Identity Politics vs. Class Struggle

The Left is arguing quite nastily about whether to pursue identity politics or class politics. If you bring up the working class, you will be attacked for abandoning African-Americans in favor of white workers. I’ve been screamed at that “class struggle” is code for racist views. What may be most absurd is that class politics is actually a form of identity politics—but for some it seems too inclusive. 

The term “identity politics” originated back in the 1960s among feminists. Then, as now, there formed black identity groups that excluded or expelled white members. The basic idea was that an oppressed people should band together as a group with a shared identity and work to change society. To oversimplify, you get together with people like yourself and set out to succeed in our godforsaken country.

The argument against identity politics has been that it divides people, excludes people, and sets one group to fighting against another. In the recent primary elections, for example, lesbians tended to unite for Hillary (because she is a woman),while socialists supported Bernie. Lesbian socialists had a tough decision. 

Another argument against identity groups is that black lesbians (for example) are not identical. Differences get lost. And so on, the arguments go back and forth. It might be that identity politics is unavoidable. George Lakoff is telling us that we need to make connections to people at the level of basic values that transcend class and identity issues. That’s what works, he says. People engaged in politics don’t listen to him, but he’s probably right.