Coming February 6, 2024 . . .
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
Coming February 6, 2024 . . . MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Stacey Abrams rejects Fukuyama’s negative view of so-called identity politics
She notes
The marginalized did not create identity politics: their identities have been forced on them by dominant groups, and politics is the most effective method of revolt.
Also
Fukuyama and other critics of identity politics contend that broad categories such as economic class contain multitudes and that all attention should focus on wide constructs rather than the substrates of inequality. But such arguments fail to acknowledge that some members of any particular economic class have advantages not enjoyed by others in their cohort. U.S. history abounds with examples of members of dominant groups abandoning class solidarity after concluding that opportunity is a zero-sum game. The oppressed have often aimed their impotent rage at those too low on the social scale to even attempt rebellion. This is particularly true in the catchall category known as “the working class.” Conflict between black and white laborers stretches back to the earliest eras in U.S. history, which witnessed tensions between African slaves and European indentured servants. Racism and sexism have long tarnished the heroic story of the U.S. labor movement—defects that contributed to the rise of a segregated middle class and to persistent pay disparities between men and women, disparities exacerbated by racial differences. Indeed, the American working class has consistently relied on people of color and women to push for improved status for workers but has been slow to include them in the movement’s victories.
The facile advice to focus solely on class ignores these complex links among American notions of race, gender, and economics. As Fukuyama himself notes, it has been difficult “to create broad coalitions to fight for redistribution,” since “members of the working class who also belong to higher-status identity groups (such as whites in the United States) tend to resist making common cause with those below them, and vice versa.” Fukuyama’s preferred strategy is also called into question by the success that the Democratic Party enjoyed in 2018 by engaging in what he derides as identity politics. Last year, I was the Democratic Party’s gubernatorial nominee in Georgia and became the first African American woman in U.S. history to be nominated for governor by a major political party. In my bid for office, I intentionally and vigorously highlighted communities of color and other marginalized groups, not to the exclusion of others but as a recognition of their specific policy needs. My campaign championed reforms to eliminate police shootings of African Americans, protect the LGBTQ community against ersatz religious freedom legislation, expand Medicaid to save rural hospitals, and reaffirm that undocumented immigrants deserve legal protections. I refused to accept the notion that the voters most affected by these policies would invariably support me simply because I was a member of a minority group. (The truth is that when people do not hear their causes authentically addressed by campaigns, they generally just don’t vote at all.) My campaign built an unprecedented coalition of people of color, rural whites, suburban dwellers, and young people in the Deep South by articulating an understanding of each group’s unique concerns instead of trying to create a false image of universality. As a result, in a midterm contest with a record-high turnout of nearly four million voters, I received more votes than any Democrat in Georgia’s history, falling a scant 54,000 votes shy of victory in a contest riddled with voting irregularitiesthat benefited my opponent.
Comments
Stacey Abrams rejects Fukuyama’s negative view of so-called identity politics
She notes
Also
URL:
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 10:14am
Also see the NYT review of her SOTU rebuttal by Jamelle Bouie
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/06/opinion/stacey-abrams-state-of-the-union.html
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 10:17am
all 5 opinions and Fukuyama's reply to them are here:
by artappraiser on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 12:30pm
P.S. The Foreign Affairs' twitter thread gives a link to their free access full article but also continues with more tweets summarizing the article. I noted that on the twitter thread, a commenter adds this reply which might interest Michael Wolraich:
Also, Vox did an article on Stacey Abrams' view on this as news making:
by artappraiser on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 12:43pm
Fukuyama 1: (Weekly Standard)
Fukuyama 2 (Wikipedia):
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 1:54pm
Interesting, thanks.
On Obama, my definition, I actually think of Obama as the opposite of identity politics,from the day he appeared on the national scene, a uniter not divider, in practice (i.e., the whole bi-partisan thing, his early presidential campaign attempts to fold-in evangelicals, his early dissing of extreme gay activism, etc.) and even symbolically as bi-racial global child raised in many different cultures.
