Guest post: Trans identitarianism benefits principally upper-class white men

Originally a comment by Papito on His colleagues complained.

Nullius, I agree with your statement:

Action within the constraints of egalitarianism (treating none as lesser or greater than oneself) is incapable of exerting the power over others necessary to bring about egalitarian conditions. Egalitarianism cannot bring itself about. Thus, a Leftist politics must necessarily incorporate some other non-egalitarian mechanism for changing the state of affairs obtaining in the world.

This can be substantiated by looking at leftist theory, e.g. Marcuse, who states openly that a bias should be instituted in favor of leftist ideas, to contradict a naturally existing bias towards conservative ideas. So it’s true that leftism has a propensity towards identitarianism, at least as an intermediate stage in the progress towards equality.

On the other hand, there has also been a hijacking of leftist purpose at the means stage, on the part of capitalism. Identity politics has been coopted as a tax paid by the well-educated and well-established in order to continue pursuing the concentration of wealth unhindered. In this, a means stage of leftism has itself become one of the main antagonists of leftist ends.

Trans identitarianism – gender theology – benefits principally upper-class white men. They love to use the shield of poor brown people in, say, Brazil, as a justification for their extortion, but there is nothing whatsoever about that project that enhances equality between rich white trans men in America and mixed-race tranny prostitutes on the street in Rio.

Many other forms of identitarianism have been similarly perverted – affirmative action in American colleges principally benefits immigrants from Africa and middle-class black kids, while leaving the native-born impoverished behind. The left finds itself in frank conflict between those who seek to create a more egalitarian social system and those who seek to use their identity status for personal gain within the system as is. The latter are winning, not incidentally because it’s been so easy for capitalism to adapt to them. It’s just another form of rent-seeking.

But back to the question: are university bosses who force out lesbians and feminists for telling the truth “far-left?” All they’re doing is privileging one identity over another; they’re not doing any work whatsoever to bring about greater social equality. We call them “leftist” if we find the identity/means part of leftist praxis to be its most salient feature, and we don’t if we believe that working for social equality is leftism’s most salient feature. They are simultaneously examples of leftism and examples of its antithesis; they are emblematic of the failure of leftism.

5 Responses to “Guest post: Trans identitarianism benefits principally upper-class white men”