Identity Politics Is Tearing America Apart

Jump to Last Post 1-3 of 3 discussions (42 posts)
  1. GA Anderson profile image91
    GA Andersonposted 13 months ago

    Pulling an IslandMom's quote from another thread . . .

    "...to believe in the shared idea of what America should be without abandoning the struggle to right its wrongs."

    A recent news blurb refocused this thought for me. It was something to do with a recent shooting in which four Sikhs were victims. The speaker noted there were about seven thousand Sikh Americans in our nation, (I think that was the reference.

    Anyway, the noted identity of Sikh Americans, and the accompanying statement that our governing administration should have a Sikh liaison/whatever*. That is what I see as our foremost problem. We are no longer a nation of Americans with a national perspective, we have become a nation of hyphenated Americans with tribal identity first and national identity second.
    * I don't know much about the Sikhs. My mention of them was only to frame the point.

    If, in a discussion with a stranger, you heard the stranger say I am a Filipino American, would you perceive that as different from the stranger saying I am an American of Filipino heritage?

    It should be American first, heritage second. The tail is wagging the dog and too many folks are blindly happy to see it happening. We have become a nation of Neros fiddling while the country burns.

    GA

    1. Castlepaloma profile image75
      Castlepalomaposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      +++

    2. Sharlee01 profile image85
      Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

      To answer the question --- It does not matter to me.  I would most likely not take note of it. at all.    America is a melting pot, not sure how someone describes themself as an American first or heritage first matters at this point?

      In my view, we have tons of problems in regards to patriotism. But how one describes their background would be at the bottom of my list. It seems a bit late to be sensitive about words describing one's background. Some of us bought the matches and lit the fire.

      1. GA Anderson profile image91
        GA Andersonposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        You say word order is unimportant, no big deal. I say we all use words to convey a meaning or message. We choose our words to convey our message the way we want it conveyed.

        My thought is that the choice to put heritage first conveys the message that the heritage is a more important point. That may seem a small thing, but I think that small thing indicates a perspective. One where ethnic identity is a priority national identity. *shrug

        GA

        1. Sharlee01 profile image85
          Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

          Ok, first I fully understand your sentiment, and I do appreciate it. It makes wonderful sense. However, I got to thinking,  does the full context of the conversation where the person uses the words that put heritage before Country need to be considered?   

          For instance, in the article you posted in another thread   "The Fourth Of July", the author Ken White used the words in the sentence "Judge Lew — the first Chinese-American district court judge". His choice of words described the judge as Chinese -American. Was his choice of words used to give a bit of depth to his touching story about immigrants? Perhaps give America a pat on the back, for a couple of  American dreams come true, the judges and the men that were finally sworn in as citizens. 

          At any rate, I felt Mr. White pointed out foreign heritage in a  positive light. In my view, it added a positive impact on the context of the article. White also used the words "They were all, I would learn later, Filipinos. Their children and grandchildren were Filipino-American".

          In my view,   It would seem the author use those words perhaps due to an innate characteristic to look at someone although born in America but once removed from their heritage, perhaps does stands apart from "an American"...  This context could appear to give a different perception of using heritage before the county.

          I would most likely be offended if someone said,  I am Chinese first and an American second.

    3. Credence2 profile image81
      Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

      GA,

      And when have we really been one, I mean really? People circle the wagons during both major world wars of the last century, putting off grievances reluctantly for the duration of the conflict. WE recognizing that neither the Kaiser nor Hitler was not going to be any more of a redress for the grievances we had with American life.

      Dis harmony is concealed, kept under wraps during the past, but the problems for conservatives is that it does not remain there.

      The only things that we have in common is geographic location and the desire to live under the rule of law, and I have to question even that with the Conservative based insurrection of the Capitol building last January.

      Its black verses white
      Rich verses poor,
      Left verses Right etc, etc,

      We have nev r been so divided, even though the disharmony has always existed among us. Could it be the press that is reminding us all and is responsible (social media) and such?

