IdentityPolitics

The problem with identity politics is pretty simple.

You start with the, correct, observation that different "identities" ie. races, genres, sexualities etc etc. get to experience the world in radically different ways, usually because they are somehow different from the norms of the culture / society in which they live.

And the purpose of identity politics is to resist / deal with that by ...

Well, that is where a fundamental dilemma or bifurcation point appears.

On the one hand, you can respond by denying that there IS a real, fundamental difference. That the purported differences are simply due to errors of, or prejudices of, or categories constructed within the power-structures of, the society and its dominant identity.

The challenge, therefore, is to overcome these prejudices and constructed categories for the identity to be recognised as the same, and to be allowed to be able to participate in society as peers and equals to the dominant identity.

On the other hand, you can accept that there is a difference, and instead claim that the values or ways of being of the identity you are fighting for, are better than the values of the mainstream dominant identities. And should therefore be valorized or adopted. Perhaps should even supplant those of the mainstream.

We'll call this first group and first politics, the "same and equal" position. And the second, the "different but better" position.

Now these are fundamentally different and opposed political viewpoints and projects. But the tendency in new identity movements is to ignore or gloss-over the distinction. Advocates of an identity politics will often feel uncomfortable with, and deny, that there two contradictory projects. Many activists will respond to and accept beliefs from both positions. The distinction will not be worth trying to enquire too deeply into or firm up.

Nevertheless, as far as I can see, almost all the problems that arise in identity politics : the internal quarrels and ruptures, often turning into bitter and vicious civil wars, or even just debilitating quarrels about "strategy", often stem from not recognising this distinction, and then discovering it in the context of a particular policy difference around which the two camps do then split, often bitterly.

More ... IdentityPoliticsIsKryptoniteToTheLeft

Of course, what comes with Identity Politics is PositiveDiscrimination, the belief that you can address the problems that identities suffer statistically, by targeting everyone with the identity for some special benefit or dispensation.

Transcluded from TransExclusionaryRadicalFeminist

In a discussion of alleged LeftWingAntiSemitism I discussed TransExclusionaryRadicalFeminists as an example of the dangers of IdentityPolitics :

The left has a competitive victimhood problem.

Let's look at this problem in the wider context.

At the beginning of this year, 2018, the UK Labour Party has had a horrible internal bust-up about its "all women shortlists", "transphobia" and evolving understanding of trans-women's rights, which are coming into conflict with previous understandings about the right to create safe space and positive discrimination in favour of women.

Horrifying campaign to purge trans women from Labour shortlists raises thousands

Anti-trans activist suspended from Labour Party after posting transphobic memes

From an outsider perspective - I'm a cis, heterosexual male - this whole thing is an unnecessary and unfortunate internal squabble between groups who probably agree on many things, and would normally, happily work together to advance the Labour Party principles and inclusivity of all sexualities and genders.

Does anyone really think that the kind of people attracted by the modern Labour Party and its values, are fundamentally hostile to either women's advancement or to trans-rights? Of course not. Most Labour and left activists and supporters are going to be broadly sympathetic to both.

However, in a particular place, two passionately held activist agendas, and their entire intellectual and emotional underpinnings, have crashed into each other. Their demands have turned out to be in conflict. And because of this, all the emotional energy of each activism has been turned against the "near enemy" in a catastrophic terf war.

This is an endemic risk of the kinds of identity politics that are intertwined with modern left-wing thought and activism. The Left should be above "identity" in the sense of being inclusive of all. But inclusivity sometimes requires making a positive effort on behalf of, or prioritising, the previously excluded. And so you end up with competitive victimhood, as rival groups vie for who has the greatest claim that their demands are addressed.

I see this as an endemic problem for the left. But that doesn't mean we can pretend identity doesn't exist or matter. Or that we shouldn't work with it. Even support positive discrimination at times. But we should recognise that it's a hazardous substance that can sometimes blow up in our faces and cause huge damage.