Okay Will, (Is it okay if I call you Will?) My next question is this: why does these concepts stop there?

To me when I hear "universalist" it applies to more than race relations, and when I hear "identitarian" is applies to more than race relations. Why do these concepts (which actually can be group identities) stop at "how someone observes race relations"? Doesn't a concept with the root word stemming from "universal/universe" infers more than race?

And also, if YOU are the one calling people "identitarians" wouldn't that make you an "identitarian" by default, since you are grouping and labeling people? Because the way I'm seeing it, the whole concept of "universalist" is the antithesis of calling people "identitarians" in the first place. It's kinda ironic, or hypocritical. Calling people "identitarian" is incongruent with the logic of calling yourself a universalist. You understand what I'm saying?

--

--

The Analytical Lens

Johnny Silvercloud on life, photography and principle. Johnny is a 20 year Army retiree who took up photography halfway through his military career. Life, love and universe through his lens, one shot at a time.

Connect with The Analytical Lens