 |
| Identity Politics, Depicted |
I suppose I'm lucky in that I don't have any notable "identity." By that I mean than none of my demographic attributes constitute paplable fodder for so-called "identity politics." I am
- White
- Male
- Heterosexual
- Of an ethnic background that is a mix of English, Scots, and Scots-Irish
- A native English speaker
- A native-born American citizen
- Middle or even upper-middle in socioeconomic class
- A graduate of a good university, Georgetown
- Suburban
It's true that I am also
- Over 70 years of age, and so I might conceivably someday find myself a victim of ageism (though I've never run into any such thing in my own actual life)
- Catholic (as a convert from Protestantism), though I've never been discriminated against because of my faith (or lack thereof)
- Medically disabled, though not obviously so to other people; I've never encountered any sort of discrimination because of health problems
So my voting and political leanings are not informed by any personal resentment against any sort of discrimination against what I seem to represent in the eyes of others. Political pundits have been opining for decades, however, that many American voters are persuaded by identity politics. Generally speaking, this has been the central organizing principle of the voting coalition that in recent decades has put Democrats into office instead of Republicans.
But in 2016, or so the story goes, that stopped working for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Though she outpolled Donald Trump among such groups as African Americans, Latinos, and highly educated white women, President Trump dominated among white working-class voters, especially men. Clinton could not draw enough votes among her target identity groups to overcome Trump's electoral advantages in key states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
Now we are about to have an off-year election in which, pundits are saying, there could be a "blue wave" that will help the Democrats in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives as sell as in state governorships and other state and local elections. An unusually large number of Democratic office seekers this year are women, and women voters (especially those with college degrees) are one of the key identity groups that Democrats think they need major support from if they are to produce a "blue wave" in 2018.
*****
 |
| Carlos Lozada, Washington Post |
Identity politics may divide us. But ultimately we can’t unite without it," Lozada's essay, is tremendously worth reading.
I admit, though, that after I read it, I found myself quite dubious about the basic legitimacy of identity politics. And yet ... the main takeaway from the Lozada article is just the opposite: that identity politics can ultimately rescue us from the political polarization we see today — and that identity politics itself has contributed mightily to during the last several decades.
I will leave it to you readers of this blog post to think about the various attitudes toward identity politics which Lozada mentions in his article. What you take away from Lozada's discussion is apt to differ from his own expressed attitudes, as well as from the one I am myself about to express.
*****
The one I would like to express here has to do with enmity. To me, keying on group identity in politics is keying on the enmity that group members can be expected to have toward those "on the other side." If I were black, for instance, I might feel enmity toward (a) all whites, or (b) just those whites who "hate" me because of my color.
If I were gay, I might feel a visceral enmity toward homophobes.
As a male of the species, I admit to sometimes entertaining misogynistic thoughts, as if feminists were an enemy.
If I were poor, I might see the top "one percent" as enemies.
Pundits talk about the rise of "tribalism" today. When we engage in identity politics, I'd say we are engaging in tribalism. Up with the tribes we personally identify as being members of, down with the enemies of those tribes!
*****
But Jesus taught in the Gospel of Matthew 5:43-48:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
It was those verses that dominated my own reaction to Lozada's article and to the attitudes toward identity politics he muses upon. Why did Jesus say "love your enemies," I wondered, instead of just making a blanket adjuration to "love everybody"? I think his choice of words represents the perhaps sad fact that we are all, including myself, prone to identifying our supposed "enemies" and then striving to wipe them out in some literal or metaphorical way. We want to "see them dead" — if not necessarily physically, then in terms of other, more abstract demises that we first envision and then strive to impose on them.
In short, we are all basically tribal creatures. This fact is somewhat offset by the fact that we are notably civilized, and many of us inherit our culture from a religious tradition which includes what Jesus so radically taught at Matthew 5:43-48.
*****
At this point in my own personal musings about identity politics as I read the Lozada article, I simply had to give up trying to mesh the whole approach to identity politics with the "love your enemies" idea that Jesus taught. I realized that my own religious faith is too faint, my own personal wisdom too weak, to really and truly be able to fully live by such words as these, uttered by Martin Luther King:
 |
| The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. |
I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality... I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.
And:
We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools.
So I admit it: my own political orientation in favor of Democrats over Republicans and Trump haters over Trump supporters is tinged with, yes, enmity and tribalism. If my faith in my supposed religion — Catholic Christianity — were stronger, I'm sure I would at this point have to ask everyone to pray for my soul, and for their own souls as well.
