0
2

[–] tinyhousesbrah 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Got to be careful here, there's some landmines.

I'd put it like so: there should be an umbrella identity yes, but let's not say 'one identity' - that takes you off to totalitarianism when the next generation turns your motivations into caricatures as they always do.

I'd point out that identify politics is nearly never an Asian/White issue. It's nearly all MENA or Middle East and Africa that have a collision proper with Western culture. Chinese and Japanese don't agree with us on lots of things but somehow we don't turn it into a problem.

I guess that what mature civilizations do. Just agree to disagree, try not to act like dicks.

0
0

[–] Chiefpacman [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I’m not saying there should be one identity. There just shouldn’t be such wildly differing ones in one nation. The only reason there is, is because of mass migration from shit hole countries to ours.

0
1

[–] tinyhousesbrah 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Some thoughts.

Japan is Alt Right, convincingly so. It's also not Alt Right Political like Voat - it's latently there in the population as it was in the old times in Europe, a true Right wing culture. I think that is a good route because if Voat ever was most of the population there would exist endless purity spirals (the right wing's version of virtue signaling), leading nowhere especially positive, all hands on deck for conformity - which does make sense under conflicts or war but otherwise not.

I suspect you can appear to have wildly different ideas in the 'infosphere' of society, but because their ethnicity is the same in some not obvious way it doesn't cause conflict. It's like biology places an upper bound on conflict. The opposite is where even tedious small differences cause riots - that's usually because there is some balance of power in society that is disrupted. Muslims are basically antimatter in Liberal society but few in official positions have the balls to acknowledge it.

Little doubt that mulicultural society is fragile, the opposite of Taleb's antifragile concept. It's not exclusively race/class - because we already know that certain species of memes like religion, communism are divisive. Still these are often pseudonyms for racial alliances/conflicts but that's not easy to see with how our we conventionally read history. I'd point you at Albion's Seed which demonstrates the evidence for the influence of ancestry on culture.

The Chinese and the Europeans are very different, biologically, culturally, historically... yet something is the same and I think that something is civilization - both societies have evolved very similar patterns (like how different species independently came up with the same solutions), even their disbelief in the other ideas expresses a symmetry. The Chinese used to believe in something which I perceive to be identical to The Cathedral which caused their nation to become so tyrannically authoritarian it made Maoists look like pussies. That's is why the Chinese are anti-human rights, it's not because they believe they ought to be monsters, it's because they believe it to be an evolutionary dead end and I'm afraid they're completely correct.

tldr; Nothing you didn't already know: relaxed controls on civilized people and strict controls on barbarians.

0
1

[–] NotHereForPizza 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

To be honest, identitarianism arises (pretty reasonably) in people who set forth to discover their past and learn from it.

Unfortunately, some will stumble along the way to the light, and misunderstand that the individual is needed to form the group. So, while identity is important to understand, there are certain principals set before us by our fathers that we can't ignore, principals that will lead us to the next level of consciousness. One day, that identity-based realization might excel us forward, but we won't really be able to re-segregate ourselves if it's needed until everyone stops being all purposefully divided.

Alright, I'm done now, though. You got me curious for some reason.

0
0

[–] Chiefpacman [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

That’s a good point; it probably is too late. To re-diversify

Unless we can get off this planet one day.. which we probably can’t.

Were doomed! But it’s still important to fight off the doom for as long as possible

0
1

[–] fusir 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

That's interesting because if you had a group that wanted to advance itself through victimhood in a 2 identity nation they would try to some point and then succeed (at level of effort X). If there are more groups then they have to vye for recognition against competing groups so they put more effort in.

Wait a minute. Let's talk about the economics of this. If they have to try harder to succeed wouldn't that be a potencial disincentive? Let's talk about these types of disincentives because they aren't straight forward. Let's say I offer to give you $50 if you do a lap around a football field. You will put in some degree of effort. Now let's say I want a mile. Ok, so you will try harder doing four laps. Ok, now I want you to run four counties and back. Now you put in less total effort.

So what the premise implies is that if there were only two groups that the second group would have been successful.

0
0

[–] M346 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Well that's what makes identity politics so easy is that you can always break it down further.

0
0

[–] vastrightwing 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

You're making a case for homogeneity.

I agree!

0
1

[–] fusir 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

What if we made a case against democracy being a means of getting gibs. Then we could be individuals with some degrees of homogeneity and some degrees of inhomogeneity and not have to deal with people bullshitting.

2
0

[–] EyeoftheChampion 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago 

There should be one identity, the national cultural one that all newcomers to the country passionate adopt. Ancestry is in the past and should be remembered as the past not the future.

0
3

[–] DeadFox 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Lmao youre an insane man. You're to blame for the hell we live in now. Mixing pot theory is impossible. When strife comes to town people will always side with their own.

0
1

[–] Optick 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Assimilation is a false god

0
1

[–] Chiefpacman [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I think the term itself is propaganda. It's 'nativism' vs disrespectful foreigners and the libtards that sponsor their agenda.

0
0

[–] flipflop1026 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

So if a people don't want to mix, you would advocate to force them, under threat of violence, to live in a way they don't want to?

What happens when they resist, kill them?