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

[danny la rouge]

seems to be arguing that people taking an interest in family/social history is some sort of alien manifestation of identity politics.

That's not what he's arguing. He explicitly says it's the idea of racial essentialism that he's tacking here: the idea that culture is passed on biologically rather than socially. That's the whole thrust of the piece, so I'm surprised you missed it.

He writes: "there is a desire to link genetic inheritance to social heritage to contemporary identity."

It's this linkage, with the three steps he enumerates, that he sees as the problem, and I agree with him. This is a theme Malik has written about many times in articles and books.

leaving aside (as Malik does) the question of whether this kind of dna testing actually works

Well, it's a newspaper article with a given word count. He does provide two relevant links. And he's covered it in his book, Strange Fruit.

 

[inva]

That's not what he's arguing. He explicitly says it's the idea of racial essentialism that he's tacking here: the idea that culture is passed on biologically rather than socially. That's the whole thrust of the piece, so I'm surprised you missed it.

He writes: "there is a desire to link genetic inheritance to social heritage to contemporary identity."

It's this linkage, with the three steps he enumerates, that he sees as the problem, and I agree with him. This is a theme Malik has written about many times in articles and books.

yes i understood his point, but i didn't think building it on examples like that works. maybe i made a bigger deal of it than i needed to because its not really important, it was more what he contrasts that development with that i have a problem with.

Well, it's a newspaper article with a given word count. He does provide two relevant links. And he's covered it in his book, Strange Fruit.

sorry i may not have been clear here, when i said leaving aside i wasn't criticising him for not going into detail on that as i'm totally prepared to believe that this dna testing doesn't give useful/accurate results (don't know anything about it myself but sure its probably riddled with bullshit). i said leaving it aside because i was arguing on the basis of these peoples belief that the dna tests do work as they claim. i've read Strange Fruit and some of his other books and generally like them, though i think they share some of the same problems as this piece.

 

[LDC]

Just started the Asad Haider Mistaken Identity book that's probably be mentioned on here. And if it hasn't it should have been. Only a few pages in, but very impressed with it so far.

Short bit here Verso

On the other end of the spectrum just read the The Xenofeminism Manifesto which is the biggest pile of drivel my eyes have clapped sight on for ages.

 

[inva]

also this might not be the right thread exactly as it is more on intersectionality specifically than identity politics, but i found this article The Limits of Intersectionality by Angry Workers to be interesting and worth a read (its actually a review of the book Striking Women' - Struggles and Strategies of South Asian Women Workers from Grunwick to Gate Gourmet).

Although ‘intersectionality theory’ does not necessarily end up in affirming identity politics, they both share the tendency to focus on oppression and individual experience of it, rather than on what creates the condition for it. We are currently witnessing a problematic intersection of state ideology and liberal leftist politics when it comes to race, class and gender - and ‘intersectionality’ will be a useless tool to question this. Capitalism needs divide-and-rule to maintain itself but even if it wanted to it couldn't do away with the material basis of racism and sexism.

 

[flypanam]

Just started the Asad Haider Mistaken Identity book that's probably be mentioned on here. And if it hasn't it should have been. Only a few pages in, but very impressed with it so far.

He was on Henwood's show at the end of August defending the book from slurs that appeared in Jacobin. Worth a listen...
Behind The News, 8/30/18 Behind The News With Doug Henwood podcast

 

[likesfish]

its a yank think the 26%apache or whatever got taken to task by some yank claiming he was 5th generation Irish American and actually had somebody from Ireland pointing out that makes him American
people should have multiple ids lives complex your not just your gender/class/sexual idenity/nationality/religious/ political belief system and to think you can see your entire life through one filter is madness ID politics can be useful but its a tool
sometimes it's appropriate sometimes its not

 

[Idris2002]

its a yank think the 26%apache or whatever got taken to task by some yank claiming he was 5th generation Irish American and actually had somebody from Ireland pointing out that makes him American
people should have multiple ids lives complex your not just your gender/class/sexual idenity/nationality/religious/ political belief system and to think you can see your entire life through one filter is madness ID politics can be useful but its a tool
sometimes it's appropriate sometimes its not

I once had an American proudly declare to me that he was "Irish, German, and Cherokee". I think the Cherokee thing comes from a practice that tribe (I hate the word "tribe", but sometimes there's no better substitute) had of taking in people who were on the run from the other side of the frontier.

As for I-Ams, they are different from other Americans, and that's because they hail from my own little patch of heaven.

 

[8ball]

That's not what he's arguing. He explicitly says it's the idea of racial essentialism that he's tacking here: the idea that culture is passed on biologically rather than socially.

You need a little more than that to get to racial essentialism, unless you’re just talking about “the human race”.

I wonder how the left would respond if the dogmatic axiom that the roots of culture are social pretty much down to the common biological substrate were ever meaningfully challenged..

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I wonder how the left would respond if the dogmatic axiom that the roots of culture are social pretty much down to the common biological substrate were ever meaningfully challenged..

Is it dogmatic? For example, the authors of The Bell Curve, while trying to disprove exactly this point, inadvertently collected together a bunch of evidence that, properly considered, backed up the very opposite point from the one they were trying to make. We're a species with a narrow gene pool and remarkably small differences between geographically widely separated populations. All the evidence I'm aware of backs up that point, in fact makes it the only valid position wrt said evidence.

 

[8ball]

Is it dogmatic?

Yes. Something can be dogma and backed by evidence at the same time.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yes. Something can be dogma and backed by evidence at the same time.

We can say some very strong things about certain universalities across all human populations just by following the evidence. So no need for dogma.

 

[8ball]

We can say some very strong things about certain universalities across all human populations just by following the evidence. So no need for dogma.

