Identity Politics: the impasse, the debate, the thread.

[Athos]

I would not describe myself as supportive of 'identity politics'...

?!

 

[Treacle Toes]

 

[Athos]

Lol. That coming from one of the most fork-tounged hypocrites on these boards.

 

[friendofdorothy]

I'd be genuinely interested in hearing more of your thoughts on this. You both post a lot but mostly it's picking people up on details or asking for things to be explained further. Not so much giving your own opinions. I feel like there's a subtext that you're not really agreeing but you're not saying it explicitly or providing counter points.

I think I said a lot about my own politics and thoughts early on in this thread - when I was asking for clarification on what ID politics is - because sometimes my posts had been dismissed as ID pol here on urb75 and I'd never heard of it in RL. It seemed to be agreed that fighting for your rights as a lgbt person wasn't in itself IDpol. Then some posters said my views weren't ID pol at all and I had acted in solidarity. I've always been quite clear about my views - see my op on combatting hopelessness thread.

In my last few posts I've been trying to find out how much of the behaviours that are being decried and labelled as ID pol, take place in real life and how much is just on line, because the way power/politics works on-line is genuinely a mystery to me. I work in a care home and no one talks about class - I imagine most of my co-workers have never even heard of ID politics

I ask for clarification here because its needed - posters aren't being clear about who or what they they are talking about. Isn't that the point of debate?

 

[friendofdorothy]

I would not describe myself as supportive of 'identity politics' however I have clearly stated numerous times that I think there are issues and contexts in which 'centring' one aspect of identity/experience and organising around it is alright with me. The beginning of this thread explored numerous examples of that over and over again (civil rights/feminist agendas/LGBT liberation etc). I shouldn't need to repeat any of that.

Well said - your posts are always clear.

 

[mauvais]

The arguments are much the same are in my youth though though all the words and the settings have changed. We didn't need to exclude straight people from gay meetings in the 80s - on the whole you couldn't attract them - they just didn't attend. I'm reading Stuart Feathers book about Gay Lib in the early 70s now - lots of interesting stuff about how it grew out of revoluntary left ideas. He says how to concentrate on their own issues and not get hijacked by other agendas the GLF insisted that everyone stated their sexuality in meetings. Theres a good chapter about how the GLF women rejected the control of hetrosexual male moaists/ marxists at an early Womens Lib conference and changed the nature of feminist debate.

It's not just about active, integrated support (and all of the leadership/ownership issues that go with that) though is it? For the vast majority of people they are, by default, merely passive observers that this stuff plays out in front of; but it's also they as a mass who ultimately define social acceptance. The risk of IDP isn't just internal control, it's that a them/us barrier actively alienates people with no dog in the fight.

 

[Shechemite]

Well, who's avoiding growing up and maintaining victimhood,is what I'm asking.

Those whose ‘political’ thinking/behaviour comes under the heading of idnentity politics.

 

[kabbes]

But it's influence goes way beyond it's user base, as people who engage with politics through facebook will take what they've learned there to other forums of discussion (the pub / workplace / dinnerparty / whatever).

And vice versa.

 

[friendofdorothy]

Where FOD asked 'if this is just FB bullshit' it is posed as a question but feels like they're trying to downplay it a bit. That sort of thing.

I'm not down playing the effect of FB - I'm trying to understand it.

I don't do FB, whats app, snapchat, linkedin, or any other social media. It seems to me that how people present them selves and behave on social media is far removed from their real selves. and the media it self manipulates the way they behave, in what it shows them and how it allows advertisers to buy their data to manipulate them further. I don't think most people who use it have any idea how it works to filter everything they see. Its all 1984 big brother for my liking.

I don't think we're on opposte sides here.

 

[krtek a houby]

Those whose ‘political’ thinking/behaviour comes under the heading of idnentity politics.

Hmmm. Not sure how that makes them victims.

 

[Shechemite]

Hmmm. Not sure how that makes them victims.

Okay

 

[friendofdorothy]

People working/fighting/arguing/supporting each other for common aims, a united purpose.

I am not on FB, so don't know what that is like.

Also if you're talking about Maoism in a UK context I am not sure how relevant to the w/c any fight for control between left groups is. Not at all, I'd say.

You really haven't read my posts very well and are talking at cross purposes to me.

Yes I know what solidarity is - eggs/grandma young man - I was relating it to different times - the 'solidarity' I experienced in the 1980s when hetrosexuals weren't interested in attending our debates/meetings/demos. *
And no I wasn't talking about 'moaism' I was talking about how I'm reading that 'support' from straight men encountered by women of GLF in the 70s was rejected so they could get on and have a womens conference.

My point was that this sort of debate is nothing new - its just the times and media and language have changed.

* ok there was the notable exception of getting the trade unions on our side because of queer support for the miners strike.

 

[AllEternalsHeck]

What are the excesses IYO? How can you accuse me of being willing to 'downplay' the excesses but admit you haven't actually read where I stand on this issue? This is what I mean about people projecting in an earlier post. It's also a really loaded accusation as it positions you as an authority, you get to dictate what the excesses are and if I disagree with you I am somehow simply downplaying them/not having a valid opinion.

