When progressive identity politics hurt minorities and social justice
Illiberal and dogmatic trends in progressivism are destructive
(Defining progressivism for this post: There always is a debate about term definitions. For this post, I use progressivism in its current form to mean the extreme portion of the left that promotes postmodernist identity politics, Robin DiAngelo and Ibram Kendi, DEI and critical race theory, Defund the Police, etc. University of Chicago professor and cultural critic Jerry Coyne, who uses the same definition, also uses the term “illiberal left.”)
.
Introduction
Anyone, including within the left, who criticizes aspects of progressivism and identity politics will invariably be accused by some within the illiberal left as being rightwing (Read my earlier post on logical fallacies). I thus start by pointing out that I am a feminist raised by a League of Women Voters sex equity pioneer. I support civil rights and was an early supporter of gay marriage. I endorse certain forms of affirmative action, recognizing the importance of racial and other identity diversity in schools, organizations, and leadership. I am a proponent of voting rights and oppose voter suppression and gerrymandering. Some of these positions originate in traditional progressivism.
I also support freedom of speech and expression and viewpoint diversity and, as with many on the left, find the extreme, illiberal, and dogmatic elements within today’s progressivism and identity politics to be intolerable and an embarrassment. The illiberal left demonstrates that dogmatism and authoritarianism can appear in both the far right and far left, and are not primarily matters of politics but psychology.
How Extremes within the Right and Left Mirror Each Other
Progressivism is a small predominantly white and culturally elite movement that does not represent or promote the views and needs of most minorities. Progressives make up only 6 percent of the country and 12 percent of the Democratic party, and it is the only part of the Democratic party that is majority white. Progressives are disproportionately economically privileged and university-educated.
Many progressive policies, such as defunding the police and abolishing prisons, counter the views of most minorities in the country. For examples, most racial minorities, including 81 percent of blacks and 83 percent of Hispanics, want the same or more police in their neighborhoods; 63 percent of Latinos in California are against undocumented migrant workers; and a large majority of all races are against race-based affirmative action in job hiring. A recent report showed that, far from increasing diversity, NPR’s move to promote progressive identity politics in its programming made its listening audience even more white and monolithic.
The following are 12 ways current progressive identity politics hurt minorities and social justice,
.
1 It silences, disregards, and belittles alternative perspectives, including those from minorities
Contemporary progressivism too often embraces illiberalism, employing censorship and punishment to impose ideological and political conformity. While many progressives claim to amplify minority voices, they often only uplift those who align with their beliefs. Pushing back against this trend, black Harvard law professor and civil rights activist Randall Kennedy writes in the below essay about the importance of free speech for minorities.
Free Speech Aids Racial Justice. Activists Must Defend It. | by Randall Kennedy
.
2 It promotes groupthink
The illiberal and censorious tendencies within progressivism foster groupthink and echo chambers, which are detrimental in numerous ways. The open exchange of ideas, including dissent, is essential for advancement, growth, and the generation of productive solutions. As it is destructive to organizations and groups, groupthink poses a danger to the progressive movement itself.
"Do Progressives Have a Free Speech Problem?" by Michelle Goldberg
What is groupthink?: a destructive byproduct of the desire for group cohesion
.
3 It promotes a false portrayal of minorities
Many progressives and ideologically biased media outlets mislead fellow progressives and the public by presenting distorted representations of minority perspectives. The viewpoints within minority communities vary, and most do not adhere to progressive ideologies. However, many media and progressive organizations depict progressivism as the predominant and “authentic” minority perspective. Such disinformation and misrepresentation are always destructive.
.
4 It is elitist and separated from most minorities
A significant portion of today's progressive identity politics and social justice activism is confined to the ivory tower of academic ideas, detached from the realities and sensibilities of most minorities, the working class, and the poor. It often fixates on obscure postmodernist theories, esoteric social justice jargon, enforcing ideological and language purity and virtue signaling far removed from the daily struggles of these communities. Activists who use the latest jargon publicly signal their elite status and privilege. It is ironic and condescending that a predominantly white movement presumes what minorities should think.
Why are progressive movements so elitist? by Julian Adorney
Luxury Beliefs: an interview with psychologist Rob Henderson
.
5 It presents an oversimplified perspective of the world
Individuals and groups are categorized by current progressivism as either oppressed or oppressors, overlooking their unique complexities. The realities of our world, societies, oppression, bigotry, and people are far more intricate than what can be encapsulated by such simplistic categorizations.
.
6 It is racist
Progressive identity politics purports to combat racism and other forms of bigotry, while categorizing and evaluating individuals based on their skin color. They advocate that the worth of one's opinions and the significance of one's voice should not be determined by one’s character or merit, but solely by skin color. Defining any race, ethnicity, nationality, or large group as uniformly "all this" or "all that" is a simplistic and ignorant form of stereotyping that contradicts the goals of social justice. Teaching the youth to primarily judge others based on their skin color and other immutable characteristics, and framing racial relations as an “us versus them” zero-sum game, is dangerous for our future.
.
7 It promotes antisemitism and bigotry against other ethnic minorities
The progressive portrayal of Jews as privileged oppressors and as part of the 'white supremacy' perpetuates age-old anti-Semitic stereotypes, contributing to the widespread anti-semitism evident on many college campuses.
Its portrayal of successful Asians, light-skinned Middle Easterners and Hispanics as white or “white adjacent” is ignorant and offensive to many in those groups. Chinese American author Patricia Pan Connor writes, “Calling Asians ‘White Adjacent’ is racist and insulting. The idea that Asian Americans are too successful to be persons of color assumes success is a ‘white’ trait.”
"America’s Perfect Anti-Jewish Storm: Anti-Zionism and Critical Race Theory " by Russell Shalev
"Calling Asians White Adjacent is Racist and Insulting" by Patricia Pan Connor
.
8 Its guilt-based approach is counterproductive to social justice
Progressivism’s guilt-based social justice techniques, such as labeling all whites racist and white supremacy, have a poor record of uniting people for social justice. Anne Schneider, a political science professor and author of (Dis)continuing Racial Inequality, writes, “We need a unifying strategy, not a divisive and segregated strategy; we need ‘we’ working together in multi-racial groups as advocates for justice.” Kenneth Christiansen, a religion and sociology professor and longtime social justice activist, writes, “Persons who see themselves as assets that can bring about needed positive changes will accomplish much more for the common good than persons who are overwhelmed by feelings of guilt.”
Studies have repeatedly shown that Robin DiAngelo-style antiracism trainings not only don’t work but makes race problems worse. Making training attendees focus on race often makes them more racist. Mandatory training hasn’t increased diversity and often decreases it.
“Why Diversity Programs Fail: And What Works Better": Harvard Business Review
.
9 It creates strife and division in organizations and communities
Progressive identity politics encourages tribalism and polarization, deepening the divides among people. Through the use of public call-outs, shaming tactics, rigid dogma, censorship, and primarily defining individuals by their immutable characteristic, it breeds internal conflict within groups, including those aligned with the political left. It alienates and pushes away would-be allies. This all sets back the cause of social justice.
"How Meltdowns Brought Progressive Groups to a Standstill" by Ryan Grim
.
10 It promotes harmful victimhood mentalities
Progressive social justice activists have created a new caste system where those who deem themselves most “marginalized” are morally and socially superior to others. Viewing one’s identity primarily and inescapably as that of a victim is mentally unhealthy and dysfunctional, contributing to depression, anxiety, and other disorders. Teaching children a victim mentality and to view the world and people through a binary victim versus oppressor lens is a form of child abuse that sets them up for a lifetime of failure, unhappiness, and unhealthy relationships.
.
11 It undermines science, reason, and critical thinking
Certain progressive identity politics theories, notably critical race theory, openly challenge Enlightenment principles like reason, logic, critical thinking, and science. This backward stance is perilous, hindering the societal advancements crucial for all.
Social justice activists’ bizarre attacks on science and reason
.
12 Many progressive policies hurt minorities
Progressive policies, like reducing police presence and implementing irrationally lenient approaches to enforcing laws, have been linked to rising murder and crime rates, proliferation of open-air drug markets, and other urban challenges, disproportionately impacting marginalized communities. In cities like San Francisco and Seattle, discontent among voters toward progressive councils has surfaced due to concerns regarding downtown issues.