      Values that were once seen as a given are not so much anymore. Behind the promulgation of those values lie certain unfair hierarchies and Economic exploitation and people are becoming more "hep" to this.

      We are patchwork quilt rather than a melting pot. Instead of trying to amalgamate everyone into the same mold, it is better to respect differences and diversity and include them as part of the whole, on their terms and not yours.

      Yet, I bite my tongue over the lady with green hair at Target the other day. But, I have got to walk the talk, communicating in a way not to make her feel self conscious, realizing that I have seen stranger things.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image75
        Castlepalomaposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Yes, Canada is more of a friendly dictatorship of Federation and shopping malls. Although their differences in diversity of cultures and races. Are blended like mosaics or interwoven better than then the divisions in the US. When US collapse then it will be next Japan and shortly after Canada also.

        1. Credence2 profile image81
          Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

          Thanks, Castle

          In my travels thru Canada, i saw things just as the way you suggest.  The term "patchwork quilt" is a Canadian concept and I see the relationship of the variety of nationalities living in greater harmony than in the US. This, although they have their problems, but to much lower extent.

          When visiting Toronto, someone warned me about the "ghetto" there. I went to the area of town out of curiosity and found duplexes and condo with swing sets for the kids. None of the urban blight associated with what the word would imply in the U.S. There appears to be minimum standards to what it is people are to be deprived of when not wealthy.  I was impressed. But, its climate is just too chilly for me as I am relatively thin skinned.

          Montreal is the best and was my favorite...

          1. Castlepaloma profile image75
            Castlepalomaposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            My daughter lived in Montreal for 10 years. We live together in Nova Scotia now. Montreal has the world's largest international convention of anarchist. Perhaps the anarchist will will be our world Saviour because I can't imagine any one else besides Native American.

      2. GA Anderson profile image91
        GA Andersonposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        I don't think "green hair" covers the division I am talking about Cred. I think JFK summed things up nicely.

        Instead of your;
        "Values that were once seen as a given are not so much anymore. Behind the promulgation of those values lie certain unfair hierarchies and Economic exploitation and people are becoming more "hep" to this.

        We are patchwork quilt rather than a melting pot. Instead of trying to amalgamate everyone into the same mold, it is better to respect differences and diversity and include them as part of the whole, on their terms and not yours."


        He said;

        "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

        Is that one of the "values" that you think are no more?

        GA

        1. Ken Burgess profile image87
          Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          One has to consider the time and context of what JFK said.

          The corporate take-over, the corruption of the establishment which is our government and its supports was not so well established and entrenched.

          Today our government is nothing more than a servant to the international corporations and financial institutions which have far more wealth and power than most of the nations on earth put together.

          And China, controlled by a single political party, which in turn controls all of its Corporations and Financial Institutions, is therefore by far the most powerful entity on Earth today, and as such, has become the biggest influencer in our own government and financial institutions.

          To further explain how their dominance is going to play out in the coming few years... Biden has put a stranglehold on oil and natural gas production, which in turn will make energy prices higher and cost Americans their jobs.

          Biden's next step will be to pass a Green New Deal which will direct trillions of dollars to Solar energy and Wind production.

          China has long dominated the Solar and Wind industries (they dominate all industries today but especially the renewable energy sectors) so when it comes time to cover America with Solar panels, where do you think they will come from?

          When Biden  agrees to fund the IMF with trillions of dollars, so that those funds can be 'loaned' to other nations, to help them out of this 'pandemic' shutdown, how will that impact the American economy? How will that impact the strength and value of the Dollar?

          I actually like what Credence wrote there and I often agree with the perception and beliefs he espouses.

          The problem is that Credence and so many who believe like he does in their efforts to right the wrongs of injustice and inequities in our system are supporting the very people that are going to make those inequities worse... not better.

          They support the foxes of the world, holding open the chicken coop's door for them, thinking the fox is a watch-dog that is going to protect them.

          1. Credence2 profile image81
            Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

            Well, Ken, that's the rub, isn't it?

