[[link removed]]

STUDY: TO US PAPERS, ‘IDENTITY POLITICS’ IS MOSTLY A WAY TO SNEER
AT THE LEFT  
[[link removed]]


 

Olivia Riggio
September 18, 2024
FAIR
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Without specificity in definition and equal application to either
party’s politicking based on identities, “identity politics”
becomes yet another dog-whistle used against those who simply dare to
not be white or male. _

,

 

Following the Democratic National Convention, the NEW YORK TIMES’
“Critic’s Notebook” (8/23/24
[[link removed]])
published an analysis of Vice President Kamala Harris’ pantsuit
choices during the event.

“For the most important speech of her life, the presidential
candidate dressed for more than identity politics,” read the
subhead.

“In the end, she did not wear a white suit,” the piece began,
later explaining the linkage between the color and its symbolism of
women’s solidarity. Fashion critic Vanessa Friedman outlined the
significance of Harris’ navy blue suit choice in accepting the
Democratic nomination.

[New York Times: Kamala Harris, Outfitting a New Era]

_The NEW YORK TIMES (8/23/24
[[link removed]])
said that Kamala Harris came to her convention speech “dressed for
more than identity politics.”_

“Ms. Harris made a different choice. One that didn’t center her
femininity—or feminism (that’s a given)—but rather her ability
to do the job,” Friedman wrote, as if those points were mutually
exclusive.

A politician’s fashion choices are undoubtedly symbolic. Friedman
has also recently published pieces about Donald Trump’s use of his
suits to define patriotism (6/14/24
[[link removed]]),
JD Vance’s use of his beard to portray traditional masculinity
(7/18/24
[[link removed]])
and Tim Walz’s use of rugged clothing to define his “regular
guy” image (8/22/24
[[link removed]]).

In each of these instances, the white male politician is using his
style to communicate a message about his—and his
constituents’—identities. But only in the piece about Harris’
clothing choice does Friedman use the term “identity politics,”
lauding her for not defaulting to “when in doubt, women wear
white!”

In fact, a FAIR study of US newspapers found the overwhelming majority
of times the vague term “identity politics” was mentioned, it was
referring to Democrats and the left.

WHAT IS IDENTITY POLITICS?

Even though the right has taken to derogatorily using it against the
left, “identity politics” is commonly understood to mean forming
political alliances based on identities like religion, ethnicity and
social background.

That definition applies equally to MAGA Republicans’ explicit or
implicit appeals to white
[[link removed]], Christian
[[link removed]] and
traditional gender identities
[[link removed]] as
it does to the left’s emphasis on ethnic, sexual and religious
minorities. The DNC and RNC’s pep-rally atmospheres are both
designed to project unity under political—and
politic_ized_—identities.

But a FAIR study of newspaper coverage during the weeks of the
Republican and Democratic national conventions found that news media
largely peddle the right-wing application of the term. A search of
Nexis’ “US Newspapers” database for the phrase “identity
politics” during July 14–21 and August 18–25  turned up 52
articles (some of which were reprints in multiple outlets) that
related to the major parties, their conventions, and their
presidential and vice presidential candidates.  Forty-five of those
articles used the term to refer to Democrats and the left, four used
the term to refer to Republicans and the right, and three referred to
both groups.

A NEW YORK TIMES opinion piece by Maureen Dowd (8/23/24
[[link removed]])
was one of the 45 articles that associated “identity politics”
with Democrats and/or the left. It applauded Harris for how little she
discussed her identity, except for promising that she’d sign a bill
restoring abortion rights.

“Aside from that, she barely talked about gender and didn’t dwell
on race, shrewdly positioning herself as a Black female nominee
ditching identity politics,” Dowd wrote.

Harris “dwelling” on her race and gender—as someone who would be
the first woman, first South Asian and second Black president in the
country’s history—would have been poor judgment, Dowd implied.

[Arizona Republic: Arizona mom shares 'everyday Americans' struggles
at RNC: What she said]

_“While the left is trying to divide us with identity politics,”
the ARIZONA REPUBLIC (7/16/24
[[link removed]])
quoted an RNC speaker, “we believe that America is always, and
should be, one nation under God.”_

However, in two Arizona publications (ARIZONA REPUBLIC, 7/16/24
[[link removed]], 7/19/24
[[link removed]]; ARIZONA
DAILY STAR, 7/20/24), another woman emphasized her lived experience as
“a single mother” to uphold her support of Trump—without the
term “identity politics” being assigned to her. Instead, Sara
Workman, one of the “everyday Americans” who spoke at the RNC, was
quoted assigning it to Democrats:

“While the left is trying to divide us with identity politics, we
are here tonight because we believe that America is always, and should
be, one nation under God,” she said.

