Identity is important: racism, sexism, and weaponized identity politics shape our political landscape
The 2016 election has (re-)surfaced a terrible facet of politics in America: we are still a deeply racist and sexist nation. Our identities help shape our environment growing up and they influence how others perceive and interact with us. To dismiss identities as politically insignificant is to deny racism (and by that I mean, for the purposes of this diary, empowered and privileged white bigotry against non-whites). I've written an essay on how "weaponized identity politics" contributed to the results of the elections week. Identities matter, and "identity politics" is important. This doesn't mean it's uniformly good or bad. It's important to understand how identity forms our political selves.
Our ethnicities begin shaping our experience in society while we're still in the womb (non-whites receive worse prenatal care, for example). They shape our environment in school (white "troublemakers" might be thought of as bored or adventurously pushing boundaries, while non-whites are thought of as lazy or thuggish). They shape our interactions with other adults. Folks with names that "aren't white" have their equivalent (or superior) resumes rejected more frequently than whites. Those who aren't white earn less, and are, like in school, less likely to have missteps tolerated. They receive generally poorer medical care. They have more negative (and much more frequently fatal) interactions with the justice system.
Our gender has similar early and far-reaching impact. Differences in medical care begin early. Expectations and treatment differences in school begin early also: girls are expected to be less interested (or even less capable) in "STEM" fields and more interested in certain social interactions. Males are expected to be aggressive and physical and, while more likely to pursue a "STEM" course in general less able to be "good students". We've all experienced negative impacts from this, male and female alike. But the stereotypes and expectations of men generally favor us as we go through life. The expectation of relatively more aggressive and assertive behavior from men leads to generous allowances for us to negotiate salaries, benefits, assignments and a host of other perks at work while similar behavior in women is seen as rude, cold, arrogant, off-putting, "nagging" or a host of other negatives.
How can these things not shape the politics and views of us? Our society imbues life-impacting significance to identity, whether generally or mostly positive (white and male) or generally or mostly negative (not white or female). It shouldn't therefore be shocking when certain folks tap into their identity to inform their political habits. It should also not be dismissed as itself divisive or improper as a general rule. Instead we should view it as an opportunity for collaboration and cooperation: to understand one another better and to find common ground in solidarity to fight for our collective best interest.
That's why Hillary's weaponization of identity politics as a divide-and-conquer strategy was so harmful. The damage she and her supporters have done by promoting division along the lines of race and gender is yet to be seen: Donald hasn't taken office yet. Her use of identity politics was much worse than Trump's explicit racism and Nazi-style other-blaming demagoguery. Donald's use of these things is expected behavior for Republicans. Hillary's use has only added to the tension and highlighted the divisions by identity our society has.
So in this sense it is yet another example of how identity shapes our politics: the divides along identity can and are being exploited against us. We have perhaps entered a new era of weaponized identity politics (it has always been with us, but other changes, e.g. social media, are highlighting and augmenting how and where it is being employed). It will continue to be used by Democrats in their approach to winning elections. They believe very strongly that demographic changes will trend in their favor, and that if only they push the identity-divide narrative hard enough whites' votes truly won't matter. This is a mistake for many reasons (perhaps the subject of another essay), but it highlights how democrats intend to mould their strategy around identity politics.
We have plenty of historical precedent and example for how Donald's particular brand of identity demagoguery shapes the political landscape, and none of them positive. His weaponization of identity politics has already played out, most well-known in the form of Nazi Germany where scapegoating of Jews had a direct line to some terrible acts. Donald's victory has helped normalize this form of identity-based aggression. We as a nation have taken a giant step back in our approach to mending the divisions long identity thanks to his win. The only question that remains is: how much worse can it get?
In either case, it's clear that identity politics will continue to figure large in the American political landscape.
Note: I deliberately left sexuality out of this essay because of the complex interaction with gender and expectations it carries with it. Also there are LGBTQIPA folks around here that could treat the subject much better than I can, and I'd welcome inserting any additions they'd offer into this essay.
Comments
Weaponization of the "isms" is almost as bad as the "isms"
themselves because they do nothing to resolve the problem and present no incentives for doing so. It reduces the whole discourse down to playground antics/bullying.
A good read, thank you
We've Been Trolled. Hillary Trolled America. Donald Is a Troll.