            I don't see the Trump/GOP coalition as any help toward those aspirations in any extent at all. I certainly have no evidence that either Trump or the Republican credo is even interested in addressing these issues I am concerned about, so what am I left with?

          2. peterstreep profile image81
            peterstreepposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            ----Biden's next step will be to pass a Green New Deal which will direct trillions of dollars to Solar energy and Wind production.

            China has long dominated the Solar and Wind industries (they dominate all industries today but especially the renewable energy sectors) so when it comes time to cover America with Solar panels, where do you think they will come from? ---

            The US could have dominated the Green power market as it wasn't so conservative and concentrated on fossil fules. If it had not stepped out of the Paris agreement. Trump missed a huge opportunity with his old-fashioned way of doing business. He is a Rockefeller in a world dominated by cyber business. Ignorant of the new world.

            By the way. Just in front of my house here in Spain, I can see windmills in the mountains build by an American company.
            Same with Solar farms. The solar cells are perhaps made in China but the solar farms here in Spain are set up by American companies buying up land.

            1. Ken Burgess profile image87
              Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              The US dominated everything at one time, that time is past, it is now China that will dominate on every front. 

              It would be absurd to believe otherwise, every cutting edge tech or development today is 'Made in China'.  From Apple computers to Solar panels.

              As for the Paris Accord Agreement, your perspective fits that put out by MSM propaganda.  Truth is, there is nothing in that agreement that would have forwarded America's development, essentially it penalizes America for its use of fossil fuels while China can do as it wants.



              Feel free to provide some links, otherwise I will assume you are incorrectly informed, or that its a shell company providing such.

              1. peterstreep profile image81
                peterstreepposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                Yes, empires come and empires go. And it's definitely China that will rule/lead the second half of this century. (Empires are declining more rapidly though. Compare the Roman empire with the British one with the American One, each is shorter. So I guess the Chinese will even be shorter taken over by an empire perhaps run by a company...)
                And it wouldn't have made a difference if you had a Republican or a Democratic President.
                Ian Morris wrote a great book about the patterns of history comparing the West with China. (Why the West rules.....for now.)


                But Trump did haste the decline of the American Empire as he was not able to lead in the dominating forces of the future.
                1. Artificial Inteligence
                2. BioEngineering
                3. CryptoCurrency.
                4. Renewable Energy

                Mix these 4 together and you have the future (Not sure if I like it, but that's where we are heading)

                Luckily the US still has Silicon Valley and entrepreneurs.

                But and that's why I found it a bad move from Trump to go out of the Paris agreement. If you are not working together with other nations on one of the most important things for the future. You are missing out financially.
                The Paris agreement is not a punishment. It is a financial opportunity to sell and develop renewable energy. You're missing out. That's why Musk among others was against Trump's move out of the Paris agreement. Businesswise it was a bad move. But Trump was thinking about his Fossil Fuel friends and was still living in the past.
                So that's my thoughts about Trump making a mistake leaving the Paris Agreements. Sorry, without scientific links to back up.


                It's just my point of view. That doesn't mean it's the truth.

          3. Sharlee01 profile image85
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Ken, China will become doubly rich with Biden's new green deal. America will borrow and print cash to hand to China for the Green Deal. And anyone with a bit of a brain should be able to see the Democratic party well knows that they are going to be pushing China over the line to becoming not only the richest but even more powerful than they presently are.  We built China, and we now can look forward to there pretty much dictating our future.

        2. IslandBites profile image90
          IslandBitesposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          It should be American first, heritage second.

          Why? Because you think so? Do you know if every single person that identify themselves as african american, chinese american, etc., in fact, put their heritage first and country second other than using that term? But if they do, so?

          I think your quote answers the core of the issue.

          "Instead of trying to amalgamate everyone into the same mold, it is better to respect differences and diversity and include them as part of the whole, on their terms and not yours."

          They are part of the whole, but in their own terms.