The irony of criticizing “identity politics” while invoking a line
in the Pledge of Allegiance that was added to the oath
[[link removed]] in
1954 to assert the country’s Christian supremacy was lost on the
outlets that published this quote.

Similarly, a piece referencing Vance playing up his “working-class
roots” and “rags-to-riches” upbringing not only didn’t
acknowledge the “identity politics” in such a presentation, but
granted space to another Republican source to use the label
derogatorily against the left (SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, 7/17/24
[[link removed]]).
RNC committee member Harmeet Dhillon, was quoted saying Trump’s
decision to pick the white, male Vance instead of “a woman or a
minority” was “a sign of maturity and confidence in our party
being able to succeed based on our ideas, not on identity politics.”

THE ‘BALANCE’ DOUBLE STANDARD

Another concerning idea echoed in the press was the assertion that
Harris, simply by being a woman of color, would alienate white male
voters, and therefore _thank goodness_ she chose a white man as her
running mate!

[Detroit Free Press: COMMENTARY 5 things Harris can do at DNC to make
this Michigan never-Trump Republican vote Democrat]

_In the DETROIT FREE PRESS (8/22/24
[[link removed]]),
a Republican wrote that Harris needed to “commit to ending identity
politics” to get her vote._

In a commentary for the DETROIT FREE PRESS, headlined “Five Things
Harris Can Do at DNC to Make This Michigan Never-Trump Republican Vote
Democrat” (8/22/24
[[link removed]]),
guest columnist Andrea Bitley listed “commit[ting] to ending
identity politics” as one of her stipulations. It’s “historic”
that Harris is a “woman of color,” Bitley wrote, then connected
that to an important qualification: “However, returning to the heart
and soul of democracy and broad-based politics that don’t play
favorites with niche groups will make casting my vote easier.”

Bitley’s implication is that being Black, South Asian or a woman
itself requires special effort to avoid pandering to identity
groups—and ignores Donald Trump’s playing favorites with the
extremely niche group of billionaires he counts himself among.

Before Harris officially became the Democratic nominee and announced
Walz as her running mate, the LEXINGTON HERALD LEADER (7/21/24
[[link removed]])
in Kentucky discussed the possibility of another white man, Kentucky
Gov. Andy Beshear, becoming the VP pick.

“If you’re looking to balance a ticket that’s headed by the
first Black and South Asian woman presidential nominee, then having a
young white guy provides pretty good balance,” Al Cross, longtime
Kentucky political journalist and observer, told the outlet. He added,
“We live in an era of identity politics, and his identity is a white
guy.”

The NEW YORK TIMES (7/21/24
[[link removed]])
also reported:

Well aware of the cold reality of identity politics, Democrats assume
that if Ms. Harris, the first Black and Asian American woman to be
vice president, were nominated to the presidency, she would most
likely balance her ticket with a white man.

In other words, the press regularly advises Harris to avoid identity
politics at all costs—except when the identity being favored is
white male.

These pieces did at least acknowledge that white and
male _are _identities, but didn’t acknowledge the double-standard
of Harris being called to “balance” her ticket out with a white
man, when the last 43 of 46 presidencies have been held by white men
with white male running mates
[[link removed]].

BOTH-SIDESING

[Boston Globe: America Is at a Turning Point, Yet Again]

_Some say Donald Trump is a “threat to democratic values”; others
say “identity politics” (and federal regulation) are the “true
threat” (BOSTON GLOBE, 7/21/24
[[link removed]])._

Meanwhile, the BOSTON GLOBE equated the dangers of “identity
politics” to Trump’s threat to democracy. Guest columnist (and
former Washington bureau chief) David Shribman
[[link removed]] (7/21/24)
[[link removed]] quoted
Hamilton College political scientist Philip Klinkner:

The Republicans believe the country is halfway to the Soviet gulag.
The Democrats believe the country is halfway to Adolf Hitler. They
both see this election in apocalyptic terms.

Shribman continued:

Both sides—those who believe Donald Trump represents a threat to
democratic values, and those who believe that identity politics and an
inclination toward a highly regulatory federal government are the true
threat—consider this year’s election a moment that will define the
country for a generation.

People on the left believe Trump’s America is “halfway to Adolf
Hitler” because many of his supporters are literal neo-Nazis
[[link removed]].
They believe Trump is a threat to democratic values because he
encouraged his followers to carry out a deadly insurrection on the
Capitol after he could not accept that he lost the 2020 election, and
he is preparing to overturn
[[link removed]] the
2024 vote.

People on the right see the US as “halfway to the Soviet gulag”
because…Democrats want you to acknowledge slavery and respect
they/them pronouns?