The excesses as described in my experience yesterday. Stripping class analysis from the picture altogether and concluding that an upper middle class lawyer who happens to be bisexual or non-binary has the right to abuse any straight person as much as they like. Because in their eyes straights are the oppressing class and they are punching up against oppressors. I wish I was exaggerating but this is the level of discourse a lot of people are at.

That's excessive right? I'm don't need to be an authority to believe that's a fucked up worldview.

Going back slightly to your post about a FB friend of yours. Would you describe that as an example of the 'excesses' of IDPing? I wouldn't. She sounds like someone who hasn't worked out her own perspective in a meaningful way, more relying on generalisation/universal truisms (men get better opportunities/jobs). It seems to me that she hasn't reflected on her own position and advantages, class. I am interested as to what you did to challenge her or how you feel you could challenge that kind of conflation.

Yes I would describe that as an example of the 'excesses'. Again, putting that in quotes implies you don't really agree, without quite saying it. I'd say she has worked out her perspective in a way that is very meaningful to her. Given that she can immerse herself in communities where those views are mainstream I'd expect she'll become more embedded in that position rather then less. It's the worldview that makes sense from her class position.

I didn't challenge her. I have learned that any challenge to this position is met with scathing sarcasm and aggression. Term such as 'brosocialist' or the sarcastic use of 'not all men' would be thrown around with abandon. Since she has hundreds of fb friends from all over the world (who she clearly met online on tumblr or whatever) I'd expect to get mobbed pretty quickly with abuse about the entitlement of cishet males. Nobody would learn anything and she'd leave the encounter more validated in her view that beforehand.

I don't know if there's a way of challenging it. Maybe a lighthearted quip asking if it's ok when the position of power is occupied by a woman? Probably would get the same response.

 

[AllEternalsHeck]

I think I said a lot about my own politics and thoughts early on in this thread - when I was asking for clarification on what ID politics is - because sometimes my posts had been dismissed as ID pol here on urb75 and I'd never heard of it in RL. It seemed to be agreed that fighting for your rights as a lgbt person wasn't in itself IDpol. Then some posters said my views weren't ID pol at all and I had acted in solidarity. I've always been quite clear about my views - see my op on combatting hopelessness thread.

In my last few posts I've been trying to find out how much of the behaviours that are being decried and labelled as ID pol, take place in real life and how much is just on line, because the way power/politics works on-line is genuinely a mystery to me. I work in a care home and no one talks about class - I imagine most of my co-workers have never even heard of ID politics

I ask for clarification here because its needed - posters aren't being clear about who or what they they are talking about. Isn't that the point of debate?

Yeah, fair enough. Please don't feel like you can't ask questions, I'm sorry for giving that impression. That's the attitude I run into from the idpol crowd: 'how dare you question us it's not our job to educate you'. Not cool. Questions are part of conversation and are good. Yeah in my call-centre work nobody really spoke about class much either but I do feel there was a level of class solidarity (we're all stuck in this shitty situation together). Identity politics would make absolutely no sense in that environment and I never detected a hint of it.

As to whether it's just an online thing. Well I did believe that for ages. I see it more and more irl nowadays though, and as others have said you can separate online and real life spaces less and less these days.

 

[AllEternalsHeck]

Hmmm. Not sure how that makes them victims.

I think he was saying that they want to present themselves as victims

 

[killer b]

And vice versa.

Sure. But there isn't discrete 'FB stuff' anymore. It's embedded in everything, even when we aren't on Facebook.

 

[krtek a houby]

I think he was saying that they want to present themselves as victims

Those who use identity politics... wish to be seen as victims. Ok; forgive me, am still confused by this whole issue. I'd never heard of IDP until it started cropping up here and also from (very) right wing posters elsewhere online.

I don't think I'll ever get the hang of it. And yes, people have tried to explain it to me but it's over my head.

 

[seventh bullet]

Stop the pretend bullshit about not knowing with the added insinuation that people here are like the far right.

You're above this anyway. You abolished class in your mind, man.

 

[AllEternalsHeck]

Those who use identity politics... wish to be seen as victims. Ok; forgive me, am still confused by this whole issue. I'd never heard of IDP until it started cropping up here and also from (very) right wing posters elsewhere online.

I don't think I'll ever get the hang of it. And yes, people have tried to explain it to me but it's over my head.

It's a wish to be seen as part of an oppressed class. Say you're quite sheltered and middle class. Parents are doctors and lawyers. You go straight from your suburban comfortable home life into an elite university and get involved in student politics. You find out that as a woman you are oppressed by men and need to fight this oppression. You overlook any nuance that would come from accepting your own class privilege and consider yourself to be a political radical now. Post male tears memes at anyone who calls you a posh faker.

This may sound like a very crude caricature of identity politics but that's just how crude their politics can get.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

You really haven't read my posts very well and are talking at cross purposes to me.