That's not really how dogma works. Anyway, I was mostly musing on how certain ideological groups would respond to having sacred cows slaughtered in front of them...

I'm interested about that stuff in the Bell Curve which demonstrates the opposite to what it was meant to be proving - do you have any links (cos I'm not going to read that damn book)?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

That's not really how dogma works. Anyway, I was mostly musing on how certain ideological groups would respond to having sacred cows slaughtered in front of them...

I'm interested about that stuff in the Bell Curve which demonstrates the opposite to what it was meant to be proving - do you have any links (cos I'm not going to read that damn book)?

There was a thread on here about it years ago in which I and others provided various links debunking it using the very data that its authors had so painstakingly collected. irrc ViolentPanda also furnished some of the links. Not sure I want to go trawling through that shit again either tbh.

 

[8ball]

There was a thread on here about it years ago in which I and others provided various links debunking it using the very data that its authors had so painstakingly collected. irrc ViolentPanda also furnished some of the links. Not sure I want to go trawling through that shit again either tbh.

Nah, I was just wondering if there was a condensed version anywhere.

 

[danny la rouge]

You need a little more than that to get to racial essentialism, unless you’re just talking about “the human race”.

I’m talking about the idea that people who come from a certain supposed “racial” background have defined “authentic” ways to be and do that are assumed to be to do with their biological heritage. These ways of being and doing are reserved for people of that supposed biological heritage.

In other words the ways in which identity politics resemble racism.

 

[kabbes]

It’s worth bearing in mind that your great great great great grandad (ie going back about 150 years) is already no more related to you than your fourth cousin, which is likely thousands of present day people you have nothing in common with and wouldn’t care about even if you knew. Throw in a couple more “greats” and you could be up to hundreds of thousands of present day sixth cousins.

The idea that such a tangential relationship to an historical figure somehow defines the present day you is essentialism gone mad.

 

[TruXta]

It’s worth bearing in mind that your great great great great grandad (ie going back about 150 years) is already no more related to you than your fourth cousin, which is likely thousands of present day people you have nothing in common with and wouldn’t care about even if you knew. Throw in a couple more “greats” and you could be up to hundreds of thousands of present day sixth cousins.

The idea that such a tangential relationship to an historical figure somehow defines the present day you is essentialism gone mad.

But mah bloodline!

 

[kabbes]

But mah bloodline!

Well obviously for the more inbred amongst us, the relationship to ancestors is a touch more direct.

 

[krtek a houby]

It’s worth bearing in mind that your great great great great grandad (ie going back about 150 years) is already no more related to you than your fourth cousin, which is likely thousands of present day people you have nothing in common with and wouldn’t care about even if you knew. Throw in a couple more “greats” and you could be up to hundreds of thousands of present day sixth cousins.

The idea that such a tangential relationship to an historical figure somehow defines the present day you is essentialism gone mad.

I imagine Danny Dyer is unbearable now

 

[Athos]

I imagine Danny Dyer is unbearable now

Now?

 

[TruXta]

Well obviously for the more inbred amongst us, the relationship to ancestors is a touch more direct.

It's not inbreeding it's recursive reproduction

 

[danny la rouge]

This PDF is useful in this context:

http://archive.senseaboutscience.or.../119/Sense-About-Genetic-Ancestry-Testing.pdf

Page 2 in particular.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It’s worth bearing in mind that your great great great great grandad (ie going back about 150 years) is already no more related to you than your fourth cousin, which is likely thousands of present day people you have nothing in common with and wouldn’t care about even if you knew. Throw in a couple more “greats” and you could be up to hundreds of thousands of present day sixth cousins.

The idea that such a tangential relationship to an historical figure somehow defines the present day you is essentialism gone mad.

Sixth cousins is what two British people are on average if you know nothing more about them than that they are both British.

 

[Pickman's model]

Sixth cousins is what two British people are on average if you know nothing more about them than that they are both British.

let's see your working

 

[belboid]

let's see your working

doesn't seem to far off, according to to this - Cousin statistics - ISOGG Wiki

 

[littlebabyjesus]

doesn't seem to far off, according to to this - Cousin statistics - ISOGG Wiki

I don't respond to that cunt Pickman's Model. He is only interested in attempting to make other posters look bad and he can fuck the fuck off.

But I will give my source. The figure I gave came from the geneticist Steve Jones. Jones also said that a random person from the UK and a random person from Pakistan will on average be 12th cousins.

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't respond to that cunt Pickman's Model. He is only interested in attempting to make other posters look bad and he can fuck the fuck off.

But I will give my source. The figure I gave came from the geneticist Steve Jones. Jones also said that a random person from the UK and a random person from Pakistan will on average be 12th cousins.

not really giving your source, considering steve jones' great number of writings. Incest and folk-dancing: why sex survives

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Not even going to unignore you, Pickman's. Just fuck off.

 

[Teaboy]

One thing that gets me about all this tracing of bloodlines and family is how often 'illegitimate' children are overlooked. Lets face it down the years, forever, people have been shagging around. Loads and loads of children will have been born into families that only one of their parents actually has a blood link to, its really common. That's without all the informal adoptions.

Its an aspect I find quite sad when people spend ages researching their family trees in the hope of finding royalty or fame or even just a link to themselves whether it it be physical or some other aspect. Lets face it most of us are not related (as in blood line) to the people we think we are once we go back even two or three generations.

 

[mojo pixy]

Really, it's true; obsessing over bloodline and authentic ancestry is well reactionary. There's a bit of a phenomenon going on, usure how new it is, of people claiming to be from where their parents (even grandparents) are from, and essentially renouncing the place they themselves are actually from (ie born in)