Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

It’s time to declare war on identity politics

3 yrs ago, writing in The Federalist, I noted how the left’s embrace — and political deployment — of identity politics had given rise to, and a perverse justification for (in its own hive mind), white supremacy, a blunt rejection of the collective call by the left and academia to demonize whiteness.

I pored over & unpacked the “alt-right manifesto” of an influential “thought leader” of the movement and found what was easily recognizable: a progressive strain placing it on par with La Raza, BLM, CAIR, and Occupy (now Antifa). Essentially, Farrakhanism in a bed sheet.

The El Paso shooter, if we believe his manifesto, is for all intents and purposes, a confused National Socialist. He trafficked in identity and grievance politics while supporting much of the Green New Deal. He railed against capitalism and jobs lost to automation. He’s a leftist — as were the Nazis — who found himself part of an unprotected class; the Dayton shooter supported, in addition to Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, Antifa, which may have actually provided him gun tips in advance of his eventual spree killing. He, too, was a leftist.

Which is why conservatives should deplore all identity and grievance politics, regardless of the color it takes. Intersectionality, however, is the left’s stock and trade, from the academy to the media to Hollywood. Until that is marginalized, you won’t kill white supremacy, despite pleadings by the editors at National Review.

And here’s why: Many of the motivations of the white supremacist movement, which Vox Day couched as “alt-right” in his alt-right “manifesto,” were predictable and — again, however perversely — understandable: in a political and cultural ethos wherein white straight Christian males have become one of the last “identity groups” eligible for collective hostility and scapegoating, there was bound to be defensive push-back. In my piece I commiserated with some of the alt-right’s concerns while rejecting its underlying philosophy; I counseled the rejection of all identity politics and intersectionality, suggesting instead a return to founding principals: constitutionalism, federalism, republicanism, the rule of law, assimilation, and — most crucially —individualism and individual rights and autonomy.

When Rep. AyannaPressley spoke out recently demanding people of color or non-traditional sexuality or certain religions she deems marginalized talk with a voice that matches their public face (“black,” “brown,” “queer,” “Muslim”), what she was demanding was rank tribalism.

What comes to count as an acceptable “voice,” in Pressley’s dangerous and dehumanizing formulation, is of course tied to a political stance, with progressives determining for all what constitutes “authenticity.” Not only is this dictate blatantly racist, homophobic, and wrong, but it has the further — and intended — effect of delegitimating individuality: there can be no black face with a black voice that doesn’t stridently echo the black identity narrative progressives like Pressley have adopted and sanctioned. And the preferred identity narratives on the left are always grievance narratives posing as empowerment narratives.

It is thus inevitable that, in a cultural and political climate that rewards and empowers identity groups while it brackets individualism as some deplorable and dangerous social ill, those most marginalized by the prevailing norm would seek to gain power and “legitimacy” within that very system.

Intersectionality developed then as a way to prioritize the leftist grievance scale, but the damage had already been done: as a free-floating individual in a political and cultural climate, one was rendered less than powerless (as he perceived it) in the ascendant identity hierarchy; yet in a group, for such individuals, the perception of regained political power and renewed purpose was able to take root. Thus, white supremacy became the extreme version of — and mirror image to — those group identities declaring themselves deserving of special dispensation. Perversely, it was being incentivized by a political milieu that had organized to marginalize it.

And this is what we see now: when anyone not hewing to leftist dogma is labeled a white supremacist, or racist, or – phobe of some kind, this frees up a fringe to embrace the designation and marshal it for power. The resurgence of white supremacy is but the manifestation of a competing identity narrative in a toxic, Balkanized identity politics culture.

Unless and until the foundations that undergird it are razed, it won’t itself be effectively eradicated. It will merely go deeper underground, where it becomes more difficult to locate and eradicate.

Trump, I felt back in 2016, had given some cover to this new grievance narrative. But his presidency has shown a clear rejection of “white supremacy,” opting instead for an America First platform that has lifted (at least, economically) every minority group, age group, and sex. It is a patriotic platform, not a racialist one, and as a result it has augured the reformation of the idea that the US is a propositional nation. The “genetic heritage” and “white culture” alt-right leaders promoted as essential — in the strictest sense of blood and genes — to the country’s salvation, Trump rejected. As a result, white supremacists like Richard Spencer, appearing on CNN recently, noted that most white supremacists don’t support the President, have rejected Trumpism as anathema to what are their essentialst longings.

To the left and adepts of identity politics, this return to the dignity of the individual, is an existential threat to their political influence. Individuals thinking and acting individually defang bloc voting by identity, which is key to the left’s coalition power. And the left has shown in the wake of recent shootings and civil unrest that it will not surrender its animating, identity politics program, which it continues ruthlessly to enforce through shaming, doxxing, boycotts, media propaganda, PC language, and physical intimidation. This totalitarian political impulse is at odds with our propositional nation.

It follows that stamping out white supremacy must happen either by force, or by thoroughly and completely rejecting the identity politics and intersectionality the left has mapped over the country and its discourse. We are a country of individuals. We need to act like it.

It’s time to declare war on identity politics. It may feel good to single one group out — hell, you might even believe it necessary — but if you don’t destroy the foundation, you’re just trying to “fix” a single broken window. During a rainstorm. Where the rain is made of rocks.