          Btw, it is usually "americans" with their obsession who demand others that look different to answer where are they from and are not satisfy with 'american' as an answer.

          Also, I dont think you were never "a nation of Americans with a national perspective". In any case, you had a prevalent perspective and multiple ignored ones. The other voices are louder now.

          1. GA Anderson profile image91
            GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            It appears my example of American Filipino vs Filipino American conveyed a stronger message than was intended. I agree with the bolded part of your included quote and your thought that "The other voices are louder now." But, those thoughts aren't the point I was trying to make.

            You could be right that my white majority perspective blinds me to understanding any minority perspective, even though I try to avoid that error. Or you might be wrong. I think my perspective is as simple to understand as an analogy to the Budweiser beer wagon.

            The wagon is our nation and we are the horses. Consider how much forward progress the wagon will make when all of us pull in the same direction vs. how much is made when we all pull in different directions. Consider how much harder that forward progress is when we work together than when we have to be individually brought to rein.

            Yes, I know that sounds like a kumbaya campfire thought, and I know that some of those pulling in different directions may be doing so because of real burrs, (social inequities), under their harness, but I think it also sounds like the reality of common sense.

            Contrary to your quote's thought about amalgamation I think that is exactly what we must do. Amalgamate into a whole—combine all parts into the whole. I intend that thought to be different from the thought of a `melting pot' where everything is dumped in and all are expected to come out as identical parts.

            GA

            1. Credence2 profile image81
              Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

              But can we all agree as to what is appropriate for the "same direction", that is the issue as I see it.

              1. GA Anderson profile image91
                GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                It is our job as a group of people and our duty as citizens of a group, (a choice), to find the path to that "same direction."  I think we are failing at both.

                I can see the early work Unions era and MLK's Civil Rights era as steps towards finding that "same direction." Some steps were bold, some steps were baby steps, and some were backward steps, but they were all steps on the same path.

                When I compare that thought with today's "direction"; the Unions overstepped and lost credibility—diverting from that path, and the minority issues, (all of them; ethnic, sex, religious), have also overstepped with their new path of `Burn it down instead of fixing it," I am left with the perception that all these tribal groups that have become more "hep" aren't looking to find a `same direction' for all, but a new direction just for them.

                GA

                1. Credence2 profile image81
                  Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  Which group, which group of citizens?

                  "I can see the early work Unions era and MLK's Civil Rights era as steps towards finding that "same direction." Some steps were bold, some steps were baby steps, and some were backward steps, but they were all steps on the same path."

                  There are lot of your brethren who politically and otherwise resent those gains and are using surreptitious methods to unravel them. You may see advancement, but that attitude of what you consider the same path may been seen as too progressive for your rightwing buddies, yet far too tardy for people like me.

                  Fundamentally, I am with you. We all need to gather together to find the happy medium, unfortunately in this political climate, that is going to be hard to come by.

                  1. GA Anderson profile image91
                    GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    The harder the task the greater the reward.

                    GA

        3. Credence2 profile image81
          Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

          "Values that were once seen as a given are not so much anymore. Behind the promulgation of those values lie certain unfair hierarchies and Economic exploitation and people are becoming more "hep" to this.

          We are patchwork quilt rather than a melting pot. Instead of trying to amalgamate everyone into the same mold, it is better to respect differences and diversity and include them as part of the whole, on their terms and not yours."

          Vs.

          Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
          -----------
          Why does there have to be a contradiction?

          1. GA Anderson profile image91
            GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            I think "there has to be a contradiction" because of the reason you stated. It should not be a case of "their terms" vs. "your terms" but a case of `our' terms.

            GA

            1. Credence2 profile image81
              Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Mere semantics? What is the difference, I mean really?

              1. GA Anderson profile image91
                GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                My first thought is that your question about semantics illustrates what I have been saying.

                The most extreme and obvious example:

                Black Civil Rights issues:

                Your terms:
                Give me what I want or I will burn it down or blow it up.

                Their terms:[/i]
                Okay, here's a crumb, now sit down.

