Even Richard Dawkins recognises the incoherence of identity politics, and rightly labels it as an “evil”. On the other hand, he does not recognise that he has no foundation for describing anything as evil or good without a moral basis in God.
Identity politics represents the death of a cohesive society.
When there is a competition for ultimate victim status, there can be no harmony. The community becomes a battlefield for moral supremacy, power, and status between competing interests. Brendon O’Neill also makes the point that identity politics is fundamentally intolerant – as if we needed any reminding of that in 2017.
Identity politics represents the death of free speech and therefore free thought. It traps people in sad little bubbles out of which there is no escape.
The madness on university campuses across the world demonstrates the ultimate atomisation of this process. O’Neill explains that on many university campuses white homosexuals are now regarded as less deserving than black homosexuals. And so the fragmentation continues in the quest for the ultimate victim group.
University campuses also demonstrates the stupidity that identity politics inevitably produces. I would go so far as to suggest that it requires a stupid and passive mind to accept these premises in the first place, and the only outcome is further stupidity. But identity politics is not just the result of foolish man-children. It is itself the result of minds darkened to the wisdom of God. As our blessed Lord so rightly taught us, “Disregard them! They are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into the pit.” (Matthew 15:14).
Our social structure is now scotch-taped together by institutions that pre-date identity politics, and which ironically could never have emerged from contemporary political philosophy. That shows how far the decline has gone.
In a world where:
1. A person who does not want to bake a wedding cake gets their shop shut down [Link]
2. An Australian Human Rights Commission claims that all Roman Catholic bishops have a “case to answer” for their stance against same-sex marriage. [Link]
3. A university professor is charged for harassment for jokingly referring to female professor’s having a night out as a “girls night out” [Link]
4. Teachers are advised to avoid terms like “girls” and “boys [Link]
5. Australian political parties fight against having a plebiscite vote on same-sex marriage, because allowing the people to vote would encourage debate, and too much debate, like too much democracy, could lead to hate crimes and suicide. [Link]
Could such a political and social philosophy which creates the above abuses of power and common sense have ever produced concepts like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and parliamentary democracy? Most assuredly, not.
The fight against the mental strongholds that hold men captive is far from over. Indeed, it has hardly begun.