people and defy the sanctity of the men. Many radical political thoughts (which cause mass murders) in modern time are inspired by Darwin theory. However, academia is not church; we should seek truth (however uncomfortable). Darwin can be good Christian when he is a man in daily life, but when he begins to work as a scientist, he must distance himself from what he believes or what he would like the world to be. In research, the scientist ceases to be a man; he becomes the embodiment reason itself. After the research, he recovers his morality and ideal. A scientist may then decide to hide the uncomfortable discover, or burn it because it will bring injustice when misused. I think many people outside of STEM emphasis on too much on humanity, too little on the reason. They do not realize the importance of this duality of personality when discovering the truth require our cold-hearted rationalism, and hiding the harmful truth from public require our warm-hearted humanity. I think every true scholar who is interested in women study, with the dream of obtaining truth, should leave that particular echo chamber. Real researchers on women’s issue should go back to common political science or sociology department where there is not a particular agenda or central ideology. Their theory may be completely right, but it needs to put outside of the echo chamber and face strict scrutiny to as befitting the academic standard. Having a feminist reviewing the paper of another feminist will not produce any real science.

The Institute of Ideas? You couldn't fucking dream up this shit.

i identify as you.

Let's say a few people still don't get the term 'ISLAM'

That Brendan O’Neill is a dwarf among giants in that discussion. He brought nothing but straw men to the table.

Listen to 40 mins of people pointing out the obvious.

American doctor probably makes the best comment in the end. The universal and particular can function together, and sometimes, in the history of black American civil liberties for example, they may need each other.

I identify as a "dissected", I therefore find this video offensive :p Check your sected privilege!

Brendon once again offering straw man arguments in contrast to the extremely thoughtful lines of thought coming from the other panellists. I do enjoy his provocations, but wish he would aim his rhetoric at less polarising ideas instead of getting down into the scrap at a populist level - he would of course defend populism...

I thought nothing could be more irritating and obnoxious than identity politics until I heard the screeching that this vid opened with. Dear lord! have some consideration for our ears

WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT INTRO?

this is really boring, a mere academic maddness, no working person, mum or dad are Interested in such nonsense,

'A Forum of Professional Bullshitters.'

Utter middle class nonsense, as usual