                Our terms:
                Our first step should be . . . then we find a way to . . . and then our efforts should be like finding the right key on a large keyring—you keep trying until you find the right key. You don't just blow up the house because it was too much work to find the right key.

                Maybe a little less extreme and obvious.

                The LGBT issues:

                Your, (generic "you"), terms:
                You give me my own bathroom and gender, and you call me `they or Ze' Or I will . . .

                Their terms:
                Okay, we can start with working towards equality in Rights, and we can go with using your bathroom of choice.

                Our terms:
                Recognize there are some issues that just go too far. What is a fair compromise?

                It ain't just semantics bud.

                GA

                1. IslandBites profile image90
                  IslandBitesposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  I think the issue is that the "negotiations" didnt start just now. It's been a long road without a crumb, and then tiny crumbs for a while. And the excuse is oh, changes are so hard for me, you should have patience cause its is hard for me (in power) to concede.

                  And people dont want to keep waiting. Now things are at that point; well, move it enough for us, or we'll move it for you.

                  1. GA Anderson profile image91
                    GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    Yes, it has been a long road, but it has been a road of progress and I think the steps, (crumbs), have been getting bigger and more progressive.

                    GA

                2. Credence2 profile image81
                  Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  Alright, GA

                  Now, what you refer to can be considered clear as crystal.

                  Just how much effort is being placed to find the key, both sides should take this seriously and in earnest if for no other reason but to avoid the frustration of no progress leaving curtain number 1 as a viable option for those that weary of too gradual "gradualism".

                  1. wilderness profile image95
                    wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    "Just how much effort is being placed to find the key"

                    None.  Neither side is willing to compromise to find an actual key (solution).  This is American politics, after all.

    4. tsmog profile image80
      tsmogposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      "If, in a discussion with a stranger, you heard the stranger say I am a Filipino American, would you perceive that as different from the stranger saying I am an American of Filipino heritage?"

      Yes. Yet, it would for me be a reflection on the context of the conversation and who I was having it with. To me Filipino American usage is pretty much mainstream and kind of street talk.

      Curious while thinking the most common is Afro-American I looked into that discovering it was traced back to a 1782 sermon. Then I pondered if with those of other heritages are they just riding that coattail.

      As to "Identity Politics is Tearing America Apart" at this point in my journey I agree supported by what I read at The Promises and Perils of Identity Politics excerpt. For full text see: https://www.heritage.org/progressivism/ … y-politics Again, that is at this point in my journey.

      1. GA Anderson profile image91
        GA Andersonposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        I liked your excerpt link. I think this blurb sums it up nicely:

        "The main reason identity politics exerts such powerful pull in America is because it claims to speak—exclusively, one should note—on behalf of those who have been mistreated (to varying degrees) in the past. It appeals to our sense of justice. It suggests that we can either embrace identity politics or remain callously indifferent to the well-being of fellow citizens who look different than we do.

        That, in truth, is a false choice. One can sympathize and feel solidarity with black Americans, women, and any other minorities who are pressing just claims without embracing the poisonous ideology of identity politics. Identity politics should be rejected not because it demands justice for those who have been unjustly treated, but because it poses a threat to republican self-government by corroding patriotic ties, fostering hatred, promoting cultural separatism, and demanding special treatment rather than equality under the law."


        GA

        1. Credence2 profile image81
          Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

          The problem with your comment, GA is that when people have been mistreated and excluded it is hard to be patriotic, and to see oneself as part of a larger whole. When this happens, you have to carve out your own microcosm for sustenance and survival.

          Fix the causes of disparity and perhaps things can been seen in a different light.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            When you feel that your ancestors, or even people that share your skin color, were mistreated and excluded and therefore you are, too and you must now carve out your own microcosm there is a problem.

            Did you forget that blacks fought in the civil war?  And in WWI and WWII?  By choice, not being forced?

            1. Credence2 profile image81
              Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Not so much ancestors, solely.

