Identity Clubbing and the New York Times

Funny thing about life. There are things where people will have disagreements, like my last post. I disagreed with Adam of Adam ruins everything, but there was respect there. Only some will agree on something, and sometimes it is better when we don’t on subjects that take some depth to really get to issues. People will learn in different ways. I may change, and others may change, but the passion for doing better drives us all on that one.

Then we have this.

For those who do not know, I am disabled. I harp on the subject a bit. First, I do not know about the issues or who is saying them all that is laid before me is how people react. Seeing that there was never a greater need to imbibe the volume of the Willamette River in bourbon than watching people specifically after the debate.

Listen, politics is the next great blood sport. People will look to their political side like they used to during the Yankees-Red Sox feud or the Cowboys- 49’ers feuds if you are familiar with Baseball or American Football. An international one would be Manchester United and Liverpool for those familiar with Euro Football or Soccer. Each of those feuds brings something where the fans are not only emotionally invested but also combative of the opposing side. In some cases can be nothing more than adding fuel to the competition, but here is the problem.

Politics is not a competition. It isn’t a game with winners and losers, and the fact that it is being looked at in that way shows some of the reasons we are having some problems. For example, among my friends from high school, there is a marine (conservative) Mormon (more conservative), Jehova’s witness (semi-conservative), and a farmer (conservative). If you asked them, they would say I am a liberal, not as an insult, I look at things differently, but we can always discuss what is on our minds and afterward find a way to come to some ground we can all agree on in majority, where some of the details we may not like. Still, the majority of the action is approved.

So, this made watching the comments from others and the article created by the New York Times (above) felt like a migraine powered by a thousand symbol-clapping monkeys. Looking back to see what had been said about both sides makes the monkeys get a stereo system. It makes it much louder because this is especially going on as of late. People are using identity as a defense, some defending Fetterman, who had just come out of a stroke, a major medical event, to a debate.

Now, this is one of two ways, either one, Fetterman had the passion for trying and continuing but did not have the way to make a showing of skills to make up for the loss of skills in the stroke, which could very well be temporary. His passion made a choice in this scenario where discretion would have been the better form of valor. He did not do well in the debate, but he made the decision thinking he could show what his strengths were.

The second way is his team backed him into it, thinking they could together show the strengths that maybe he could not on his own and take care of the public relations issues, not knowing what may come back. Now, in this case, one can look to the media giving the sudden disability tag and trying to make it an identity case when legitimate points are brought up.

Looking at the kind of pieces written about from both sides, it is clear that disability is being used as a defense for a bad situation, so let me say this to groups like the New York Times or anyone else who think taking it suddenly when things go bad. The identitarian political clubbing that causes people to reach for disabled, black, jew, and more like they were weapons in an arena is sickening and cheapens the experiences and problems we have gone through. It degrades the experiences the people have had and sows discord for those when people honestly want to use what experiences they have accrued to the service of the group, whether in politics or in specific teams. So, for those who think this is okay, where one can be black or disabled to get a couple extra points in something because you feel a lead slipping away. Let me say this.

Screw You.

Screw your paper, screw your reporting, screw this identitarian clubbing, screw the political bloodsport, screw it all with a drill deep enough that it can be driven into the ground and out of sight like some moral version of the elephant’s foot in Chernobyl, where people only remember it knowing what disaster we caused and look to it to make sure we never do it again. The only reason the disabled tag was taken by those is there was a hope it would be used to gain favor and defenders in the light of a bad showing. Not taking into account the people who can’t get disability payments because they are trying to still make something out of themselves, not those who died with the last knowledge they had that the supposed nets for them did not want to pay out. Not taking into account that being disabled seems to be dictated by political leaning as well nowadays. Taking a title of a group of people with enough problems, and no one in politics seems to want to give them answers or at least a hand, makes me want to ask exactly who thought it was a great idea.

Screw you for those who died with nothing, only for a case to be paid to their next of kin. Screw you for those who work themselves, knowing doing so at paces they need to without help will drop the axe on their finances. This is me angry about it because this has no reason. It was the move of someone trying to paint a picture that had no right existing.

Not to Fetterman or his team or both. If they were in agreement, they made a decision, but it didn’t work. Come back stronger and the best of health to Mr. Fetterman. No idea what your politics are about or even if I agree with a single point. We get stronger when we defend our points and grow in the weaknesses they present.

Keep Calm and Stay Strong.