Yes I know what solidarity is - eggs/grandma young man - I was relating it to different times - the 'solidarity' I experienced in the 1980s when hetrosexuals weren't interested in attending our debates/meetings/demos. *
And no I wasn't talking about 'moaism' I was talking about how I'm reading that 'support' from straight men encountered by women of GLF in the 70s was rejected so they could get on and have a womens conference.

My point was that this sort of debate is nothing new - its just the times and media and language have changed.

* ok there was the notable exception of getting the trade unions on our side because of queer support for the miners strike.

The debate may be nothing new, but I would argue that the terms of engagement and what is at stake have changed.

To run with your eg, we've come an incredibly long way in the 50 years since the first partial decriminalisation to a point where full legal equality is just about there. I'd guess that 1970s GLF activists would scarcely have dreamed that such progress could be made so quickly. And that surely profoundly changes what it is to be a gay activist today - the focus is no longer against the state. Any focus on the state is likely to involve ensuring that it does what it says it will do. I'm not saying it's all hunky dory, but we've come a long way from Clause 28 and discrimination built into the legal system.

Something similar can be said about racism and the fight against racial discrimination.

On the other hand, in all kinds of ways things have changed since the 70s, post-Thatcher, in a way that makes fighting against the state for wider social and economic justice far more urgent. Various trades unionists of the 60s or 70s may not have seen the struggle for gay liberation as their struggle, or even the struggle against racism, leaving activists little choice for joining in with a wider movement. But today, the need for struggle against the state in a united front is the urgent one. The social and economic injustice cuts right across all narrower interest groups, whose main focus of action isn't even really the state any more.

 

[sunnysidedown]

I thought this review of Angela Nagle's K.A.N. was worth reading in light of the current trans/terf wars (could of done with a bit of proof reading).

As she points out, not conforming to the gender binary is hardly a new thing. What is new is how we talk about gender variations, how we argue about them, and what sort of recognition they require. While sites like Tumblr (founded only ten years ago) are not the only place people have discussed new ideas about gender, there is an extra capitalist mechanism at play which mediates those discussions.

That mechanism? Attention, distributed through the accumulation and appropriation of virtue.

 

[ManchesterBeth]

Can you expand a bit on what you mean this please dialectician ?

It's just a pointless culture of self-blame, like so what if you're white that don't mean you have to tiptoe around people of colour, we're more interested in your politics than making 19th century race theories of the volatile savage palatable for the 21st c. i saw this being taken to absurd lengths when someone asked in a discussion whether they should capitalise black/brown because they are white and feel guilt.

i mean it's the same with class as liberal conceptions of classism noone's blaming you for being middle class or whatever, these are social relationships and processes that we relate to each other within. I'm not even getting into the thorny dilemma where you can occupy contradictory class positions. Feeling guilty about your middle classness isn't going to change anything is it? as if it's all about consciousness raising and the actual production we are engaged in from day-to-day doesn't matter.

 

[ManchesterBeth]

You're above this anyway. You abolished class in your mind, man.

*must. resist. urge to make professor joke...*

 

[J Ed]

I would not describe myself as supportive of 'identity politics'

Apart from the 'white nationalism is identity politics for white people' far-right types, does anyone?

 

[ManchesterBeth]

To add i think this culture of self-blame can have some ugly consequences re mental health and increasing paranoia etc.

Noone deserves that.

 

[AllEternalsHeck]

Apart from the 'white nationalism is identity politics for white people' far-right types, does anyone?

Those who practice identity politics don't use the term themselves. Pretty sure they see at as a right-wing slur. Always makes me awkward about calling it out because I know they'll categorise me as a conservative. I just remind myself that Naomi Klein was critiquing identity politics 20 years ago from an anti-capitalist standpoint and it's not my fault these people read tumblr instead of books.

 

[Athos]

Plebs?

 

[J Ed]

Not sure 'plebs' are the problem!

 

[Treacle Toes]

It's just a pointless culture of self-blame, like so what if you're white that don't mean you have to tiptoe around people of colour, we're more interested in your politics than making 19th century race theories of the volatile savage palatable for the 21st c. i saw this being taken to absurd lengths when someone asked in a discussion whether they should capitalise black/brown because they are white and feel guilt.

i mean it's the same with class as liberal conceptions of classism noone's blaming you for being middle class or whatever, these are social relationships and processes that we relate to each other within. I'm not even getting into the thorny dilemma where you can occupy contradictory class positions. Feeling guilty about your middle classness isn't going to change anything is it? as if it's all about consciousness raising and the actual production we are engaged in from day-to-day doesn't matter.

Right, I get ya. So with the examples you used in the post I quoted...

With the attendent sanitised racism that such a politics covers.

especially if you're mixed race, or on the peripheries of whiteness (like myself in the second case...)

..are you including mixed people and those on the peripheries of whiteness are targets for that kind of 'self-blame'?

 

[AllEternalsHeck]

Plebs?

Not sure 'plebs' are the problem!

OK sorry guys edited that out, mistake on my part. Was just trying to fire in a sarky insult it's not about them being poor or some shit (my whole argument is directed at people who are explicitly not poor).