Identity Politics The Two Party System by Movies-For-The-Blind-Songs-For-The-Deaf Lyrics
I really had trouble deciding what I should write my first essay on. There is so many problems with the current political climate and it’s incredibly difficult sticking to one topic. I will do my best to remain on point.
Before I begin, let me define identity politics so we are all on the same page.
What exactly is identity politics?
My working definition for this discussion can be boiled down to this. Basing political thought and belief around different social groups, literally as it sounds, crafting politics out of identity.
Now, how does identity politics relate to the two party system?
Identity politics is embedded into the two party system by it’s very nature. You can see it almost anytime any representative or talking head of one of the two major parties makes a statement. Trump and Hillary both used it extensively in their campaigns. Almost every candidate up on stage of either party was utilizing it. It’s an incredibly basic form of manipulation and influence, and yet it continues to work on the majority of people.
It goes back a long way, but I’d like to stick to a frame of reference we are all familiar with. Let’s take Hillary Clinton. Her campaign was entirely based around identity politics. I’m for women, I’m for minorities. This was her rallying cry throughout the campaign. Barack Obama spoke a similar message and a majority of Democrats do as well. It seems harmless on the surface, like something most people can get behind. So, what’s the problem?
Before getting to that, let’s look at Trump’s campaign. I found myself in disagreement with almost everything both major candidates were saying and the positions they were holding, but I did admire and find a lot of entertainment in observing Trump and how he was manipulating and influencing everyone. Trump’s tactics of manipulation and influence is worthy of an entire essay, so I will avoid speaking on that. The one we want to focus on was his utilization of identity politics. Trump’s policy positions are more in alignment with Bernie Sanders than Ronald Reagan, so how exactly did he win the Republican nomination and eventual presidency? One huge factor was identity politics. Republicans to their credit haven’t hammered home identity politics to the extent Democrats have over the years, but that changed with Trump. His entire message was built around being for the working class, he spoke in an incredibly simplistic moralization of almost everything. He was using what I would commonly associate with Democrat tactics against them. He fed into the anger of the working class by focusing onto their identity and telling them someone was screwing them over. It was identity politics.
Why is identity politics a problem? It’s the fundamental problem with the two party system. It becomes a team sport. It’s no longer about the policy, or principles, or ideas. Everything turns into a cheering/jeering match because someone has an R or a D next to their name. Trump says he’s for the working class, well I’m the working class so I support him and screw the other guys. Hillary says she’s for women, well I’m a woman and she’s right, so screw the other people. If you want an example of this at play, watch how Democrats treated Mitt Romney when he called Russia America’s biggest foreign threat, then observe how they seemed to blame Russia for absolutely every problem with little to no evidence. Vice versa, see how Republicans have flipped on their views of Russia because of Trump.
For another example, I’ll point to gay marriage. Democrats said they were for gay people and people who opposed gay marriage must hate gay people. Republicans drummed up Christianity and claimed it goes against the bible, so you can’t support it. You are an average American working class Christian, you have to pick an extreme, so you go to the one that claims to speak for you. This doesn’t allow any sort of nuance of opinion or real debate, it just turns into a shouting match.
If you are a Republican/Democrat and feel as if I have misrepresented your position, congratulations. You understand the underlying problem with this sort of moralizing and tribalism. It no longer becomes about you as an individual and what you might believe, it just becomes a big collective for people to shout at.
The fundamental idea behind identity politics is collectivization. It is creating a stereotype. When someone claims they speak for black people, your brain wants to associate what they are saying with black people. This is fundamentally flawed thinking. Black people aren’t all the same people with the same ideas and thoughts. There’s quite a difference between a Black Nationalist like Louis Farrakhan and a black conservative like Larry Elder. It seems unknowingly people collectivize themselves and others while perpetuating stereotypes.
I would argue, we are all individuals. Every one of us is singular and deserves to be judged based off of that and that alone. We shouldn’t attack a label that someone might adopt that holds ideas this person might not even believe. It would be quite ridiculous to begin a conversation with someone who considers themselves a Democrat and scream at them over gun control, and that person be an advocate for 2nd Amendment rights. You don’t know. Your biases might be right 99% of the time, but that 1% should prove to you that your thinking isn’t true.
