The problem with saying that “identity politics” is divisive is the assumption that the working class is entirely or even mostly made up of able-bodied cishet white men.Posted: 2016-12-30 | |
It ignores the fact that people of color are more likely to be proletarians in the West and the fact that the vast majority of the global working class are people of color.
It ignores the fact that women are more likely to be proletarians and the fact that women are often required to preform unpaid domestic labor.
It ignores the fact that gender, romantic, and sexual minorities are more likely to be proletarians and all too often can find themselves cast out into homelessness at a young age, or face even worse persecution.
It ignores the fact that the disabled and neurodivergent people are more likely to be proletarians and are often punished for their conditions by medical expenses.
Talking feminism, anti-racism, decolonization, GSRM liberation, and anti-ableism is not divisive. If anything, the real divisiveness comes from people who demand that these issues be dropped or ignored in favor of focusing on the issues of able-bodied cishet white men.
I'm not denying that there are able-bodied, neurotypical cishet white men who suffer under the domination of capital. There are many of them, and they belong in our movement too. But we should not be throwing our millions of comrades who are women, people of color, GSRM, disabled, or neurotypical under the bus just for the sake of trying to appeal to those people.