Identity Politics: Learnings from America

Here’s how the term “identity politics” is defined:

“A tendency for people of a particular religion, race, social background, etc., to form exclusive political alliances, moving away from traditional broad-based party politics.”

Until recently, it was almost always restricted to the oppressed (real or imagined) and minorities in the respective democracies (blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, lower castes etc). What’s changed now is that the majority have adopted the same technique. Whites in America, Hindus in India, you get the idea.

Mark Lilla, a Columbia University professor, gave a very interesting interview on the topic. His statements are in the context of America but replace certain words and you can see the parallels to India:

“As soon as you cast an issue exclusively in terms of identity you invite your adversary to do the same. Those who play one race card should be prepared to be trumped by another.”

Even if such stances were necessary at some point, they soon become the default. And such a stance is the perfect “textbook example of how not to build solidarity”. Because, very soon it alienates anyone who’s not part of that group, even those who started off being sympathetic.

Lilla goes on to say that the left leaners in the US “have convinced themselves that if they just win the presidency by getting a big turnout of their constituencies on the two coasts they can achieve their goals”. And as long as that was possible, why bother about the rest of the country or engage with people whose views they didn’t like? It reminded me of how minority/caste politics is played in India…

Lilla says that the minority groups have been splitting into sub-identities:

“Take the acronym LGBTQ as an example. It’s been fascinating to see how this list of letters has grown as each subgroup calls for recognition, rather than people in the groups finally settling on a single word as a moniker – say “gay,” or “queer,” or whatever. I don’t see how ID politics makes solidarity possible.”

See the parallel with how the triple talaq verdict at home is being called a victory for Muslim women, a sub-identity within the larger Muslim identity?

“Left identitarianism is a dead end.  It does not unify anybody and it only plays into the hands of the alt-right by inflaming passions. We need to recognize that.”

And at the end, Lilla asks the right if its movement is spiralling out of control:

“You have failed to police your side, you have sanctioned indifference to truth, fallen silent in the face of demagogues … demonized your opponents, and inflamed hysteria.”

This last point is more true of the US than India… so far. But we should take it as a warning and a learning for the right in India.