America does have racial and gender issues, but they were nowhere near as bad as they are now due to the trolling from the Corporate Left.
Instead of posting recipes, and moving on, the media fed the trolls. The corporate media fed the American People to the trolls.
I also found the weaponizing of identity by Hillary's campaign to be a great evil. Not sure if it was as great an evil as Drumpf, but I know it was more cynical and unethical.
They whipped race and gender to manipulate their own voters, in both the primary and the general. They tried to troll their way to the White House.
I expect this to be the type of election we will be treated to in the future if the Establishment has it's way.
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
Fanning the flames to distract from their own failure.
One the best examples you'll ever find is this attack by Chitown Kev on Bernie because Bernie had not responded on Twitter within one hour of Sessions being appointed AG.
The comments, where MBNYC makes an appearance, are hilarious. One "new" user trolls CK about being off of Twitter long enough to write a two paragraph rant diary. That same user also ridicules MBNYC for the time he spends on twitter. The drama level can be escalated only by the appearance of TomP who is now chiding CK for unfairly attacking Bernie.
(I swear i only go over there to toss in a few grenades if I can.
The contrast between the level of discourse here and there has reached an even higher level.)
I like "the Corporate Left"
as much as I like "weaponized identity politics." Good work!
Need a meme-meister to start putting together some good memes.
Funny... I Just Scrapped an Essay on Framing Which, Ironically
enough featured these two frames.
The other was business as usual, the business of government, which should be a dead horse by now, but it's not even on the public's radar.
We didn't need a business person in government. Too many businesspeople in government and too cozy a relationship between corporate and government are the problem. Drumpf is going to do the same stuff, PLUS, but under an ugly Confederate Flag brand.
Infrastructure will be real estate. Think about that one for a few...
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
Identity politics is a distraction.
It's a symptom of the larger problem, and focusing on it keeps us divided and unable to tackle real issues of racism, sexism, xenophobia, and bigotry. For example, Democrats idolize Obama, but they are quick to forget that two organic mass movements developed under his presidency: OWS and Black Lives Matter. Partisans were so enamored by the fact that he was black and enraptured by the eloquent progressive lip service he espoused that they deliberately ignored every single shortcoming and outright betrayal of his presidency, shutting down any and all criticism on the basis of identity. I can't count how many times I was called a racist for daring to criticize his center-right policies, or how many times I was called a sexist for refusing to vote for Hillary the neoliberal.
The people who use identity politics as a cudgel are either intensely ignorant, or really don't care about any of the issues they claim to support. Most of them could care less about policy and the larger systemic or institutional nature of reform, so long as they feel adequately "represented" and can "see themselves" being able to do something in an empowering, neoliberal bullshit, "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" kind of way. Concerns about racism, for example, are less about addressing institutional racism and inequality than they are about preventing the use of offensive language and engaging in sleights that can be interpreted as racist, leaving the larger, more central causes of racism completely unabated. Never mind that actually addressing institutional and systemic factors will necessarily improve, possibly even fix, the surface-level symptoms of the larger problem that so many identity politics devotees obsess over.
Additionally, this focus on identity politics has sparked an intense and dangerous reaction on the Right, where white voters are now starting to view themselves in the same identity terms as everyone else. Pundits claiming that Trump's win represents a "whitelash" or the last gasp from an increasingly irrelevant white electorate are only further exacerbating the problems associated with identity politics. Further, it's become increasingly clear that the intent of identity politics is to divide and conquer. When we are obsessed with forming tribal coalitions based purely on our race, gender, and sexuality, there can be no larger institutional reform. The only way to address these issues is to recognize shared commonalities and to fight back collectively, not to continually splinter off into increasingly fragmented and marginalized groups.
Identity group fighting identity group does the work of those
who control the political economy for them.
It's not only foolishness, it's harmful if you are trying to avoid climate change by initiating system change. Identity politics is reactionary and greatly harms the working class.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
I don't agree entirely with this.
I do believe that the elites use identity politics as a means to divide us in order to empower themselves. My essay at least strongly implies this: I do not believe that "identity politics is reactionary" as a blanket statement is appropriate. Our identities matter: they shape and form our political selves.
Much like the Democratic Party isn't going to fix its problems without understanding how and why Hillary caused such great harm, we as a society aren't going to have much progress in addressing tensions along the lines of identity that essentially form the essential being of our country. That means not turning a blind eye to our ethnic, gender, and yes, class identities.
