Above Identity Politics

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Oh, are you talking cyber communties? Where the groups don't actually stick together physically?

ETA - on further thought, I think you might be refering to a current american trend in political rhetoric that I haven't been really exposed to, and don't know much about. I have seen the mention of those terms on forums, but am not sure how they are used in the american media.
I shouldn't have responded - I thought you were talking about real communities.

a reply to: Bluesma

On the first disagreement, what you describe is the root, although it does seem like religion binds people, it actually divides people and thus destroys security in the name of providing it.

Why do human beings not see their relationship, human being and mankind, there is no separation, so why the need to bind through a religion, the color of their skin and so on.
Obviously, those who do, set themselves apart from their fellow human beings.
That divided state sooner or later will lead to conflict, it is the root.

On the second disagreement, it is not my intention to change anybody.
Everyone has the right to decide for himself, what to believe in, where one identifies himself with, it is up to the person.
There is no question of correction, to the contrary, a holy rule is, not to try to change the world or others.
But we can philosophize and discuss, share our insights.

originally posted by: Bluesma
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Oh, are you talking cyber communties? Where the groups don't actually stick together physically?

ETA - on further thought, I think you might be refering to a current american trend in political rhetoric that I haven't been really exposed to, and don't know much about. I have seen the mention of those terms on forums, but am nsure how they are used in the american media.
I shouldn't have responded - I thought you were talking about real communities.

In the United States about 150 million people are eligible to vote, of that amount about 30 million are "extremists".

Despite the media hype that supports extremist positions ? That is a reflection of who is actually paying attention to an election that is in November of 2016.

In relation to the media presentation it is important to read between the lines and understand this phase in Presidential elections, does constitute a "silly period", as has been often stated in the Media.

originally posted by: earthling42
a reply to: Bluesma

Why do human beings not see their relationship, human being and mankind, there is no separation, so why the need to bind through a religion, the color of their skin and so on.
Obviously, those who do, set themselves apart from their fellow human beings.
That divided state sooner or later will lead to conflict, it is the root.

Well, I am torn about continuing in this discussion, because I had misunderstood the OP, so my comments were a bit off topic. I was thinking of such groups as religions in particular (living in France, the subject, with the current wave of refugees, is a hot one).

But there are differences in us which happen because of where we lived, and in what environment we grew up in, that will automatically make groups different from one another, whether they choose to acknowledge it or not.

I can deny my american identity all I want, and yet I have some ways of thinking developed early in life that remain with me no matter how hard I try to change them. Those are ones that contrast with the majority of my current environment.
I could insist they are not result of my being american in origin- the others around me could too, and just say it is my individual personality quirks. Yet fact remains that when I am with americans, these traits are not a problem- they are understood and shared.

Like my work ethic- I take my work seriously, and I cannot help placing value on individual merit.
These are a problem in this environment and system, they are offensive to those around me. Yet when with Americans, that is not a "problem", most feel the same, and our system is based upon these ideas.

I have been the target of hatred and hostility because of these traits (seen as virtues in america, vices here). I insist upon facing them alone, but it is not at all difficult to understand that some might turn to adherence and support of your "people" in face of such threat. The clash of culture already exists, no matter what I decide to identify with; whether I wish to acknowledge the environmental influence or not.

It's funny, I am currently facing a case in which prejudice and verbal abuse happened to me, and my nationality was used as provocation (hating americans was proclaimed as the reason). I didn't pay that much attention the hating americans part, I felt more assaulted by other acts and words aimed at me as an individual.

But my husband reacted strongly to the "racism" card, and has been trying to convince me I should call up and ask for aid by the american consulate! (for I was actually fired illegally, with no fault on my part at all; I lost my job).

All the legal points support me 100%, and I have a lot of support from others around me, so I don't agree with getting help from the americans.

But then... I believe in individual merit- if my behavior has been with integrity and respect over time, I will not need the back up of a "tribe of origin".

And he is French, in which relying on individual merit is egotistical, selfish, and narcissistic.
At this point, I understand where he is coming from, I can see through his eyes, and into his heart, but the fact remains that I still feel best with this "quirk", which is mine as an individual, but I would be only lying to myself to say that I developed it solely on my own, without the influence of a specific culture I was nurtured in. The difference is already there, and will be a cause of clash anyway. It will be there whether I decide to openly identify as an american or not.

