?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
07 February 2017 @ 07:07 am
Us & them  
“Identity politics” is redundant. Politics always divides into us & them, and the most effective kind is the establishment making it ubiquitous. (Many white people believe that only others have a race. Karl Marx built an identity politics around the one sociological concept sloppier than Race, and it worked when the State imposed it but not otherwise.)

If you don’t have that kind of control, you try to get the voters to accept that you are on their side in the relevant Us/Them distinctions. (Dolt45 got millions of working-class people to believe that he was on their side against the Big Bosses.) Here is an excellent approach to political persuasion based on that. One example is the Anheuser-Busch commercial on the Super Bowl. Not only does Trump have Budweiser arrayed against him, but they’re using good tactics.
Tags:
 
 
 
eub on February 8th, 2017 09:37 am (UTC)
You're doing the "there's always at least a little identity in politics, ergo there's always the same amount and same kind of thing. That's not right, unless you weaken it down to something like "life experience and awareness influence people's beliefs." Not the same as having your identity carry along a package of beliefs.

Take an example, where has social movement on LGBTQ tolerance come from? Not from people taking on a queer identity en masse. Not from people taking on "tolerates queer people" as their identity, either -- oh, people have that (frankly I do), but that's not the big movement. A lot of people are still the same white-Catholic-Iowan-or-whatever-it-is identity, but they're a white-Catholic-Iowan-or-whatever who learned some things and realized "there's not actually a damn thing wrong with my nephew."

There's always identity in politics, but the farther it gets towards political beliefs as a package with your identity, the harder it is to compromise or to change. And even if you don't need to compromise or change, what about that other guy?