[wbsss4412]

Do you have particular examples of identity being a core part of the issue?

I see people complain about identity politics all the time, but when it comes down to it, the individual issues that fall under that umbrella are things that people deeply care about and can’t just be dismissed.

[kenjackson]

I think almost all issues with any controversy seem to have identity at the crux. This is why there is virtually no principled consistency. That's why you have Defund the Police and then Defund the FBI. Or "athletes get paid too much" and "it's a free market". Or "go back where you came from" and "go back where you came from". Or "my body my choice" and "my body my choice".

If I woke up tomorrow I think the supporters of each of these could just about flip and they'd be no worse off from a principled perspective. They just need to make sure those others in their identity group are on the same page.

[wbsss4412]

How is identity at the crux of “defund the FBI”?

“Identity politics” are generally considered to be issues related to things like race, gender, social class, etc

[kenjackson]

Yes, view identity as the group of people you identify with. It's a cross section of race/gender/social class/political party/geography/etc... "Defund the FBI" is just a reaction of a specific identity group -- largely the same group that hated people saying Defund the Police, fought for Blue Lives Matter, etc...

[wbsss4412]

You’re confusing partisanship with identity.

I realize it’s seemingly a small difference or amounts to the same thing, but not making the distinction really muddies the conversation.

[kenjackson]

I view them as different in that this is about your personal identity. An example, is if a Republican Governor commits a crime -- should I care? Not really, it doesn't change the party platform. Maybe a minor impact associated with their chance at re-election. But when your identity is caught up with party, now you start to defend the governer purely because of their party. It's not simply a party affiliation, but your identity.

This is much larger and intractable than partisanship.

[wbsss4412]

I realize that, but it’s a redefinition that makes it very challenging for people engaging in fleeting internet conversations to follow the thread.

Identity politics and partisanship have fairly well defined meanings within political discourse, and so when you say “identity is the problem” the assumption for many people is that you’re talking about issues like BLM, trans issues, etc.

[Swizec]

People voting D or R because that’s their tribe rather than because they want those policies is an example.

I know a lot of people who vote without even really reading what’s on the ballot. They just go with whatever option has D next to it. Others do the same but for R.

Personally I can’t vote so it’s mostly an interesting phenomenon to observe

[wbsss4412]

I feel like calling that “identity” muddles the term, as identity politics generally refers to categories like race and gender, and maps to feelings on issues such as abortion and the Black Lives Matter movement.

To attempt to be helpful, I’d suggest that what you’re referring to is more of an issue of uber partisanship than identity per se.

[Swizec]

Yes and uber partisanship is identity. We even call it identifying with your party affiliation.

You can see this in how people say “I am a democrat/republican”. They don’t say vote or belong to or member of, people very explicitly talk about it as an identity and both or all parties encourage that.

[wbsss4412]

It is, but is distinct from the meaning of “identity politics” and not making that distinction causes confusion.

[NaturalPhallacy]

The D vs. R tribalism is super visible if you're a G(reen).

The Ds assume I'm an R, and the Rs assume I'm a D. My voter registration says "Pacific Green" and I vote Green/Independent most of the time when possible.