I first heard the term "identity politics" in the early '80's. It was difficult to pin down its meaning, but it seemed to be a description of a view that actually shunned any theory of injustice, capitalism or racism in favor of deciding that some "groups" were privileged and others were not. Instead of examining the historic oppression of African-Americans, Native Americans and Mexican Americans, "identity politics" seemed to just identify them as victims, therefore good guys. The correlation was that women, gay people, physically handicapped people, survivors of domestic violence, etc., etc., etc. were also victims and therefore analogous to oppressed nationalities. There seemed to be no class analysis attached to this, no colonial analysis, no analysis at all. The good thing about identity politics was that it stood for equality. The bad thing about it was that it allowed all sorts of privileged people to ignore their own privilege because they also had a non-privileged identity to claim: woman, incest survivor, etc.
About the same time that "identity politics" emerged, I noticed that the phrase "political correctness" had escaped the limited confines of the Marxist circles and made its way into the general discourse of college campuses. This was not purely coincidental; it developed a new meaning, tied to identity politics. Among Marxists, political correctness referred to avoidance of language that was ambiguous about the particulars of one's theory, strategy and tactics. Did you use the word "race" when you believed that oppression was "national"? A no-no. Did you quote Fidel or Che? The only acceptable sources were Marx and Engels. (Also Mao or Enver Hoxha, depending on your circle.) Some folks defied the plain meanings of words, preferring, for example, to say that two positions were "dialectically opposed" when they clearly meant "diametrically opposed." They had to get a reference to dialectics in, even if they showed their failure to understand that idea just by using its name.
The political correctness of the early '80's was much more widely understood. If it, too, delineated an "in" group, that group was much larger than the circles of the '70's. Again, it was about avoidance of language, but this time it was about language that was offensive to the "groups" I referenced above. It was politically correct to say "Native American" instead of Indian, and to say "African American" instead of Black. It was politically correct to use people-first terminology instead of "handicapped." The good thing was that it is evidently preferable to avoid labelling people with terms that they regard as misleading or insulting! I think that is just elementary courtesy. The bad thing about this political correctness was its failure to go beyond asking people what label they prefer. By focusing on names, the "political correctness" of the '80's reinforced the idea that recognizing these identities would somehow do away with injustice. It obscured the differences between systematic racism and other kinds of obstacles to equality.
Now it is 2016 and the terms "identity politics" and "political correctness" have come to play a giant part in the discourse of the racist right. Their meanings have clearly shifted, too. During this last presidential election campaign "identity politics" came to refer to any recognition that there is inequality in America. More particularly, when a speaker disparages "identity politics" it means they are angry that people whom they don't consider human want to be treated as human. Look at the people who criticize what they call "identity politics" and what they are calling out. It is always about the rights of a group that is denied their rights. Call attention to disparate police violence against people of color? Identity politics, shut up! Call attention to homophobia? Identity politics, shut up!
The same thing is true of the new use of political correctness. Call out a presidential candidate for boasting about his sexual assaults? Political correctness, shut up! Ask a presidential candidate to clarify his claims that Mexicans are rapists? Political correctness, shut up! The use of the term "political correctness" as a pejorative has morphed: instead of being content with mocking common courtesy its critics have graduated to mocking humanity and mocking truth. If I ask them to treat others as humans and to speak truth, then, in their eyes, I deserve to be attacked for being "politically correct."
Language matters. That is the reason that homophobes prefer to speak of their "religious freedom" to cruelly discriminate against others. That is the reason that racists piously respond that "all lives matter" when confronted about the horrors of police impunity in encounters with people of color. It should be clear to everybody that they don't care about the teachings of their gospels. They are utterly transparent in their failure to value all lives equally. They choose phrases that mask and prettify their intentions.
As a society we want a politics that treats all of us with respect, not one that categorizes us. That is why the enemies of respect prefer to dismiss the movements of oppressed people as "identity politics." As a society we want creative and free expression, not some arbitrary rules about acceptable language. That is why the enemies of freedom prefer to dismiss calls for humanity as "political correctness."
Don't believe me? Look at the ferocious venom our racist right reserves for the idea that every human deserves to be cherished. Listen to the way they hurl the expression "snowflake" at young people with whom they disagree. It is their ultimate insult. And they have so succeeded in this that people all over the political spectrum agree, and use this in the same way!
We cannot allow ourselves to believe that the worst weakness is the demand to be seen and heard. Stop using any of these phrases. They are ways of capturing our minds. During the presidential campaign the racist right was insistent on identifying the international enemies of freedom as "Islamic." We resisted that characterization. We can also resist their insistence that elementary decency be demonized.
No comments:
Post a Comment