Yeah, you keep saying that over and over again, but you can't back it up with anything beyond assertions and rants. And you have no response to any challenges besides to repeat yourself.

As demonstrated by the rather insane assertion that identity politics causes potential nuclear disasters. So, unless you can demonstrate how the premises or conclusions there are flawed, then the irrationality of your position has been sufficiently demonstrated, and I'm done.

I already demonstrated it. I'll repost it for you:

"Identity politics sows division and promotes tribalism. The "end game" of tribalism is intertribal warfare, as it has been for all of human history."

It doesn't necessarily lead to nuclear disasters, though it did nearly lead to one in that specific instance, which is what I said from the beginning. I never made the claim that all identity politics will result in nuclear war. I said that identity politics almost destroyed the world in the 1980s and it did. Identity politics does inherently lead to death and destruction though, because its basic premise is to turn groups of people against each other on the basis of their differing identities.

Fantastic interview, just like everybody said it was. I highly recommend everybody in this thread, regardless of what side you are on, take an hour out of your life and watch it.

Gina comes across as genuine, both in her claims that she doesn't hate anybody regardless of race or sexual orientation, that her posts were misunderstood, and the pain she feels as a result of months of corporate and mob bullying and harassment. She always projects an air of strength, but you can see through that veil in this interview, see a woman who is truly hurting because she has been bullied and misunderstood by so many. The picture she paints of Disney/LucasFilm (or at least certain prominent elements of them) is not a pretty one. A corporation that bullies employees who step out of line in regards to politics, a corporation that cared more about appeasing the mob that had harassed Gina for months, rather than the health and safety of one of their own stars. A corporation that is suppressing the voice of many of their employees, who feel too scared to speak their own mind for fear of being fired simply for their beliefs. A corporation of hypocrites that is completely ok with their left wing employees posting controversial statements, but not their right wing employees. 

The Mandalorian cast is a great example of how we can all put aside our politics and still be friends. Despite the fact that Gina was a conservative and most of the other cast members were liberals, they were all able to put aside their differences and be friends with one another. But Disney ripped apart one of the best examples of unity in America, dividing us once again, not just on politics, but re-dividing a Star Wars fandom of new vs old that had started to come together thanks to The Mandalorian. 

You posted assertions not demonstrations. And I've already pointed out the flaws.

If an ideology contributes to the rise to a regime (which has not been demonstrated in this case), is that ideology directly responsible for every action that regime takes? Yes or no?

Pretty much, yeah. I already acknowledged that violence is the endgame of unchecked nationalism. It becomes unchecked nationalism when it crosses that line from being proud of your own culture to hating the culture of others. The flaw with your argument tho is that you think all ideologies are created equally. This is not the case. Identity politics are inherently more destructive than nationalism because the entire premise is based on turning groups against each other. Nationalism isn't that. It has the potential to reach that point, but it doesn't have to.

Yes, identity politics does lead to death and destruction. Glad we agree on that. As for your second premise, there's a difference between being proud of your country and/or culture and thinking that all other countries/cultures are inferior to your own, though there is obviously some overlap between the two. Unchecked nationalism to the point of vilifying and identifying the "others" as your enemies does indeed lead to genocide, yes. It's just another form of identity politics. Identity politics are not exclusively used by the left - the right has and does use them as well, though the left uses them far more at the moment.

As soon as I see identity politics become a major component of the modern right in the Western world, I will happily take a stand against that too. And it will happen. If you think the dominant populace (the benefactors of so called "white-privilege") are going to stand for being vilified and demonized forever simply for being white and/or conservative, you're very mistaken. The shit show you saw at the capitol on January 6th was just an appetizer of what's to come. And it's a real shame, because it's totally unnecessary. Everyone should be moving toward the centre and finding some common ground, yet every day both sides drift further apart. As I said earlier in this thread - I wish it didn't have to be this way, as any non-sociopathic person would. Sadly, no one is taking the warnings seriously.

White Identity Politics has been a staple of Conservative politics for decades. It isn't something we are waiting to see crop up on the right, it is a fundamental part of the conservative ethos. The fact that "identity politics" is more closely associated with the left simply tells you that the right has been more successful on a PR front, not that they aren't using the same tools.

That said, not all uses of the same tools are created equal. Identity politics is neither inherently good or inherently evil. Sometimes, identity politics is used as a means of identifying certain group oriented struggles, like the oppressive systems of racism. It is only through identifying and fighting against those systems that such oppression can be abolished. On the other hand, sometimes identity politics is used to promote irrational fears, xenophobia and nationalism in order to rally support around policies which are designed to oppress others. It is through fear bred by white identity politics, which we are able to justify the inhumane treatment of immigrants in this country, from "they took our jobs" to "they are sending rapists". This is amplified to the extreme when examining further right ideas such as "White Genocide" and the desire for a white ethnostate.

As for the enlightened centrist nonsense, a compromise between justice and injustice is still injustice, and a compromise between freedom and oppression is still oppression. 

All groups of people are oppressed for different reasons. Even to have a society in which many people come together, some oppression of individuality is required. If your goal is to create a utopia in which oppression ceases to exist, I hate to break it to you, but you're chasing an impossible dream. And your efforts to bring in this utopia are far more likely to lead to massive problems than the good you are trying to achieve. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

So, in what way is this argument actionable? Are you implying that we should not take political action against oppression when it is identified? It is an absurd blanket statement in my opinion, especially when looking at the history of this country, that we should not take action against oppression because of some nebulous, unnamed "problems", so I hope that isn't the argument you are trying to make.

I'd be curious to hear what the pro-Identity Politics camp in this thread think about this:

To me that is a perfect example of just how harmful identity politics has become. An entire race of some 750-850m people worldwide being demonized for the color of their skin. Like one of the top replies to that tweet says, if that same statement "Dismantling whiteness, and not allowing whiteness to reassert itself" was applied to any other race expect whites it would be seen as calling for mass extermination and cultural annihilation.