That was why I said 'we' about the universal liberals. I certainly don't claim not to be biased towards universal liberalism. That would make it hard to argue for. I thought that was a good attempt at steelmanning the IdPol position & their concerns abt the UniLib one. No? https://twitter.com/rgigger/status/998157270297948161 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
I think it was a good attempt but there are some things that I would change if the goal is for the people you are describing to feel like they aren’t being mischaracterized.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rgigger @HPluckrose
So I am obvs biased in the other direction but the whole “Identity Politics” label feels like a smear. It feels like you are saying we want to divide the world up by race rather than simply dealing with the fact that other people already have.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rgigger @HPluckrose
Whereas claiming that “Universal Liberalism” can’t apply to people who think we need to talk about race seems unfair.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rgigger @HPluckrose
Like I don’t accept that “identity politics” is all about advocating for aggrieved minorities. “Identity politics” starts with the majority oppressing the minority based on identity. That is also identity politics.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes, it is. I have said so often. However, this thread was about two conflicting views on a very specific subject.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.