Unless and until you understand identity politics — how and why it works, and from where it draws its “intellectual” power — you will not be able to stop it. Pumping your virtue glands does nothing but add to the foundation’s decay.

11 Replies to “It’s time to declare war on identity politics”

  1. SDN says:

    In a legal system that doles out rewards to identity groups, why is anyone surprised when iveryone plays the game?

  2. Darleen says:

    Just finished listening to your appearance on Pete Kaliner’s Show.

    Bravo.

    Identity politics is poison. It needs to be banished.

  3. What Darleen said.

  4. happyfeet says:

    i don’t believe the manifesto it feels like a perfunctory exercise in box-checking

    you read it and ask yourself

    is this guy trying to persuade me?

    and the answer’s no not a bit

    and is there really a resurgence of supremerism blanco?

    i’m not really sold on that either

    supremerism resurgence is a chimera

    it’s entirely notional and contrived

    just like how anorexic jack douchey’s oft-referenced twatter’s actually demonstrably unrepresentative of real-life opinion on *anything*

    people just sort of agree to make pretendsies it’s relevant

    but it’s summertime and this city’s so beautiful it makes you wanna cry

    stormy husky brawling too

    cable news is toxic

  5. JHoward says:

    is there really a resurgence of supremerism blanco?

    i’m not really sold on that either

    supremerism resurgence is a chimera

    it’s entirely notional and contrived

    Yup.

    “White supremecy” is loaded to the gunnels with Kafka-trapping: In two words we’re informed that palorists are inherently racist and worse, want to create an implied super state. No? Such a personal, targeted defamation cannot also but be gaslighting. It’s whole aim is to instantly slam the left’s Overton window far left – the linguistics are explicitly built to be unquestionable.

    It’s a ploy even before it’s debunked by the particular facts. Rightists should stop playing in kind.

    “Supremerism” is its perfect label. It’s time to declare war on identity politics. Destroy the loaded terms.

  6. Diana says:

    You’re back! Good to see you.

  7. Darleen says:

    JHoward

    Don’t let the “manifesto” distract. As has been pointed out other places, it may be the ultimate in trolling – getting people hysterical in trying to figure out all the contradictory assertions in order to point fingers.

    I’m more inclined to agree with Jeff (from the interview) where he stated media is sniffing “well, WE won’t publish that manifesto, it is hateful rubbish” then they turn right around to cherry pick just those bits to bolster their narrative.

    THAT is a very dangerous game.

  8. JHoward says:

    I have little patience for any expression of conventional rightism, Darleen. First, the right is all but completely passive in the face of half a century of slander, and second, it’s been complicit in a century of statism. The two are naturally related.
    Examples abound. A member of congress doxxes private constituents and the right faithfully opines that this is wrong before flitting to the next lost cause. In a functional society – society, not political body – he’d be quietly removed from office in a week.
    Another leftist declares whites and/or conservatives supremecists and in another losing game of back and forth they politely retort that they’re not instead of exploding the whole ruse going back those fifty years. They even go so far as to declare other rightists white supremecists, despite the term being almost inherently loaded.
    The right adopts racialism and counter-group identity and engages its own battle of identity politics, ambushing the left’s race hypocrisy and even flipping the same narratives, in some odd expectation the psycho left will reason by the terms of its own cancerous lie.
    Eventually the right becomes the left.
    That’s before we get to the enormous roster of good socialism championed by the ostensible right, the entrenched, eternal, and bankrupt aspects of Leviathan.
    I’m not terribly worried about the manifesto and on face, I also don’t think the desire to protect any bordered people is identity politics and therefore leftist. Specific instances may compound the two together, but that level of detail is a world apart from a social element utterly unable and willing to reason.
    At some point the battle is lost and the strategy shifts to pre-emption and restoration – say, the CoS – and the tactics away from unwinnable street skirmishes.

  9. happyfeet says:

    identity politics is here to stay cause of it’s buttressed and nurtured

    by the viciously anti-semitic democratic party

    by the sloppy unprofessional boob-droolers in failmerica’s colleges and universities

    by CNN/NPR fredo-pedo fake news

    by the unflagging efforts of the googlenazi the zuckertwat the billgates and the anorexic jack douchey

    at some point the battle is lost but

    ha i did a fatalism then added “but” at the end like the little whisper in pandora’s box

    identity politics as practiced by contemporary fascists seems ever to minimalize identity

    it’s inherently reductionist in its thrust

    you are a pigment

    you are an income bracket

    you got you some titties (real ones or pretend ones)

    ad nauseum

    but ever reductionist

    intersectional but never holistic

    there’s another approach

    one of maximalism where you’re a father a mother a brother a worker an employer a soldier a christian a cheese connoisseur you like to take your drone to the beach at sunset and you like to go fishing at the same lake in central canada your dad found on a trip after he mustered out in 77

    identity!

  10. duuwhee says:

    I think Instapundit nailed it when he pointed out that after decades of carving the USA into identity groups in contrast and opposition, the Democrats were shocked when whites voted like one

  11. ronhan says:

    I’m pretty sure identity politics is prevailing because of the huge numbers of identities allowed to migrate to this country for the last 150 years or so. You might have noticed relatively homogeneous countries like Japan don’t have identity politics. Or are they just evil racist Nazis.

Comments are closed.