We have to move away from the idea of collectives and move toward the idea of the individual. This is the only way to have effective conversations about anything. Principles and ideas are the building blocks of true discussion, debate, and effective policy. Collectivization and identity politics destroy this. The conversation ends before it begins.
Before I begin, let me define identity politics so we are all on the same page.
What exactly is identity politics?
My working definition for this discussion can be boiled down to this. Basing political thought and belief around different social groups, literally as it sounds, crafting politics out of identity.
Now, how does identity politics relate to the two party system?
Identity politics is embedded into the two party system by it’s very nature. You can see it almost anytime any representative or talking head of one of the two major parties makes a statement. Trump and Hillary both used it extensively in their campaigns. Almost every candidate up on stage of either party was utilizing it. It’s an incredibly basic form of manipulation and influence, and yet it continues to work on the majority of people.
It goes back a long way, but I’d like to stick to a frame of reference we are all familiar with. Let’s take Hillary Clinton. Her campaign was entirely based around identity politics. I’m for women, I’m for minorities. This was her rallying cry throughout the campaign. Barack Obama spoke a similar message and a majority of Democrats do as well. It seems harmless on the surface, like something most people can get behind. So, what’s the problem?
Before getting to that, let’s look at Trump’s campaign. I found myself in disagreement with almost everything both major candidates were saying and the positions they were holding, but I did admire and find a lot of entertainment in observing Trump and how he was manipulating and influencing everyone. Trump’s tactics of manipulation and influence is worthy of an entire essay, so I will avoid speaking on that. The one we want to focus on was his utilization of identity politics. Trump’s policy positions are more in alignment with Bernie Sanders than Ronald Reagan, so how exactly did he win the Republican nomination and eventual presidency? One huge factor was identity politics. Republicans to their credit haven’t hammered home identity politics to the extent Democrats have over the years, but that changed with Trump. His entire message was built around being for the working class, he spoke in an incredibly simplistic moralization of almost everything. He was using what I would commonly associate with Democrat tactics against them. He fed into the anger of the working class by focusing onto their identity and telling them someone was screwing them over. It was identity politics.
Why is identity politics a problem? It’s the fundamental problem with the two party system. It becomes a team sport. It’s no longer about the policy, or principles, or ideas. Everything turns into a cheering/jeering match because someone has an R or a D next to their name. Trump says he’s for the working class, well I’m the working class so I support him and screw the other guys. Hillary says she’s for women, well I’m a woman and she’s right, so screw the other people. If you want an example of this at play, watch how Democrats treated Mitt Romney when he called Russia America’s biggest foreign threat, then observe how they seemed to blame Russia for absolutely every problem with little to no evidence. Vice versa, see how Republicans have flipped on their views of Russia because of Trump.
For another example, I’ll point to gay marriage. Democrats said they were for gay people and people who opposed gay marriage must hate gay people. Republicans drummed up Christianity and claimed it goes against the bible, so you can’t support it. You are an average American working class Christian, you have to pick an extreme, so you go to the one that claims to speak for you. This doesn’t allow any sort of nuance of opinion or real debate, it just turns into a shouting match.
If you are a Republican/Democrat and feel as if I have misrepresented your position, congratulations. You understand the underlying problem with this sort of moralizing and tribalism. It no longer becomes about you as an individual and what you might believe, it just becomes a big collective for people to shout at.
The fundamental idea behind identity politics is collectivization. It is creating a stereotype. When someone claims they speak for black people, your brain wants to associate what they are saying with black people. This is fundamentally flawed thinking. Black people aren’t all the same people with the same ideas and thoughts. There’s quite a difference between a Black Nationalist like Louis Farrakhan and a black conservative like Larry Elder. It seems unknowingly people collectivize themselves and others while perpetuating stereotypes.
I would argue, we are all individuals. Every one of us is singular and deserves to be judged based off of that and that alone. We shouldn’t attack a label that someone might adopt that holds ideas this person might not even believe. It would be quite ridiculous to begin a conversation with someone who considers themselves a Democrat and scream at them over gun control, and that person be an advocate for 2nd Amendment rights. You don’t know. Your biases might be right 99% of the time, but that 1% should prove to you that your thinking isn’t true.
We have to move away from the idea of collectives and move toward the idea of the individual. This is the only way to have effective conversations about anything. Principles and ideas are the building blocks of true discussion, debate, and effective policy. Collectivization and identity politics destroy this. The conversation ends before it begins.