              Check your history:

              Blacks fought in the Civil war not for patriotism but to destroy slavery as being its victims. Instead of 40 acres and a mule, we get Jim Crow, KKK and disenfranchisement.

              WWI we fought to make the world safe for democracy putting aside our grievances about Jim Crow while being subject to a form of state sanctioned terrorism, with the hope that our countrymen would recognize the sacrifice and make the necessary adjustments to improve our treatment as citizens, but that did not come.

              WWII, more of the same, put aside your grievances, coming together in a patriotic fervor to defeat Hitler and the Axis Powers and when it's over, America will attend to unfinished business of racial justice. But, as before, 1865 and 1918, the pale face spoke with forked tongue.


              The theme of this thread is identity politics. Most of Us do not see economics,  cultural values nor politics the way most of you do. That is today, here and now.

              In the past, we were all ask to come together as Americans only when it was time to stop a bullet, and that is where the "all in this together" stuff ends...

              So, Wilderness, you were saying?

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                I was saying that black folks fought in the world wars out of patriotism.  You say is was because they were downtrodden and hoped for respect.

                And there we part ways; your comments are exactly what I was talking about.  You're seeing everything through glasses tinted very darkly from assuming that "your" people (who you never met and never knew) feel just as you do.  I'm seeing them through rose colored glasses, giving the benefit of doubt to all.

                1. Credence2 profile image81
                  Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  There is some wisdom in what you say, Wilderness.

                  While I had a great uncle that lived long enough who was in the Great War as a ship's steward, he had a patriotic attitude.

                  It was much like the parent of a wayward child, always forgiving error and hoping that one day the child would see the correct course and take it. When seen that way, Black folks are among the nation's greatest patriots.

                  The younger generations are simply out of patience.

          2. GA Anderson profile image91
            GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Damn! I can't argue with that reality. But I can argue with the methods of doing the "fixing."

            GA

        2. tsmog profile image80
          tsmogposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          I think that was powerful while offering for me at this time in my journey of learning a lot to ponder. I can see "threat to republican self-government". Wavering on what followed. But, just me at this time.

    5. peterstreep profile image81
      peterstreepposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      I think that's the burden of history.
      America has a long history of Apartheid. Slavery, Indigenous Reservation Systems, and even genocide.
      Systems to divide people by race, religion and heritage. It's only since 1955 that Rosa Parks rejected the Apartheid system and wanted to sit at the front of the bus.
      This is hardly a generation.
      So it makes sense that a theme like heritage comes back with a vengeance. The US still has to structure itself to find a way to deal with all the different races and religions.
      It's what makes the US so special and amazing. A country build by different races and religions. But for a long long time, it was ruled by white people with black people seen second-class citizens
      It was amazing that the US chose a black president, but I guess for conservative America this was too much of a threat and it hit back with white supremacism in the shape of Donald Trump.

      I agree that America should be first and heritage second, but because of the racial mess made in the last 500 years, it makes sense that race and heritage comes first as the issue of race, religion, and heritage is too fresh a problem to call it settled and done.

  2. Ken Burgess profile image87
    Ken Burgessposted 13 months ago

    Yes, identity politics is doing just that.

    And yes they are being pushed in earnest just for that purpose.

  3. Live to Learn profile image76
    Live to Learnposted 13 months ago

    You are stating a belief I've had for many years. But, it won't gain traction. People use the word order to make a statement about themselves. I can't count the times I've done an internal eye roll when a new acquaintance insists they are Italian American. They then play on the stereotypes they think make them more interesting. It's not unique to those who hope to be seen in a more positive light, based on their personal assumptions of how that particular group is seen.

    Now a days, a lot of times people identify with a group in order to internalize their perception of an historical struggle. Everyone seems to want to be a victim these days.

    The American dream of our collective being bound together by ideals of equality, not historical heritage, is being drowned out by a cacophony of voices demanding to be put first. Selfishness is a part of human nature we used to frown on. Now it appears to be celebrated

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)