"Not At This Table" Is Part of The Problem

Fareed Zakaria is right about the first and third point. However, the other guy makes an excellent point about factor #3.

In fact, Trump ran much more on identity politics, but his identities were “white” and “male”. Those are the only two demographics he won.

Of course, those are not regarded as identities by you and others because they are still seen as the default.

— Ali Minai (@barbarikon) November 10, 2024

A year ago, Donald Trump charged that immigrants (not illegal immigrants- immigrants) are "poisoning the blood of our country. That's what they've done..." In October, he said of immigrants "you know, now a murderer, I believe this, it's in their genes. And we got a lot of bad genes in our country right now."

That's pure, unadulterated, classic racism and only two examples of the identity politics Trump traffics in.

Nonetheless, identity politics, central to Donald Trump's message and appeal, is alive and well on the left and on cable television. I had to watch this twice because I couldn't believe the silliness and stupidity:

"I am NOT going to listen to transphobia at this table!"

CNN panelist loses their mind over "slur" used by Republican strategist during trans sports debate. pic.twitter.com/5PXnSJW4A0

— Brigitte Gabriel (@ACTBrigitte) November 9, 2024

If we wanted an example of the role of identity politics which Zakaria believes played a role in the defeat of the Democratic Party in this cycle, you can't do any better than this exchange.It's hard to hear everything while guests are interrupting other guests, as is common on CNN's Abby Phillip Tonight.

Conservative Republican Shermichael Singleton can be heard remarking "I think there a lot of families ut there who don't believe boys should play girls' sports." Openly gay Jay Michaelson, a writer, journalist, professor, and new-age rabbi angrily retorts "They're not boys. I'm not going to listen to transphobia at this table."

There is no such word as "transphobia," except insofar as it was made up for ideological purposes. It has been common to take something we believe in- in this case, trans- and add "phobia" to it to disparage critics or skeptics. Moreover, though "trans," which is cooler than "transsexual" or "transvestite," has become a thing, it is not a word but a prefix. As the absurdly politically correct Merriam-Webster puts it (italics theirs)

While the word trans has been used as a shortened version of both transgender and transsexual, the word transsexual is dated and sometimes offensive. The word transgender is preferred..

Preferred by whom? The answer, evidently, is those who for whatever reason are "offended" by "transsexual." Not that "transsexual" isn't accurate- it makes people feel bad. By contrast, as has been explained

"But crushing truths prish from being acknowledged," (Albert) Camus writes- and what a wise observation. There are so many applications of that statement! Acknowledging something negative about your condition (something you were avoiding) is the same as acknowledging a crushing truth- but only after you acknowledge it can you conquer it. Go to an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, and they will tell you that getting past denial is the first and hardest step towards recovery.

Another truth is that transsexualism exists, notwithstanding Merriam-Webster's intent to disappear it. And so does the widespread sentiment that boys now are being invited to play against girls in girls' sports leagues. Whether Shermichael- with whom I typically disagree- believes that they should be allowed to do so, or even whether transgendered individuals are still male- is not his point. 

As it is, it is not at all clear that boys attempting to transition to girls are now female, or that they are yet male, despite Michaelson's apparent certitude. But assuming the unassumable- that these individuals are not boys- the "I'm not going to listen to transphobia at this table" is very problematic.

Not only is it usually self-defeating not to listen to- or rather, to shout down- individuals with whom we disagree, it is particularly reprehensible to do so on Abby Phillips Tonight, which is meant to showcase differing opinions. Unfortunately, the host seemed not to understand the raison d'etre of her own show when she stated

Look, this is a really heated issue, alright? Shermichael, I know you. I know that you understand that people have different views on this. I think out of respect for Jay, let's try to talk about this in a way that is respectful. 

Singleton then assured her "let me rephrase this since I'm being targeted here," (which was obviously the case) and the show went on. Contrary to Phillip's implication, Singleton was disrespectufl by neither manner nor words.  And ironically, his point was in fact that people have different views on this, contrary to the heated Michaelson, who believed either that everyone is of the same view as is he or, more likely, that anyone who disagrees with him is a bigot or dunderhead.

Posing as open-minded, Abby Phillip runs a dishonest program. More importantly, though, the exchange exemplifies the identity politics Fareed Zakaria believes has come to define the Democratic Party in the mind of voters. This wasn't the only, and not even the most important, factor in the awful results from Election Day. And it's unclear how exactly sensible politicians separate themselves from the narrow-minded people who believe sexuality and race must define their own Party. But they must start with an open acknowledgement of the problem.

 

Share |