I have not listened to this podcast and I’m sure how to read the question mark but, for my part, I don’t think there has been an American politician since George C. Wallace who has built an appeal around identity politics more than Trump.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Exactly right. 🎯 And to be able to appreciate this requires understanding that “identity politics “ includes the “default”, ie, white/male/straight/cis, etc.
We'll have to define "identity politics" first. Ronald Reagan (aka white Republican) or Barack Obama (aka black Dem) or Nixon (aka white Republican) or 34-felon (aka white Republican) or Kamala Harris (black Dem).
I suspect what some people *say* is the definition isn't the real definition.
"identity politics" as used by the right (and apparently supported by the msm) is just a derogatory way of saying "caring about people in a group you yourself do not necessarily belong to"
The people who claim to object to "identity politics" never seem to see cis straight white maleness as an identity. And yet it is the identity that most dominates our politics.
There seems to be a general assumption in the media that "identity politics" is not a thing when the "identity" is white, straight, cis, Christian men.
Not for white men or white people, in general. Or even MAGA or White Christian Nationalists. So, no. His win won’t stop or didn’t stop identity politics.
One could argue forcefully that initiating and defending Jim Crow, and then finding ways to resist integration and civil rights politically, is the foundational origin story of identity politics in this country & when it branched off into oppressing other minorities, it was always right wing
The "beauty" of reactionary narrative inversion as an act of propaganda is that you get to invent the thing and practice it oppressively and when the oppressed say "Hey! Get off me!" you then say "what's with this identity politics YOU are doing?"
There *is* the old saw that whenever you title an article with a yes or no question, the answer is “no”… but I don’t think that’s what these guys were going for.
1/ 3
white supremacy is identity politics, Christian Nationalists is all about identity politics, Trad Catholics is all about identity politics, an Israel oriented Jewish coalition is all about identity politics
Comments
I suspect what some people *say* is the definition isn't the real definition.
🔴|🔴|🔴2024
🔵|🔵|🔴2020
🔵|🔴|🔴2016
🔵|🔵|🔴2012
🔵|🔵|🔴2008
🔴|🔴|🔴2004
🔵|🔴|🔴2000
🔵|🔵|🔴1996
🔵|🔵|🔴1992
🔴|🔴|🔴1988
🔴|🔴|🔴1984
🔴|🔴|🔴1980
🔵|🔵|🔴1976
🔴|🔴|🔴1972
🔴|🔴|🔴1968
🔵|🔵|🔵1964 ---- Civil Rights Act
🔵|🔵|🔵1960
🔴|🔴|🔴1956
🔴|🔴|🔴1952
🔵|🔵|🔵1948
___________
🇺🇸 Popular 🗳️
🏛️ Electoral College 🗳️
⚪ White 🗳️
🔵 Dem
🔴 Rep
It's part of why I think most "-ist" tags kinda flat against them.
They will accept any person so long as they support Trump and hate Democrats.
One could argue forcefully that initiating and defending Jim Crow, and then finding ways to resist integration and civil rights politically, is the foundational origin story of identity politics in this country & when it branched off into oppressing other minorities, it was always right wing
white supremacy is identity politics, Christian Nationalists is all about identity politics, Trad Catholics is all about identity politics, an Israel oriented Jewish coalition is all about identity politics
What they are asking is
"Will non-dominant populations' ability to demand representation at the decision making table be suppressed into silent acquiescence?"