The Great Con
link
That was great to read - thanks for the link.
Look at the money funding BLM and how the organization(s) is set up to see a more sophisticated example of the class war as it is practiced.
What's left of organized labor has to spend too much time and money fighting for its organizational life and holding on to the few jobs that haven't been sent to another country.
We simply don't have the time to waste listening to capitalist scolds accusing organizers of holding views that are some of the forbidden "isms." What should be forbidden are those who deny workplace democracy; those who foment wars to benefit the few;those who are destroying the planet as a habitable place for diverse species(including us); and those who routinely violate treaties and laws that took so much time and effort to put into place.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
War on Culture?
They are supplying the "small arms" to various factions in the Perpetual War on Culture, or the Culture Wars.
It really does look a lot like the same kind of clusterfuck that the ME has become. With our allies attacking eachother, us risking war with Russia to protect Al Qaeda assets in the area... that kind of shit.
Maybe it's a new version of chaos theory or game theory.
Certainly has many corollaries.
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
My reaction to all identity politics appeals is: TL;dr
Doesn't work anymore. Honestly IDGAF who calls me racist. Somebody thinks I'm racist? Ok. I'm racist. A proud strong racist. Now they can GTFO my face.
I say this to people and you can almost see their thoughts:
Oh, dear, no! My powers aren't working anymore! No one is deferring to me! People are continuing to debate even after I've silenced them! People are ignoring my subjective feelings as the final arbiter and demanding fact-based rational discussion! I tell people they don't "get to" say things but they keep talking! Reeeeeeee!
I am so bored of this eternal talk talk talk about racist attitudes and racist ideas and secret hidden racist feelings. Same with other isms. The very foundation of the American idea is supposed to be that we police what people do, not what they believe. Because a belief never hurt anybody on its own without an action. That's why we have freedom of the press and freedom of expression and even let people call for revolution as long as there is not a direct accompanying action. Jefferson talked about this; look it up.
Yet identity politics bullies focus on getting people to admit what they really, secretly believe or feel, so they can feel guilty, so they can feel intimidated. Like Maoist self-criticism. What they don't want is a rational discussion about specific actions, because in discussions like those, the other side can be heard.
Maybe identity politics apologetics can find more fertile ground on an Ivy League campus where the children of millionaires can be ostentatiously comforted and petted as they cry in their safe spaces? Or maybe as a selling point for the TPP and its "opportunities" for workers in developing nations? Or as derisive insults to seniors whose Medicare is being gutted so they can check their privilege?
Blowback is a bitch.
To advocate for Satan...
It has taken us 45 years to attain the goals Hitler managed in a dozen. So, I quess there is still a glimmer of hope.
Personally I expect our own Krystallnacht within the next year.
There is no such thing as TMI. It can always be held in reserve for extortion.
Well...
I agree that identity shapes our lives (personal and political) but for me this just worked out very weirdly
They shape our environment in school (white "troublemakers" might be thought of as bored or adventurously pushing boundaries, while non-whites are thought of as lazy or thuggish).
By that description, I would be a "white troublemaker"...but of course...well...
Of course, Trump's weaponization of "identity politics" was waaaaay worse off for me than Hillary's (then again I am non-white) but....
a) there was a certain bit of game playing in that regard that came back to bite Hillary in the butt.
I thin I'm having some trouble with the terminology that we're using here
Just ask people to explain what they mean
Most people will. If they won't then don't engage with them until they do.
"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott
What trouble?
Trouble as in, trouble agreeing with some of it? Trouble as in I haven't made it clear what I mean?
The school example was just a single example. When I was growing up (impoverished neighborhood, whites in the minority), I saw that example at least once a year. I saw other examples. Assuming a kid dressed a certain way (hell, dressed any way) was a drug dealer. Mocking some of my Vietnamese and Korean peers for their difficulty with pronouncing of certain english consonants. Seriously, I saw a lot of racism growing up.
One of the worst things about this election is the terrible way identity-based aggression has been exploited. I wrote that I think we took a step back. I think I was too conservative. It feels like we lurched a few decades (or a century) backward. I never thought I'd see in person how Hitler's Germany played out, and I fear now that I will whether I want to or not.
I think it's my POV, that's all
and what I, myself, found myself to be faced with time after time after time...it's very difficult for me to explain