Obama actually sort of helped me define my definition for me and think about the whole identity politics thing in a more refined way. I had always disliked political correctness police, one of the main reasons I became an Independent in the early 80's. But there was no big picture "aha" until Obama. And this is the main reason why I was attracted to Fukuyama stoking it all with his book, helped me pull that all together with Trump/Bannon populism style movements coming to the fore.
by artappraiser on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 2:14pm
BTW - did anyone actually read through to find Fukuyama's rebuttal/explainer at the bottom of the article?
To some extent it should be prompting a Rosanne Rosannadanna "oh. Never mind." but I'm too optimistic by half.
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 4:41pm
Yeah I've seen a lot of people doing a knee jerk straw man thing on him and this book since it came out. There's two things going on, I think. First, there's his history and the haters of things he said before, and there's those that just presume it's just more of the same. But this little foray of his is quite different from that, mho, including that he's changed a considerable number of his thoughts. And then, second, it's just the inflammatory nature of the term "identity politics" itself, and how it means different things to different people.
He could have avoided all of this by not using the term. But then he wouldn't have sold so many books and wouldn't have gotten so much buzz. Editor in him and real editor and publisher wins
by artappraiser on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 7:13pm
Actually the controversy implied by the start of this thread is faux.
I checked. Fukuyama retweeted Abrams input on Feb. 4:
and retweeted this 21 hours ago:
He is looking for scholarly discussion and refinement of theory, not playing politics.
I always thought the same mistake was made by politics-uber-alles progressive bloggers who labeled him as part and parcel of the enemy Neo-Con warmongering cabal during the Bush years because of his theoretical writings.
Of course, someone with that kind of approach is always going to find it difficult to communicate with anyone who thinks solidarity in tribal groupthink is best for the world.
by artappraiser on Sat, 02/09/2019 - 10:12pm
Obama initially downplayed identity politics. He then realized that it was pervasive.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/11/30/obamas-evolution-downplaying-identity-politics-acknowledging-prevalence-tribalism/?utm_term=.95930e2ebc8a
2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19751-2004Jul27.html
2018
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/28/politics/barack-obama-media-climate/index.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/11/30/obamas-evolution-downplaying-identity-politics-acknowledging-prevalence-tribalism/?utm_term=.95930e2ebc8a
Ta-Nehisi Coates
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/10/the-first-white-president-ta-nehisi-coates/537909/
Roxane Gay says the following about identity politics
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/dec/27/roxane-gay-writer-interview-literary-fiction-reading-diversely
After the Civil War, when blacks were struggling for acceptance, there was white backlash. Booker T Washington issued the Atlanta Comprises in 1895, promising whites that blacks would stay in menial jobs. The backlash wasn’t called due to identity politics in 1895, it was called racism.
When Martin Luther King fought Jim Crow, he was hated. J. Edgar Hoover hounded him. He was assassinated. The backlash wasn’t said to be secondary to identity politics, it was called racism.
Now Black Lives Matter is active and a new term, identity politics, is used. We no longer call it racism.when there is backlash
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 8:08pm
Fukuyama does not limit the term identity politics to the arts.
In a review of “Identity “ the following is noted:
https://datebook.sfchronicle.com/books/divided-we-stand-a-review-of-identity-by-francis-fukuyama
There is nothing new in white backlash. As I noted in one post, Booker T.Washington, Martin Luther King Jr., and a host of others had to deal with pressure from whites who thought things were moving too fast. Whites felt as threatened then as they do now. Now we try to rationalize te backlash by blaming identity politics.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 9:49pm
After reading all of this, a reminder that she lost the election for Governor of Georgia 48.8% to 50.2% with 0.9% going to the Libertarian candidate.
I found that this FiveThirtyEight article was good on that--
The first half of the article lays out stats realistically rating performance in governor's races, then it continues with going over some ground which is more to point, starting with this paragraph:
What Does It Mean That Abrams And Gillum Are Both Likely To Lose?
