2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThere seems to be a lot of handwringing about the term Identity Politics and what it means
it does not mean voting for a woman because you are a woman.
it mean voting for a person who will most further your feminist agenda, if you are a feminist.
voting for a person who will further your queer agenda, if you prioritize gay rights.
it is voting for the person who most aligns with the identity that is salient to you politically.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics
This is why no one on this board who identifies as a feminist voted for Sarah Palin, but plenty voted for Obama and HRC.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)This makes way too much sense.
K&R
Additional +1 for showing the proper use of "agenda" when referenced with these terms.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)different contexts. Philosophers spend their early chapters defining those. In Sander's case, he defined his use of the term also.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)politics.
SaschaHM
(2,897 posts)For once, I'd love it if the folks that rushed to defend him on these things actually listened to what he said. Just like I wish they'd listen to him when he says he is not a democrat.
WhiteTara
(30,172 posts)but I do remember what he said, both before and during the election and it seems that he has his own agenda.
BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)Words have definitive meanings, actually. And "context" and "definition" are two entirely separate concepts.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)Words that meant one thing 50 years ago might mean something different today. Usage, whether in your opinion faulty or not, changes meaning.
That said, I'm not invested in saying we should be redefining identity politics. Sanders probably should have used tokenism instead, since identity politics seems to commonly imply that the policies are addressing the needs of these identity groups.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)rights coalitions.
LexVegas
(6,578 posts)Yes.