The same problem could exist for others- their nurturing environment produces a clash of difference. The question becomes- do you call upon the people of the same nurturing environment to support you when in danger or threat? Or do you play David to a Goliath?

Actually, this event does relate the subject at hand, because more than nationalistic ties are in play!
The pressure on me from the french people at this establishment (a large one, a group of hospitals and nursing homes) is that by NOT pressing charges, I am being a traitor the female community! Because this individual makes a habit of abusing women on a daily basis this way, and does not do it to men. Most of the women are in financial hardship and cannot afford to defend themselves, remaining victims and enabling him to continue doing it.

The argument placed before me is that one- as a female, I am being self centered to not take action with their well being in mind. I am not identifying enough with them to have compassion and empathy for the women who will continue to be victims.
My internal debate is about whether or not I "do it for us women" or do it for "us americans" (same issue- if I let it ride, I am letting other expats to face the same alone). HE already perceive a difference between men and women, and acts upon that difference he perceives.
Do I jump into the fray, or do I let it continue?

Personally? I want to scoff at his idiocy and walk away- life is too short to spend on stupid conflicts, and I have confidence in my ability to find another, more satisfying work environment. But is it selfish to ignore the women and americans I leave behind?

a reply to: Bluesma

Yes, we are born in different cultures which form us to who we are to an extent, the environment we grow up in.

I would say, david and goliath, although a prefer Wodan and Mimir, Wodan was allowed to drink from the well of wisdom on the condition that he would pay a price.
Wodan said he would give up one eye, 'than that shall be the price' said the giant Mimir.
This is where wodan got the name as the one eyed god, his eye lies at the bottom of the well
This is to show that wisdom has its price, the well is symbolic for the self, one who loses the thread in life, has to descend within in order to come in touch the core of its being .
This is the symbolic explanation for the old Germanic tale mother hulda.

My life has been vastly different from people around me, as a baby of 5 months old, i was taken away from my parents.
At the age of 4 i was reunited with them and it has been a living hell due to mental and physical abuse.
This might have formed me, it surely has led to a breaking point during my youth, one that i am thankful for.
Since that moment i am my own light, not afraid to be david against goliath.

But you are you, nobody but you can know best what to do, trust your instinct.

There are many people who use their energy to influence others in order to get something out of it, revenge for example.
Now i'm not saying that they might want to settle a score with this individual, through using you in order to get what they want, that is something only you can know.
But why do they try to influence you (making you feel guilty) and not use their energy and time to file a complaint them self?
If you press charges against this individual, do it not because others tell you to do so, do it if you think and feel for yourself it is the right thing to do.

Personally? I want to scoff at his idiocy and walk away- life is too short to spend on stupid conflicts, and I have confidence in my ability to find another, more satisfying work environment. But is it selfish to ignore the women and americans I leave behind?

Than walk away and leave it behind if you feel that is best.
That is not being selfish, everyone has to go his own way in life, in fact, it would be foolish if you allow yourself to be limited in your freedom to do so in order to please others.

Everyone will do what is best and go where one can blossom, that is not selfishness.

originally posted by: earthling42

There are many people who use their energy to influence others in order to get something out of it, revenge for example.
Now i'm not saying that they might want to settle a score with this individual, through using you in order to get what they want, that is something only you can know.
But why do they try to influence you (making you feel guilty) and not use their energy and time to file a complaint them self?

The reason they hope I will press charges is because I have a very good case- I made no mistakes, I said nothing that could be construed as disrespectful- in the contrary, I went out of my way to aid and facilitate the adminstration, in a way that is uncommon here. His behavior, though habitual for him, is usually done behind closed doors- without other witnesses.

In my case, my lack of reaction to his provocation (not crying, not defending myself, just listening silently) made him mad enough to have done it in public, in front of a lot of witnesses, that are willing to testify.

Besides being abusive, he is incompetent in his functions- the organism is going under because of his constant faulty decisions and lack of impulse control.
The syndicate (trade union) has no personal revenge desire, but a goal to have him fired, which my case is seen as an opportunity for. (I suspect that on a personal level, there is some desire on the individuals parts to fulfill their desire to be "rescuers" or aid for victims of unjustice, but that is my speculation ).


The reason no one has done it yet is partly due to the lack of witnesses, and mostly because he chooses women of the lowest rank in the organism- women struggling with low income, children to feed, who cannot take the risk of losing their job, nor carrying the reputation of being a low life troublemaker which would be a possible obstacle to getting another job.

