You’re absolutely correct in your conclusions. I’ve been trying to spread the same message and get my close friends to see this situation for what it is, and all I get for my efforts is called a libertarian (which I’m not), or be told I’m racist (I live in a blended family and friends group).
The leftist elitists in the USA love to scoff at the close-minded bigotry from the right, and pat themselves on the back about how open minded they are, while being completely closed off to anyone who tries to tell them how they’re alienating people, and causing strife with their identity politics.
Identity politics are poison. They seem purposefully engineered to sow division, instead of their stated goal of inclusion. I’ve tried to talk about this online a few times and gave up after being eviscerated by people parroting agenda points rather than actually engaging in a conversation.
The left, or the Democrats, or whatever you want to call them, have continually alienated huge portions of the population, portions required to win elections and actually change policies, with issues that affect miniscule portions of the population.
I want everyone to be treated equally. I want equality and inclusion. You don’t obtain that by telling 60% of the people in the country that their voices don’t matter, their opinions don’t matter, and their only job is to shut up and listen. Yes, it’s wise to listen more than you talk when someone who has experienced something you haven’t is sharing their experiences with you. But the overtly hostile fashion in which that message has been spread is offensive, and damaging, and alienating, and we saw the outcome of that last night.
I would warrant caution and nuance when considering the effect of IdPol on these things. It’s a term that’s been abused and bastardized to high heaven, and it’s a concept that the right has made ample, productive (for them) use of.
The politics of whiteness, the politics of masculinity, the politics of white masculinity, the politics of Christian conservatism, the politics of white nationalism, of Christian nationalism, of white-Christian nationalism, etc., are all IdPol. These are identity groups that the right has very successfully leaned on and groomed.
If you actually look at the Democrats, the Liberals, or even the NDP, what Identity Politics do they actually spout? What do they say that’s such a turn off, with respect to IdPol? It’s very little. Instead, what you actually see is them focusing on issues that matter to women, immigrants, and people of colour, but not to the exclusion of others.
But the right has used the fact that they speak of non-white, non-male, non-Christians at all and used it to reinforce the Identity Politics of the blue collar voter.
The aggrivated teenage sitting at the dinner table whining at you about how racist and imperialist the country is is not engaging in IdPol. They’re engaging in the process of coming to terms with the fact that the world is not how it has been portrayed to them. But the rural Canadian or American voting against their interest because the party that is going to fuck them or their community over the most has done the work to sure up their identity as white, rural, and working class.
Their politics and support follows their identity, not their interests or policy preferences.
That is Identity Politics. And you’re right, it’s toxic.
It’s just not what you were using the word to mean.
You’re absolutely correct in your conclusions. I’ve been trying to spread the same message and get my close friends to see this situation for what it is, and all I get for my efforts is called a libertarian (which I’m not), or be told I’m racist (I live in a blended family and friends group).
The leftist elitists in the USA love to scoff at the close-minded bigotry from the right, and pat themselves on the back about how open minded they are, while being completely closed off to anyone who tries to tell them how they’re alienating people, and causing strife with their identity politics.
Identity politics are poison. They seem purposefully engineered to sow division, instead of their stated goal of inclusion. I’ve tried to talk about this online a few times and gave up after being eviscerated by people parroting agenda points rather than actually engaging in a conversation.
The left, or the Democrats, or whatever you want to call them, have continually alienated huge portions of the population, portions required to win elections and actually change policies, with issues that affect miniscule portions of the population.
I want everyone to be treated equally. I want equality and inclusion. You don’t obtain that by telling 60% of the people in the country that their voices don’t matter, their opinions don’t matter, and their only job is to shut up and listen. Yes, it’s wise to listen more than you talk when someone who has experienced something you haven’t is sharing their experiences with you. But the overtly hostile fashion in which that message has been spread is offensive, and damaging, and alienating, and we saw the outcome of that last night.
I would warrant caution and nuance when considering the effect of IdPol on these things. It’s a term that’s been abused and bastardized to high heaven, and it’s a concept that the right has made ample, productive (for them) use of.
The politics of whiteness, the politics of masculinity, the politics of white masculinity, the politics of Christian conservatism, the politics of white nationalism, of Christian nationalism, of white-Christian nationalism, etc., are all IdPol. These are identity groups that the right has very successfully leaned on and groomed.
If you actually look at the Democrats, the Liberals, or even the NDP, what Identity Politics do they actually spout? What do they say that’s such a turn off, with respect to IdPol? It’s very little. Instead, what you actually see is them focusing on issues that matter to women, immigrants, and people of colour, but not to the exclusion of others.
But the right has used the fact that they speak of non-white, non-male, non-Christians at all and used it to reinforce the Identity Politics of the blue collar voter.
The aggrivated teenage sitting at the dinner table whining at you about how racist and imperialist the country is is not engaging in IdPol. They’re engaging in the process of coming to terms with the fact that the world is not how it has been portrayed to them. But the rural Canadian or American voting against their interest because the party that is going to fuck them or their community over the most has done the work to sure up their identity as white, rural, and working class.
Their politics and support follows their identity, not their interests or policy preferences.
That is Identity Politics. And you’re right, it’s toxic.
It’s just not what you were using the word to mean.
Great insights!