- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: When did identity politics start in the US
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:47 pm to arp0925
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:47 pm to arp0925
The modern incarnation of outrage over things not worth being outraged about (white priveldge, microagressions, etc...) is tied to the philosophy of critical race theory.
LINK
LINK
Posted on 4/29/17 at 7:42 am to dpd901
i would say that's correct mid to late 80's and bill clinton being the last traditionally elected democrat.
the thing is identity politics is a fools errand in a country that's 70% white. the danger was always going to be the creation of a white voting bloc and the distribution of minorities in the united states isn't uniform ironically minorities are most concentrated in red states. take mississippi for example 37% of the state is black that's the highest percentage in the nation yet 90% of the white vote goes to republican's. a state turns red when 60% of the white vote accrues to the republican candidate and then that trend moves up and down ballot. romney lost because he under performed his national average among white voters (60%) in the mid west performing in the low 50's where as obama performed in the mid 40's. hillary clinton under performed obama among whites in the mid west by 7 points receiving only 38% of the white vote trump on the other hand performed to his national average among white voters right at 59%.
the notion that you can put together a coalition of fruits and nuts and win elections is sophistry.
the thing is identity politics is a fools errand in a country that's 70% white. the danger was always going to be the creation of a white voting bloc and the distribution of minorities in the united states isn't uniform ironically minorities are most concentrated in red states. take mississippi for example 37% of the state is black that's the highest percentage in the nation yet 90% of the white vote goes to republican's. a state turns red when 60% of the white vote accrues to the republican candidate and then that trend moves up and down ballot. romney lost because he under performed his national average among white voters (60%) in the mid west performing in the low 50's where as obama performed in the mid 40's. hillary clinton under performed obama among whites in the mid west by 7 points receiving only 38% of the white vote trump on the other hand performed to his national average among white voters right at 59%.
the notion that you can put together a coalition of fruits and nuts and win elections is sophistry.
Posted on 4/29/17 at 8:15 am to dpd901
quote:
The modern incarnation of outrage over things not worth being outraged about (white priveldge, microagressions, etc...) is tied to the philosophy of critical race theory.
This is the correct answer in terms of what we think of as "identity politics" today.
Posted on 4/29/17 at 9:14 am to dpd901
quote:
The modern incarnation of outrage over things not worth being outraged about (white priveldge, microagressions, etc...) is tied to the philosophy of critical race theory.
It has a lot of twists and turns throughout history, but specifically in the modern political realm of the US, this answer above and the link are correct. This is the version you are seeing today.
The left, along with their ilk in media and academia have perfected it. Only problem is, America is clearly tired of it, but they don't care.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News