I can afford the risk- I am well off and do not need a job, financially. I also have a certain amount of respect and recognition in the community, having been a business owner here, with a reputation for being ethical and reliable... which for many, gives my case even more credibility. I am less likely to be seen as a poor person trying to profit from the system in order to get money.

If you press charges against this individual, do it not because others tell you to do so, do it if you think and feel for yourself it is the right thing to do.

There is a difference between doing so out of some sort of submission, and doing so because one has heard, understood and found other's position valid and reasonable. I have made no decision as of yet. But I do find myself trying to contemplate the decision, which is right in line with some of what the OP pointed at-
an ethical question of do I "rise above" for my own comfort, or do I have the courage to delve into the lower conflicts, that are actually very real and destructive for those unable to "rise above".

From past experience, I find that making decisions based only upon my own well being seem good at the beginning, but eat at me in the long run, because I continue to feel empathic and sympathetic with others- I can't cut myself off completely from others.

a reply to: Bluesma

For me it is not a question of ethics, nor higher and lower, simply put, the burdens have fallen away and therefore there is freedom intrinsically from conflicts.
Not that they don't exist, the environment we live in is full of conflicts, but we are not part of the conflicts anymore and therefore we are free from them.
In that freedom we can observe it and learn from it, it is like watching the flow of the river, one cannot alter the flow and if one is swimming in the middle of it, one is unable to see it.

It is not 'rising above' for one's own comfort, one sees the implications of it, the suffering, hurts and violence which it brings forth.
One cannot decide to rise above, it is not a question of choice but a question of seeing, learning and understanding.

In my 20s my employer who knew of my situation because we had a few talks together over time gave me the choice to leave the home of my parents and he would help me to rent a place of my own and help with finances.

The physical abuse had stopped when i was 16 years old and got a job, but every euro i earned with that job went straight to the account of my parents.
They were quite fond of gambling so most of the money flowing in was lost due to gambling and we were in debt hugely.

When the choice was put forward by my employer, it would have been easy to accept and be free from them, start my own life and let them be.
But to me this was not a choice but an easy way out which i politely refused.
For years i'd seen and observed their suffering, their struggle in life and if there was a moment to leave them, it would be when not only me, my kid brother and little sister but also they would be able to stand on their own feet financially.
That moment came when a bank was willing to give me a mortgage despite me having a hugh portion of debt from my parents written on my name.
I took my kid brother and little sister with me and our parents moved into a carevan in the country side.

Of course it didn't last long before they got into financial trouble again, when they came to ask for help i gave them a choice, either go to the casino and unsubscribe, than i will help, or continue your destructive way of life and i can't and will not help because it is in vain.
The next day i had two letters on my table and so i helped them with their problems.
Even on her deathbed my mother talked about it, saying it has been the best thing to happen in their life, for the remainder of their life they actually had a joyful living.

So why do i write all this, i do not cut myself from others, i observe and listen, act in the interest of people around me.
But i'm not trying to change them, to influence them and deciding for them, everyone has to do what he or she feels is the right thing to do.

As i mentioned in my former reply, nobody but you can know best what to do.
If you have a strong case with witnesses and testimonies from many other victims, evidentiary of his incompetence for his functioning, what is it that keeps you from pressing charges against him?
What does the employer do, or what has he done against the complaints about abuse and why is this individual still in his function despite his incompetence?

In the way you explained it, there is a motivation to get rid of him, that is not what the motivation should be.
Abuse of woman, using his power to abuse is an offence, the motivation should be to take him to court in order to stop him from doing so, not only in his current function but in any other function in any other business.
Having him sacked is not a solution, he'll do it elsewhere with the difference that it is not in your community, but does that really changes anything?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

This is the difficulty for myself and perhaps others in these regards: should I ignore identity politics and get on with my life,

In a nutshell yes everyone should get on with their lives, and ignore it.

The whole practical aim of politics is to divide and conquer also known as identity politics.

Which covers a wide range of labels: Democrat,Republican, rich,poor, black, and white, and the list goes on.

Identity politics entire goal is to keep spreading 'discontent' between groups of people to where the funny part is only two groups of people remain: the majority, the minority.

The majority always wins. The issues really don't matter. Just the result.