this is an interesting one, too:

smart guy:

“Don’t weaponize race,” Gillum warned over the weekend.

Don't know that I agree 100% with this, but it is worth a read and a thought or two about new possible "common good" coalitions:

Joshua Johnson of NPR, his 1A site based @ Washington DC's WAMU:

“America is divided, but millions of us are still eager to come together. 1A proves that every day. We take on tough subjects in a thoughtful, civil and meaningful way. It’s exactly the kind of conversation this nation desperately needs. And it can only happen when you show your support.”

— Joshua Johnson

empty dupe due to code problem

Identity Politics Does Not Continue the Work of the Civil Rights Movements

By Helen Pluckrose & James A. Lindsay @ Aero Magazine, Sept. 25

It is nearly beyond dispute that the Civil Rights Movement, second-wave liberal feminism, and Gay Pride were liberal projects, both in the broad philosophical sense and in the narrower meaning that arises within contemporary politics. Nevertheless, it is common for those of us who consider ourselves liberal in either sense, or both, to be told we must disapprove of these great liberal successes. This occurs when we criticize identity politics.

This peculiar criticism follows an insistence that these civil rights movements must be a form of identity politics because they advocated very explicitly for a certain identity group. No. This is never what liberal critics of “identity politics” mean by the term. It is fully consistent with—indeed, integral to—universal liberalism to advocate for universal human rights, freedoms, and opportunities by focusing on the identity groups who lack them. This advocacy, however, is not identity politics.

This is not a mere semantic quibble. It is vital to distinguish between universal liberalism and identity politics and recognize what they share in common alongside how they differ. Both see and oppose inequality and seek to remedy it, but they do so with very different conceptions of society and use different approaches. These differences matter. Universal liberalism focuses on individuality and shared humanity and seeks to achieve a society in which every individual is equally able to access every right, freedom, and opportunity that our shared societies provide. Identity politics focuses explicitly on group identity and seeks political empowerment by promoting that group as a monolithic, marginalized entity distinct from and polarized against another group depicted as a monolithic privileged entity.

Universal Liberalism

It is essential to understand that “liberal” does not indicate a place on the left of the political spectrum, as it is often used in the United States. Neither does it indicate a place on the right of the political spectrum, as it is often used in Australia. Rather, it is a philosophical and ethical position with a long history which focuses on individuality, liberty, and equal opportunity. In fact, it is found in decidedly left-wing political positions, decidedly right-wingones, libertarian ones, and among the unaffiliated but broadly centrist. Therefore, universal liberalism is a widely held principle, and it is one which grew out of Enlightenment thought and the founding of secular, liberal democracies. As such, it birthed the civil rights movements.

The Civil Rights Movement, second-wave liberal feminism, and Gay Pride functioned explicitly on these values of universal human rights and did so to forward the worth of the individual regardless of status of race, gender, sex, sexuality, or other markers of identity. They proceeded by appealing directly to universal human rights applying universally. 

They demanded that people of color, women, and sexual minorities no longer be discriminated against and treated as second class citizens. They insisted that within a liberal society that makes good on its promises to its citizens, everyone should be given the full range of rights, freedoms, and opportunities.

Martin Luther King, Jr., articulated this ethos of individuality and shared humanity explicitly when he said, “I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Liberal feminists did so when they sought to have access to the same careers as men, the same pay [....]

A reminder that Russian trolls goal is to stoke Identity Politics in order to get Americans to distrust and fear one another. We know that trolls on social media are trying to sow discord. Here is a visual guide to their strategy. Emma Cott/The New York Times

Tribalist Identity Politics vs. the common good in Britain:what Suzanne Moore says in this piece @ The Guardian "Are the Gang of Seven Right to Split from Labour?":

Politics is broken, we all know that. We are completely stuck. The two-party system strangles any innovation at birth. It has calcified in the last few years into total crisis. Representative democracy is not working in any meaningful way. We sit agog as deals are done, bungs offered and amendments made. Both main parties are in hock to their extremists and to unelected advisors.

Those who can watch a heavily pregnant Jewish woman saying that she has been bullied out of the Labour party, that this party is institutionally racist, and think nothing of it – all while she is being abused right now on social media – need to take a long, hard look themselves. Don’t bleat on about the moral integrity of some future socialism when this is what’s happening now.

Antisemitism and the leadership’s position on Russia and Venezuela are not uppermost on the doorstep. Not even Brexit is. It’s housing, jobs and hospitals – all of which are good reason to want a Labour government. But at what price? Sometimes you have to ask who your fellow travellers are, and what they are asking you to go along with. We can all spout on about ending neoliberalism. It’s harder to understand how Labour might end the barrage of abuse its women and Jewish MPs face.

The viciousness of attacks on anyone who doesn’t worship Corbyn, this continued cry of “centrist” as a meaningless insult [....]

The ultimate anti-tribal "common good" guy liberal: