As I noted last week, we are an ideologically cohesive party. We have near unanimous agreement in support of income equality, justice for all, a sane immigration policy, and respect for women. Yet we are riven by internal divisions. How can that be? And the answer is simple:
Priorities.
The hardcore Bernie Sanders dead-enders—the ones who insist on waging jihad against the party and its mainstream liberal adherents—are undying in their belief that income equality can solve all ills. Dubbed “alt-left” on Twitter (quickly replacing “Bernie Bro” as the preferred moniker), this crowd has resorted to using words like “identity politics” and “political correctness” to strike at their mainstream liberal detractors. Yup, they are adopting left-wing critiques right out of the conservative movement’s playbook.
Several days ago, the Weekly Standard had a thought experiment that is directly on point with our internal battle:
Would you trade aggressive immigration restrictions and enforcement for single-payer healthcare?
The fact that liberals would answer that question differently is exactly why we have our own internal war to fight. And yes, there is a right answer—and a wrong one.
We just saw this dynamic in action. Sanders originally hedged on endorsing Jon Ossoff in the GA-06 special election, saying he wasn’t sure the Democrat was “progressive.” His supporters had Sanders’ back: Ossoff was a corporatist!
Days later, Sanders enthusiastically embraced Heath Mello in the Omaha mayor’s race. This was okay, despite Mello’s past support for abortion restrictions, because he was fighting for a “big tent” Democratic Party. Suddenly, tolerance that wasn’t brooked for Ossoff was demanded for Mello. Why did some liberals put “identity politics” ahead of winning? Jane Sanders literally tweeted that critics of her husband’s endorsement of Mello were practicing “political correctness”.
While at first blush this appears like rank hypocrisy, the underlying dynamic is clear: for the alt-left, “big tent” means accepting Democrats that shit on core Democratic groups, or those of us practicing “identity politics”—so long as their core issue of income inequality remains front and center.
For the rest of us, we can never have a unified movement until the people who make up our base are safe and secure in their daily life. That means:
- Women don’t have their pussies grabbed by asshole men. Trump wasn’t going to the unemployment line to grab women’s pussies. And women in the workplace are literally dealing with sexual harassment, assault, and other forms of aggression. Income equality will not fix this. Period.
- Black kids aren’t being murdered by police, treated differently in courts. Sandra Bland had a good job when she was arrested and jailed (and murdered) for being black. Henry Louis Gates had a pretty decent job as a fucking Harvard professor when he was arrested for walking into his own goddam house in Cambridge. Racism cuts deeper than economics.
- Latino and Asian families aren’t being torn apart by immigration authorities. The treatment of immigrant communities has little to do with money, and once again, with a toxic mix of racism and xenophobia.
- Muslim and Jewish people aren’t being shot at, their places of worship and holy sites desecrated. Even the schools where their children learn are being targeted by right-wing assholes.
Mostly white and male Christian or atheist progressives have no fucking idea what it’s like to live with this oppressive daily pressure. They might be a little out of sorts over Trump’s presidency, but they and the people they love will never be specifically targeted the way the groups above will.
And that’s what “identity politics” is all about—standing with our most marginalized allies, and making sure their immediate safety is protected and guaranteed. Because yes, while everyone wants to see an economically equitable world, that’s a secondary consideration when your children are being murdered, your places of worship are being vandalized, your families are being torn asunder, and your own bodies are being violated.
And that’s the challenge the white male progressive crowd faces. If it rallies around those powerless communities and uses their privilege to empower their natural allies, we can then make a serious dent on these issues of racism and bigotry. And if those marginalized communities are suddenly not in the margins, they will be natural allies on broader issues of economic equality and climate change.
Or put another way, do white men want women and marginalized communities on their side, or do they really want to turn this into a pissing match over “identity politics” and shit? Because the reality is, those white male progressives are a small minority in our movement. They are about to learn what it’s like to be in the margins of a big political movement. And they have two options ahead of them: 1.) solidify their marginalization on the fringes, or 2.) become a genuine ally in the broader fight—one that will benefit us all in the long run.
Finally, I need to make this one personal point: in the 15 years I’ve run this site, I’ve never made a big deal out of being Latino. That has ended. You are seeing “Latino Kos” loud and proud from here on out, and I will have zero tolerance for asshole borderline racists who pretend to be progressives. If you really want to say the words “identity politics” in a demeaning way, go the fuck away, or I will make you go away. If you really want to argue that fighting for women’s rights or anti-racism or bigotry is “political correctness,” then go the fuck away. And if you ever say anything, like the one commenter who said about a black contributor, ”I am a recovering racist, but she is challenging my sobriety” (with several recommends, as a bonus!), then understand that my patience will be zero.
Many of you need to learn and shut up when people from marginalized communities are telling you the pain they are suffering, the fears they face, and the challenges that they must endure. And if you come from a privileged background, you need to take those words at heart, listen, consider, digest, and then figure out how you can constructively be part of that conversation and solution.
So again, ask yourself: would you trade universal health care for Trump’s glorious wall and enhanced hiring of jackbooted government ICE thugs to raid homes, schools, and workplaces? And if the answer is “yes”—then please, show yourself out the door.