WTF is "Identity Politics?!"

Summary

In this video, creator T1J explores the concept of 'identity politics,' highlighting how certain buzzwords are often used pejoratively or in place of real arguments. T1J explains that identity politics should be a neutral term describing ideologies that focus on specific social groups. However, it's often co-opted by anti-progressive movements as inherently negative. The video stresses that identity politics is a response to genuine social injustices and is necessary to address the specific issues faced by different groups. T1J argues that dismissing identity politics without acknowledging these issues is shortsighted.

Highlights

• T1J highlights how buzzwords like 'identity politics' are often used to avoid real arguments. 🚨
• Identity politics should be neutral, focusing on groups like gender or race, but is often seen as negative. ⚖️
• Using buzzwords like 'virtue signaling' or 'SJW' can dismiss legitimate discussions. 🙄
• Social injustices are real and need targeted responses from identity politics. ✔️
• Any reduction of these discussions to mere 'tribalism' misunderstands the stakes and issues involved. 🌍

Key Takeaways

• 'Identity politics' is often misused as a negative buzzword but should be a neutral term. 🏷️
• Buzzwords can often replace real arguments, diminishing meaningful discussion. 💭
• Identity politics is a necessary response to social injustices faced by specific groups. ✊
• Ignoring the issues addressed by identity politics is like ignoring symptoms without curing the disease. 🏥
• Social issues need specialists just like in medicine or mathematics to address unique challenges. 🔍

Overview

In this thought-provoking video, T1J delves into the sometimes contentious term 'identity politics' and how it, along with other buzzwords, is often used dismissively in political discourse. The term should ideally be neutral, focusing on ideologies related to specific identities like race, gender, or sexuality, but is frequently wielded as a derogatory term by anti-progressive movements.

T1J expresses concern over how these buzzwords often substitute actual argumentation, hindering productive discussions and misunderstanding the real issues at hand. He argues that identity politics is a crucial response to genuine and persistent social injustices. It's about addressing specific needs and issues faced by marginalized groups, akin to having specialists in medical or scientific fields.

The video challenges viewers to recognize and validate the necessity of identity politics as a response to systemic inequalities. T1J calls for a more nuanced understanding of these terms and stresses the importance of maintaining focus on solving the unique problems faced by various social groups. As he wraps up, he encourages openness and understanding amidst the social debates.

Chapters

• 00:00 - 01:00: Introduction and Buzzwords The chapter discusses the speaker's personal 'bullshit alarm' that activates when certain overused buzzwords are used in conversation. These buzzwords, such as 'SJW' and 'virtue signaling,' are often employed in a way that lacks sincerity or specificity, leading the speaker to take discussions involving these terms less seriously.
• 01:00 - 02:00: The Misuse of 'Identity Politics' This chapter discusses the complexities and potential pitfalls of using descriptive terms in discussions, particularly when those terms become buzzwords with political implications. It highlights how buzzwords, like 'virtue signaling,' can be used to shut down debate and avoid substantive arguments. The chapter underscores the importance of maintaining clear and meaningful communication.
• 02:00 - 04:00: Social Issues and The Need for Identity Politics This chapter titled 'Social Issues and The Need for Identity Politics' discusses the term 'identity politics', which should ideally be a neutral term. It refers to ideologies focusing on specific groups people identify with, such as gender, race, or sexual orientation, as opposed to individual or unified group ideologies. The discussion highlights that identity politics is distinct but related to class-based politics and emphasizes the necessity for a term to define this ideology.
• 04:00 - 06:00: Resistance to Social Change The chapter 'Resistance to Social Change' explores how 'identity politics' has been co-opted by an anti-progressive movement in mainstream culture. The term is often used pejoratively, without substantiated arguments, suggesting it's bad by default. This acceptance relies on pre-existing narratives about social injustice.
• 06:00 - 08:00: The Future of Identity Politics The chapter titled 'The Future of Identity Politics' discusses the contentious nature of identity politics in contemporary society. It opens with the observation that progressives often downplay the significance of identity politics or reject its necessity altogether, especially if they do not see a need for advocacy for various social groups. If someone does not believe in the need for social group advocacy, opposition to identity politics arises naturally and doesn't require convincing arguments. The term 'identity politics' itself, ideally neutral, currently tends to carry a negative connotation, as suggested in the discussion. The chapter considers the possibility of individuals who recognize social injustices globally but still acknowledge the particular challenges faced by specific groups due to those injustices.
• 08:00 - 09:00: Conclusion and Call to Action The chapter discusses the inadequacy of generalized approaches to solve complex issues, using the analogy of specialized fields like medicine and mathematics to illustrate the necessity of specialized focus in addressing diverse problems. It emphasizes the importance of understanding that specialized knowledge is integral in developing effective solutions and highlights a call to action for acknowledging and utilizing specialized skills to address multifaceted challenges.