By Perry Bacon, Jr. and Geoffrey Skelley, Nov. 15, 2018
by artappraiser on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 12:58pm
Yeah she lost so badly that the party wants her to run for the Senate.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 8:36pm
Nothing in the post said or implied Abrams lost badly. The exact percent of the vote down to tenths are posted without any qualifier. The post clearly states, "Abrams did well." It's not a serious attempt at dialog nor a reasonable response.At best it's some sort of weird spin. In the face of such a silly comment we're left wondering what agenda are you pushing that could cause you to post this non sequitur.
by ocean-kat on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 9:01pm
Well it did bring you out of the woodwork.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 9:07pm
Again a really stupid comment as I'm not in the woodwork. I post here regularly and just had an extensive dialog with you on another thread.
by ocean-kat on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 9:12pm
I found humor in the post. After the SOTU rebuttal, I thought the Abrams buzz would be her being encouraged to run for the Senate
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/428858-senate-buzz-grows-for-abrams-after-speech-electrifies-dems
Trump was predictable
https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/exclusive-trump-stacey-abrams-running-for-senate-don-think-she-can-win/5bBQEPtlvEQlpolVXbhehP/
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 9:23pm
Don’t stress about it ocean-kat, we’re gonna be Rwanda because......identity politics.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 9:55pm
Grand theorizing is all good fine and interesting, but I for one would like to see thinkers on this also take it to specifics like this:
and similar in other countries now and in the past, like say Rwanda 1990's. At what point does identity politics become so dangerous, at what point does it become "something else" easily manipulated by demagogues.
by artappraiser on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 1:51pm
Here is an exact current instance of a demagogue ramping up the divisions,stoking it, taking the ball and running with it:
And the question to me is: how would she and others who agree with her point of view deal with someone like him doing that? Or someone on Rwandan hate radio or Russian bots for that matter.
by artappraiser on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 2:35pm
This technique is nothing new. Martin Luther King Jr was labeled an outside agitator.by clergy
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2018/01/15/martin-luther-king-jr-s-scathing-critique-of-white-moderates-from-the-birmingham-jail/?utm_term=.ef669e54c777
You respond to lies with truth, as has always even done. Criticism from Tucker Carlson is a badge of honor.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 7:30pm
If one political party elects a racist conman as President, suppresses votes, poisons a city in Michigan, and tries to prevent newly elected Governors from having any power, that party might be viewed negatively by members of the other party.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 10:23pm
Hmmmn,
None of these observations have anything to do with Fukuyama's argument that groups are doing this to make themselves more important than something they are not.
Oh yeah. More important than what.
by moat on Thu, 02/07/2019 - 10:22pm
Yesterday there was a tweetstorm over the GOP/Trump supporters' "racism" - the proof? A WaPo or similar column pointing out *1 person* said blacks took gov aid and used it to "party on a bus" and a poll showed others were concerened about illegal Mexicans taking up scarce educational and health resourcea.
So the 1st isolated rather racist contention was slathered all iver the 2nd more reasonable (even if shown ti be misguided) group to make it seem all Trump followers think blacks steal gov aid to party on a rented bus *and* irrationally hate Mexican immigrants.
This is not kosher. It's wrong, self-defeating, immoral, etc. If Fox did it to us, we'd be outraged. But I was the only one I noticed pushing back on this heinous twisting and conflagrating unrelated and misleading factoids.
Could this be part of what Fukuyama is railing against?
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 02/08/2019 - 1:43am
You are gonna need a better example than a tweetstorm. Probably Russian bots involved.
Edit to add:
There has always been backlash against black progress. Identity politics is just another example used as a diversion from addressing issues.
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 02/08/2019 - 2:08am
Can I talk to the real person now? the repeating Alexa voice is starting to drive me crazy.
And yes, we're using identity politics to label a swath of America "racist" and not deal with job/culture loss and uncertainty - a diversion from addressing "corporations not paying reasonable taxes" issue.
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 02/08/2019 - 2:21am
A large swath regard what the Republicans are selling as bigoted and racist.
Jennifer Rubin on the midterms
and
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/11/07/republicans-pay-the-price-for-racism-and-xenophobia/?utm_term=.375fb790b5ea
Tell me how the term identity politics is different from past attempts b reactionaries to slow progress?
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 02/08/2019 - 7:47am
Regarding the tweetstorm, there are examples of pro-Trump trolls stealing the identities of black people on Twitter
https://www.thedailybeast.com/digital-blackface-pro-trump-trolls-are-impersonating-black-people-on-twitter-9?ref=home
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 02/08/2019 - 8:17am