This false equivalence is dangerous, and it is difficult to understand
how white supremacy, a worldview based entirely on race, is not
considered “identity politics” in this case.

RARE MENTIONS OF THE RIGHT

[NYT: On Cat Ladies, Mama Bears and ‘Momala’]

_Tressie McMillan Cottom (NEW YORK TIMES, 8/19/24
[[link removed]]):
J.D. Vance’s evasions on his “childless cat ladies” line
“reveal the wink-wink of today’s egregious right-wing identity
politics and point to the ways that this election’s identity
politics might play out through innuendo and metaphor.”_

Out of the four articles that used the term “identity politics” to
refer to the right, three were from NEW YORK TIMES writers.

In an opinion piece for the NEW YORK TIMES, Tressie McMillan Cottom
(8/19/24
[[link removed]])
referred to the “egregious right-wing identity politics” in the
context of Vance’s uncreative—and Gileadean
[[link removed]]—attacks
on “childless cat ladies.” The TIMES‘ TV critic (7/19/24
[[link removed]])
also referenced the performance of macho male identity politics at the
testosterone-laden displays at the RNC, saying, “This is what male
identity politics looks like.”

Lydia Polgreen interrogated the derogatory application of the term
“DEI candidate” to Harris, arguing that if Harris is a “DEI
candidate,” so is Vance (NEW YORK TIMES, 7/21/24
[[link removed]]).
Polgreen argued:

All politics is, at some level, identity politics—the business of
turning identity into power, be it the identity of a candidate or
demographic group or political party or region of the country.

Pointing out that white _is _a race, male _is _a gender and
identity plays into _all_ politics are arguments missing from most
of the coverage, which failed to truly interrogate what
people _really _mean when they apply these terms only to people of
color and other minorities.

The fourth piece applying “identity politics” to the right came
from the right-wing WASHINGTON TIMES (7/16/24
[[link removed]])
under a headline declaring that Black Republican speakers at the RNC
“Put Identity Politics to Rest”—after leaning on their family
“histories” that included slavery, cotton picking and “the  Jim
Crow South.” “That was where the identity politics ended,” the
paper assured readers.

INVISIBLE IDENTITIES

Race theorists like john a. powell
[[link removed]] have
long interrogated the idea of whiteness and maleness being treated as
“invisible” defaults:

White people have the luxury of not having to think about race. That
is a benefit of being white, of being part of the dominant group. Just
like men don’t have to think about gender. The system works for you,
and you don’t have to think about it…. The Blacks have race; maybe
Latinos have race; maybe Asians have race. But they’re just white.
They’re just people. That’s part of being white.

[San Diego Union Tribune: Biden Is Gone. What Is Next?]

_Harris as vice president is a “symptom” of the Democrats’
“perspective…based on identity politics.” (SAN DIEGO UNION
TRIBUNE, 7/21/24
[[link removed]])._

This belief that the normal, default human form is white and male is
what allows people like Tom Shepard, a longtime San Diego political
consultant quoted in the SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE (7/21/24
[[link removed]]),
to imply that Harris being chosen for the 2020 ticket as vice
president is merely a symptom of the Democratic Party’s embrace of
identity politics, and one of the “fundamental problems” with the
party’s policy:

The Democratic Party, for all of its strengths, has over the last
several decades kind of developed a perspective that is based on
identity politics, and the reason that Kamala Harris was on the
Democratic ticket as vice president is, at least in part, a symptom of
that approach.

It’s the same reason why terms like Critical Race Theory (CRT),
Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI), “diversity hire” and
“identity politics” are used derogatorily against people of color,
women and sexual minorities, disabled people and other
underrepresented groups that dare to attempt to achieve equity with
white men (COUNTERSPIN, 8/8/24
[[link removed]]; FAIR.ORG, 7/10/21
[[link removed]]).

Without specificity in definition and equal application to either
party’s politicking based on identities, “identity politics”
becomes yet another dog-whistle used against those who simply dare to
not be white or male.

_Olivia Riggio is a journalist and FAIR author who became FAIR's
administrative and fundraising director in April 2021. You can follow
her on Twitter @oliviariggio97._

_FAIR, the national media watch group, has been offering
well-documented criticism of media bias and censorship since 1986. We
work to invigorate the First Amendment by advocating for greater
diversity in the press and by scrutinizing media practices that
marginalize public interest, minority and dissenting viewpoints. As an
anti-censorship organization, we expose neglected news stories and
defend working journalists when they are muzzled. As a progressive
group, FAIR believes that structural reform is ultimately needed to
break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent
public broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of
information._

* identity politics
[[link removed]]
* Racism
[[link removed]]
* patriarchy
[[link removed]]
* mainstream media
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]