The Vicious Cycle of Identity Politics | 5-Minute Videos | PragerU

1위@NonaK-mz8oy3 days ago

“Yet, starting in the 1970s and accelerating through the 1990s, a new identity politics took root in American universities. It sorted people into racial, ethnic, and gender categories, assigning each group a place in a hierarchy of victimhood. It argued that—as Howard University professor Ibram X. Kendi put it—”the remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.” Just with a different set of winners and losers.”번역 보기

2위@NonaK-mz8oy3 days ago

Please read the full script, PragerU has posted it on their website.번역 보기

3위@NonaK-mz8oy3 days ago

Transcript: The Vicious Cycle of Identity Politics Presented by Andre Archie We think of identity politics — defining a group based on its race, religion, or sexual orientation — as a new development, something that recently emerged out of academia. The truth is, identity politics has a long history in the United States. You could fairly say it was the basis of the Civil War. Ultimately, this obsession with group identity was rejected. It is fundamentally a primitive concept and not an American one. The American ideal, as stated in the Declaration of Independence and later reaffirmed in the civil rights movement of the 1960s, has always been a colorblind society in which people are judged based on merit and character. But toxic ideas have a way of resurfacing. Identity politics is one of those ideas. The overriding question for those who embrace identity politics seems to be, “Who am I?” On its own, the question is perfectly legitimate. But it easily becomes destructive when it demands that one’s group-based identity be recognized in law, corporate hiring and other areas of public policy. Once government begins handing out benefits, protections, or status on the basis of group identity, politics becomes a competition among tribes. Every group is encouraged to see itself not as a collection of individuals, but as a bloc with claims on the state. This is not a recipe for national unity. It is a recipe for endless conflict. In the 19th century, the country was torn apart by a racial ideology that claimed white people were inherently superior and therefore entitled to rule over others. That belief helped justify slavery and the denial of basic human dignity. Even after the Civil War and the 13th Amendment ended slavery, it took a century of hard-fought struggle to challenge that lie and bring the nation closer to its founding principles. Yet, starting in the 1970s and accelerating through the 1990s, a new identity politics took root in American universities. It sorted people into racial, ethnic, and gender categories, assigning each group a place in a hierarchy of victimhood. It argued that—as Howard University professor Ibram X. Kendi put it—”the remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.” Just with a different set of winners and losers. At first, this remained largely confined to college campuses. But within a generation, this ideology had migrated from the academy into newsrooms, corporations, government agencies, and school curricula. Group identity became the lens through which seemingly every policy debate, every hiring decision, and every cultural controversy was filtered. The competition never ends, and the grievances never resolve, because the game isn't really about fairness—it's about power. Access the full transcript here...👉 https://l.prageru.com/...번역 보기