Submitted by putridcod87 in Anarchism (edited )

im not sure if i understand the difference in people into identity politics and people into intersectionalality or intersectional anti-oppression politics(/practice?). apart from the obvious recognition of multiple oppressions with the latter. and i dont get what either of these has to do with an anarchist position.

can anyone help me out?

heres a quote from the 2nd paragraph of dragonowl's 'against identity politics', then theres no real mention of intersectionality anywhere else throughout the (quite long) text.

"Intersectionality - the recognition of multiple forms or axes of oppression, with complex interacting effects - is an effective theoretical response to the problems of Identity Politics, but there have clearly been difficulties putting it into practice. In identity-linked movements, some people use intersectionality as a way to avoid the idea of principal contradiction, although occasionally in practice, people who claim to be intersectional end up treating one or two oppressions as primary. Nevertheless, the fact that not all identity-related theories or movements need to be treated as Identity Politics does not mean that the influence of Identity Politicians is trivial."

6

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

3ntb1t wrote

Pure (leftist/liberal) identity politics are pointless, it is about changing the gender demographic of the rulling class or oppressed nation spawning a new nation-state mirroring the one that allienated them.

Class reductionism itself would also be irrelevant or even reactionary, how would we reduce systemic racism to class struggle, identity problems would still persist after the revolution if not addressed. Good example is how various Marxist regimes treated homosexuals.

In case of strong material privilege, cultural oppression also weakens. But material oppresion and cultural oppression usually boost each other. It's quite a fuzzy thing and Intersectionality explains it well.

4