The End of Identity Liberalism

An excellent article by a liberal Columbia University professor that addresses what I think is one of the major reasons we now have a President-elect Trump:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-identity-liberalism.html?emc=eta1&_r=0

I particularly like this statement:

“National politics in healthy periods is not about ‘difference,’ it is about commonality. And it will be dominated by whoever best captures Americans’ imaginations about our shared destiny.”

 

2 thoughts on “The End of Identity Liberalism”

  1. Henry, I’m sorry, but you — or should I say Professor Lilla? — missed the mark on this one. If I recall correctly, Hillary Clinton’s tag line was “Better Together,” a sentiment that does exactly what the Prof does in his rather cloying opening: attempts to create a e pluribus unum…whereas Mr. Trump played identity politics hard and nastily, and to my chagrin, with success. The problem was, he chose only one identity to play up: white. Very very good people. Everyone else he excoriated– Latinos, Hispanics, Muslims, Jews, Chinese — very very bad. Some are even rapists and drug dealers and money grubbers propping up the international world order. Oh, sorry, there was Putin, also very very good.

    After two crushing losses to Obama the Republican post-mortem was all about creating a bigger tent, including minorities (soon to be majorities in many locales) and focusing on issues important to women, already a majority but still marginalized in the workplace. Along comes Trump, this ridiculous and scary outlier without the gravitas, interest or experience for the office, and suddenly the melting pot idea is dead. Because that clown said so?

    I realize that the full integration of many cultures into one vast American quilt is more ideal than reality. But we have certainly done a superior job to the French and Brits, who are still herding North African and east Asian minorities into the banlieus surrounding their great cities and completely ignoring them until terrorism hits. Then they ban burkinis. Policy pandering that outflanks even Trump! At least we have public policies that attempt to redress the wrongs. Not always successful. Some have been a disaster. But we keep trying.

    The vast middle of this country is still overwhelmingly white, with the exception of urban centers. Trump played perfectly to their fears, both racial and economic. To revive the canard that identity doesn’t or shouldn’t matter flies in the face of precisely how and why Trump got elected: Stick with me, white people, hear my dog whistles, and I’ll make it all go away by deporting, banning and wall-building.

    As much as I hate to say it, Hillary was a tired and tried candidate who could not galvanize anyone beyond the die-hard base. Essential segments of the population stayed home. And yet, she still won the popular vote by almost 2 million. And protests against the pres-elect continue. What does that tell you?

    To me it signals the real disconnect between the coasts and the center. That’s why we are a “divided” nation, not because people retain a sense of identity and want it reflected in public policy. If you live in Iowa where 99.9% of the populace is white, you think identity politics stink because you’ve been left behind. If you’re African-American living in Chicago, or LGBTQ living anywhere, you think they speak your truth. Where you stand still depends on where you sit.

    1. Dorrie,

      As always, I appreciate your comments. I’m no Trump fan and I certainly would not endorse any of his campaign rhetoric. However, I do think that many of his outrageous provocations come in reaction (albeit overreaction) to the constant drumbeat of identity politics and political correctness from the left. A big part of this is reflexively hurling accusations of racism, xenophobia, and countless other “isms” or “phobias” at anyone who questions any aspect of the liberal world view. This approach stifles rational and honest debate and, I believe, provides raw meat for people like Trump. (It also trivializes whatever ism or phobia is involved, thereby obscuring a focus on real instances of such bigotry.) In this regard, I think you may be overlooking Hillary’s infamous “basket of deplorables” remarks and her statement in one of the debates that, in essence, all Americans are at least somewhat racist.

      This same pattern is repeating itself after the election. For example, Trump’s proposed appointees so far seem to be drawing pretty much universal condemnation from the left as racist, antisemitic, Islamophobic, and generally dangerous fanatics–and way too white to boot. While I don’t know much about these folks, I have to think that the extreme characterizations of them must be at least a little over the top. I really wish both those on the left and the right would heed Michelle Obama’s advice to go high when the other side goes low. Unfortunately, the prevailing pattern continues to be just the opposite; when one side goes low, the other responds by going even lower.

      Best,

      Henry

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *