Tuesday 13 November 2018

MARXISM & IDENTITY POLITICS

Conservative ideologists often describe identity politics and its poster concept “privilege theory” as cultural Marxism. But is privilege theory a child of Marxism.  Probably not. 

The focus of privilege theory is the individual.   Mark Fisher, the Marxist oriented author of Capitalist Realism stated that “Anyone encountering or reading material on privilege theory will be struck by the overwhelming focus on the individual—the many confessionals of the “privileged” describing how they came to terms with their privileges or the exhorting of others to check theirs.” There is also a highly religious element  - the so-called privileged are expected to confess their privilege in the same way that the religious are expected to confess their sins but just like the religious can never be completely absolved of their sin the so-called privileged can never be absolved of the (white) colour of their skin.  As Mark Fisher says respecting the identarians “The more guilt the better. People must feel bad: it is a sign that they understand the gravity of things. It’s OK to be class-privileged if you feel guilty about privilege and make others in a subordinate class position to you feel guilty too. You do some good works for the poor, too, right?”

Mark Fisher further comments “Privilege theory also expresses a form of elitism—we are all seen to be inescapably bound to innate bias and oppressive ideas except the theorists themselves who have been able to reach a degree of enlightened self-awareness. Those who see us all as prisoners of our unearned advantages can only ever expect to persuade a minority to acknowledge their privileges. In this way, despite superficially appearing to be rooted in material reality, privilege theory actually collapses into idealism—seeing ideas as the crucial factor. That is why for privilege theory the key focus is education and awareness.”

In many respects identity politics which produces the notion of white male privilege is philosophically closer to fascism than liberalism or socialism.  Paxton, an author of several books, including " The Anatomy of Fascism" (Vintage, 2005), said fascism is based more on feelings than philosophical ideas. In his 1988 essay "The Five Stages of Fascism," published in 1998 in the Journal of Modern History, he defined seven feelings that act as "mobilizing passions" for fascist regimes. They are: 1. The primacy of the group. Supporting the group feels more important than maintaining either individual or universal rights.  2. Believing that one's group is a victim. This justifies any behavior against the group's enemies.  3.  The belief that individualism and liberalism enable dangerous decadence and have a negative effect on the group.  4.  A strong sense of community or brotherhood. This brotherhood's "unity and purity are forged by common conviction, if possible, or by exclusionary violence if necessary." 5.  Individual self-esteem is tied up in the grandeur of the group. Paxton called this an "enhanced sense of identity and belonging." 6.  Extreme support of a "natural" leader, who is always male. This results in one man taking on the role of national savior and 7. "The beauty of violence and of will, when they are devoted to the group's success in a Darwinian struggle," Paxton wrote. The idea of a naturally superior group or, especially in Hitler's case, biological racism, fits into a fascist interpretation of Darwinism. 

Identity politics shares items 1 to 5 to varying degrees.  So it is not surprising that identity politics shares with fascism a deep loathing for the Enlightenment.  

No comments:

Post a Comment