Misidentity Politics

GEWORLD YY12

Emergence of Identity Politics

Identity politics emerged in the first half of the twentieth century during the first wave of feminism where issues such as women’s right to vote, the role of women in society, and the inferiority of women over men emerged (The Art Story, n.d.). Identity politics also became a hot topic during the times of racial discrimination such as during the time of Martin Luther King. It stems from groups of people standing firm and seeking social equality that the rest of the population get to enjoy. As times have changed, identity politics has evolved and currently we see different variations such as identity politics which stems from religion and gender preference. As long as societies advance, identities will continue to be made and as such, identity politics will keep evolving.

Jonathan Haidt’s two kinds of identity politics

Jonathan Haidt discussed two kinds of identity politics, one is good, and the other is very bad. These are commonality identity politics and common enemy identity politics.

Commonality Identity Politics

Commonality identity politics works on the notion that a group of people identifies themselves together and compares their living conditions to the rest of population and show the disparities that are happening to them. This is an organized and proper way of identity politics where there is transparency and its goal is to arrive at a compromise that will benefit the identity group. This is what Martin Luther King did and he was successfully able to fight for the rights for the Blacks. This is how political and social issues ought to be solved where negotiation is the primary motive and uses no harm to resolve problems. This however is not the kind of identity politics that is primarily seen today.

Common Enemy Identity Politics

Common enemy identity politics works on the notion that people unite to fight the common enemy. This is a very dangerous type of identity politics as it is focused on tension instead of formal discourse which will lead to the proper resolution of the object of conflict. This is a type of identity politics seen in the US where there is a lot of tensions from the Black Lives Matter Movement and the violent riots of Democrats and Republicans. In this kind of identity politics freedom of speech may become a weapon that can easily infuriate one group and cause more tension instead of try to resolve it. This may arise from the fact that people nowadays have become too sensitive to other people’s personal opinions and views.

Free Speech

With common enemy identity politics being prevalent in today’s society, free speech is under threat. We are in a society that takes things too personally and act on emotion instead of reason and restraint. Instead of having transparency in being able to say what one agrees with or disagrees with in society, people are quick to judge and put shame on those who make comments different from their beliefs. In such a society, commonality identity politics is under threat and people may just choose to remain silent and not express their personal views because of fear of getting in trouble or being looked at with scorn. With this, common enemy identity politics certainly has gone too far as it threatens democracy. Many people are ending up in violence already just like what happened recently in the US Capitol. People need to be less sensitive and try to apply commonality identity politics which is the more civilized way of solving political and social issues.

Sources

The Art Story. (n.d.) Identity politics. https://www.theartstory.org/movement/identity-politics/history-and-concepts/