• Doomsider@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 days ago

    There was a lot to unpack in what you said. A shit ton of you being upset over the situation in Israel and a lot of you trying to shift the blame.

    I find it strange you attack the only people who would agree with you stances. Everyone I know who claims to be liberal is bewildered at what Israel has done. The conservatives I know approve of Isreal’s right to defend themselves at any cost.

    Also that last bit about the oppressed becoming the oppressor is interesting especially when you see what happened in South Africa and Israel. The answer is of course to recognize and stop the cycle but it does often feel like a pendulum.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      True, good point on Israel.

      Liberal politicians are the ones who are “Relaxed about Genocidal ethno-Fascism”, whilst it makes sense that genuine Liberals (so, Liberal out of principle, not merely political followers), would also be against what’s going on in Israel if only because killing people is the ultimate reduction of their freedom.

      I should have been more clear about meaning Liberal Politicians when I used the word “Liberal”.

      I don’t actually think Identity Politics is Liberal, I think it’s something build on top of Liberalism by politicians, in the best cases out of convenience - it’s far easier to address certain things by reducing people to identity groups and then fighting for entire groups and/or passing measures that affect all of a group equally and it actually works up to a point - and in the worst cases just as pure hypocrisy and even greed - it makes for simple slogans that politically work well and are easy to sell, brings them votes and if a politician happens to be a member of an identity that person can advance their own personal upsides by claiming measures that benefit them are for the identity group (this by the way, is also how the Far-Right tends to use identity politics, only they use different identities).

      That said you’re at the very least misreading my words on the whole “oppressed becoming the oppressor” - what I wrote is that all groups contain people who will do bad things when they have the power and no accountability. At no point did I claimed they were oppressed, oppressors or one of them who had become the other, much less part of “THE oppressed” or “THE oppressor”.

      Sure, sometimes the tables turn and people who are themselves oppressed and members of a group containing mainly oppressed get power and then become themselves oppressors, but that’s not related to any identity and it’s not even needed that the whole group stops being oppressed, just that individual: it’s simply that assholes who are powerless usually risk a lot by acting as assholes, whilst people in positions of power can often act as assholes if they so wish and get away with it, so assholes will do it.

      Further, there is no need for those people to be in a grand category called “THE oppressed” or “THE oppressors” - often assholes who behave meekly when faced with somebody with more power will behave as assholes towards those with less power: such double-face is a pretty common dynamic in schoolyard bullies or even company bullies (look to middle and lower level management to find those). Such people are both oppressed and oppressors - in other words, even at this level the trying to tag people as something isn’t helpful: both the oppression done to that person in the middle and the oppression that person themself does are wrong and should be stopped, and an “oppressor” tag here just muddles a situation were there are two wrong actions going on and the victim of one happens to be the perpetrator of the other.