Group Dynamics: Process Versus Identity:
You can tell a coercive entity is coercive because its processes reinforce group identity.
In a non-coercive entity the processes are attractive to individuals, because there are significant benefits to using these processes. Any group identity arises out of shared experience and it is flexible, capable of scaling to handle both new people and new generations.
Sixties, Federalization of Public Schools, & Identity Politics:
So, I haven't found the actual protocol by which they started this crap yet, but the sixties appear to be the point at which schools in this country were basically seized, and given to those who wanted to hijack the political system via identity. The 'conservative' based identities might not have necessarily been taught per se- perhaps the leftist taught identity politics with a view to have everyone be leftists and the damaged children who refused the taught identity ended up creating their own based on what they though tradition was. I don't know if this is totally true, because I know Bismarck. The right's patriotism definitely smacks of an identity, for it persists even after the theft has taken place. These are the people who hate Obama, but think it's great that he can kill anyone he wants with a drone
Identity Politics- Is There A False Christian Identity?:
If there were a false construct of Christianity, wouldn't the outcome be similar? An identity that demands behavior destructive to the person holding it, much like the female identity I mentioned above, which I came across in a discussion about biology? One that lays itself bare to our schools, governments, and corporations, in the same manner as the false female construct of self?
Is it just a coincidence that certain Christian memes originate from the 1960s? Many of the feminist memes come from that time too. Are they against each other, as people on the left/right, Republican/Democrat line like to pretend? I must say, now that I have left that line, and tend to view any real political argument ought to be taking place on a monarchist/anarchist line (if there is to be a line), I am more inclined to see people still on the old line as suffering from different versions of the same disease.
I asked the question earlier about identities and if the modern Christian was more or less dysfunctional because someone slipped in one of these non-dynamic artificial entities on the right as much as they did on the left. Well, once you start noticing, you start noticing.
Ever look at the discussion with regards to evolution and the bible. A lot of people don't actually have a problem with both. Then there are the folks who must believe one to the exclusion of the other, and if you look really closely, they often don't listen to either. Due to the long period of time it takes for human children to become adults, real evolutionary advice on how to pair up and have children seems remarkably similar to judeo-christian mores.
Similarly, I have long held the belief that the gay marriage debate has nothing to do with marriage and everything to do with granting lawyers in the divorce industry a chance to raid the coffers of homosexuals. Neither the identity driven Christian nor the identity driven homosexual seems to get that one. You'd think there would be more married people clamoring for the freedoms gay people have, not the other way round.
Building Up To Identity:
So, as conscious beings we define, but until there are at least two other entities to define against, the definitions we can make are limited. We can only define relation to others, whether we are defining the planet Jupiter or self. More entities perceived means a more discrete identity, because our identifications can be more sophisticated.
And those encouraged to 'find themselves' go marching off into unreality, their identity becoming more nebulous each and every day they continue to listen to what passes for psychological advice in this country.
Political Constructions of Self:
I believe this is a defense of a false construct of self. This false construct says if pregnancy and children occur, the self will be diminished. I'm not here to produce babies doesn't make sense if the I is a human woman, the here is the earth, and babies happen to be a part of life here on earth. I'm not here to produce babies does make sense if the I is a political identity, here is whatever territory within which the struggle is taking place, and babies are those pesky things that take resources away from the political parasites.
White identity politics is still a subset of identity politics, thus they may be exploitable by the Cultural Marxists. Consider a situation in which reactionary forces appear to be winning in America- why wouldn't an existentially threatened elite switch tactics and start providing the white rabbits with feelgoods? It appears obvious, from the comments at Evolutionistx that discussions that provide rabbits with feelbads, which are ultimately discussions which irritate the identity construct, seem to encourage them to rage and violence.
Additionally, I seem to hear the word 'triggering' most often from white nationalists, though I know this is a leftist phenomena, where the various identity groups want their safe spaces and trigger warnings, because the precious little snowflakes might freak out if they discover one of their cherished ideals is bullshit. It seems like it would be a good idea to figure out how to 'de-trigger,' deprogram, and not threaten fellow reactionaries.
I feel family, tradition, etc- is important, but I am also aware of the state of things currently. I have reached for tradition many times, only to find it riven with progress. There was once a time when traditions were whatever they were, and Rome was new. Now Rome is very old. I appreciate tradition, but it maybe necessary to walk away from it in order to found something that shall eventually be tradition for future generations. Can your identity handle that?