WTF is "Identity Politics?!" Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 So I do this thing where I have like this bullshit alarm that goes off in my head when I hear certain buzz words Hi, I'm T1j. [Twitter Voice] Follow Me but yeah, if I'm ever in a discussion with you and you unironically use certain terms I just automatically take you a little less seriously, and these are just words and phrases that are just over used. Terms like "SJW" which is a snarl word that doesn't really refer to anything specific, and phrases like virtue signaling which technically means something but it's almost always used in a disingenuous or presumptuous way.
• 00:30 - 01:00 And that second category is tricky because using descriptive terms with clear definitions is obviously useful You don't want to have to spend 30 minutes explaining every concept if there's a single agreed-upon term that covers it. The problem is when those terms get created or appropriated for political purposes and eventually become buzzwords. And the problem with buzzwords is that people use them in place of arguments. Like, if you take the time to explain your position on a topic and someone responds, "Oh, you're just virtue signaling." That's essentially them using a buzzword in order to avoid having to make an argument.
• 01:00 - 01:30 And I think that this is starting to happen with the phrase "identity politics". Now, identity politics should be a neutral term. It refers to ideology that focuses on specific groups that people identify with like gender or race or sexual orientation. This is in contrast to an ideology that focuses on each person individually, or one that focuses on everyone all together. This is also usually distinguished from class-based politics although, it's all inevitably related. That's a thing that exists so it's cool for there to be a word for it. The problem is that the term
• 01:30 - 02:00 "identity politics" has been almost entirely co-opted by this growing anti-progressive movement we're seeing in mainstream culture. And it's almost always used pejoratively as if identity politics is self-evidently a bad thing. And this is what I mean and It's used in place of making an actual argument. "It's just inherently bad." and that sentiment is somehow expressed just by saying the words. And It's weird that that even works? But the reason that it does work is because it relies on a pre-existing narrative, namely that most of the social injustice that
• 02:00 - 02:30 Progressives complain about either, doesn't really exist or isn't that big a deal. If you already don't believe that various social groups need advocacy then of course you'd oppose identity politics, without needing anyone to make an argument to convince you. Of course, that isn't implied by the term Identity politics, like I said it should be neutral, but that's just the connotation that I'm saying most of the time these days. Now, I guess it's conceivable that there are people out there who acknowledge the facts about social injustice in the world, and understand that specific groups have specific issues
• 02:30 - 03:00 and those issues can intersect, but still think that some generalized economic strategy or egalitarianism is enough to take care of all of it at once. But, it's really hard for me to believe that anyone who's actually sat down and thought about that for more than five minutes actually believes that, because it makes no sense. In medicine you need specialists. You need brain doctors and eye doctors and foot doctors. In Mathematics you need people who are going to focus on geometry and focus on algebra and arithmetic and all of the subgroups in between. You can't solve any of these problems if you don't have people who are
• 03:00 - 03:30 focusing on these particular issues, and there's no reason to think that social problems work any differently. Racial minorities, women, LGBT+, all of these groups have specific problems. Sometimes those problems intersect but sometimes they don't. And, to me, it seems ridiculous to suggest that we shouldn't have people focusing on these unique problems. I think one issue here is that identity politics makes people uncomfortable. Particularly "cis" white people, especially poor, "cis", straight, white men. I can see how it could be hard to relate when people are talking about
• 03:30 - 04:00 problems that you don't have, and I guess it would be easy to think that those problems are overblown, if you don't experience or see them. And it's even harder to relate when you do have problems of your own, and it seems like nobody wants to talk about 'em. But, here's the thing, people are dealing with these issues. They will exist whether you believe they exist or whether anyone talks about them or not. Yes, I understand for many of you the status quo is more comfortable, but people have decided to fight for equality and justice, and it doesn't really significantly harm
• 04:00 - 04:30 you for other groups to have equality. And no one is saying that economic issues are less important than race or gender issues, we can do all of that at the same time and we need people to focus on all of those things. But, I'm guessing that most people who are so worried about identity politics are people who downplay the existence or importance of these social issues. And, as you may know, because I've said it many times, I personally have decided not to spend too much of my energy trying to convince people to believe easily verifiable facts, because these ideas about social injustice in the world are thoroughly supported with evidence
• 04:30 - 05:00 and if you still don't believe that, it's going to be an uphill battle trying to get past your biases. But, other people do it, and shout out to those people: "You're doing the lord's work." I'm just over it. It seems like people think we have these identities and align ourselves in the groups just because it's fun or self congratulatory, but "identity politics" is a response to oppression. If you want to get rid of identity politics you must first get rid of social injustice. As long as people are inherently disadvantaged just because they belong to a certain social group, you will always see people form political bonds based on their shared experience.
• 05:00 - 05:30 It's not going away. This is why it's so tone-deaf when people respond to social justice movements with white identity politics, like we see in the alt-right and other modern day reactionary movements. It implies that people are doing this because it's trendy or politically convenient which demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about what's going on "It's not tribalism, Jontron." If black people or gay people or trans people or any other marginalized group, weren't treated like second-class citizens
• 05:30 - 06:00 I promise you, no one would ever talk about it. Just like how white people rarely bring up their whiteness in general conversations It's not because white people are smarter or more civil It's because society doesn't constantly remind them of their whiteness by treating them differently because of it. Now, obviously, improvements can be made from within the progressive movement. It's not perfect. There are ideas that I agree with and ideas that I don't agree with and sometimes extreme or ridiculous views on the left while, not the majority, can be loud enough to obscure the real issues. But the main point
• 06:00 - 06:30 I'm making is that the issues are real and "identity politics" is a response to their continued existence. And we're living in a world where America has just elected a president who is openly hostile to immigrants and people of color and women and LGBT people, so you can look forward to "identity politics" running at full steam in the upcoming years. What do you think? Thank you for watching my video. Be sure to subscribe to this channel for more discussions about social issues
• 06:30 - 07:00 current events and pop culture. If you'd like to say hi, ask a question or leave feedback feel free to email me at and if you find any value in my videos or if you just want to support me consider becoming a patron on Patreon and remember: Be honest, be assertive, be kind, and be open minded Stay HAKO