The apotheosis — and nadir — of identity politics

posted at 2:01 pm on May 12, 2015 by Ed Morrissey

Should we thank Mark Halperin for finally exposing the hypocrisy and shamelessness of identity politics? After all, Halperin really didn’t do anything all that much different than other reporters have done, especially with Republicans. He just took it to an extreme, perhaps as he said in a rush to generate some colorful banter, but seemingly more intent on authenticating the obvious about Ted Cruz’ ethnicity. (His father was a refugee from Cuba, which is about as authentic as it gets, no?)

Jorge Bonilla writes that while Halperin’s interview was indeed objectionable, it results from “permission structures” created by Hispanic media such as Univision, an outlet deep in the bag for Democrats:

Mainstream media takes its cues on these matters from Hispanic media generally, and from Univision specifically. Both the network’s multiple attempts to vitiate Marco Rubio and news division president Isaac Lee’s smearing of those who oppose the network’s agenda (which, by the way, extends far beyond immigration) laid a foundation for the rest of the mainstream media to engage in the same behavior. When Jorge Ramos makes the media rounds and tries to disqualify Hispanic conservatives, it signals that the rest of the mainstream media can engage this behavior without repercussion.

Let’s play What If Fox for one quick second, and imagine that HUD Secretary Julián Castro were interrogated by Sean Hannity regarding his authenticity as a Mexican-American, quizzed on his mastery of the Spanish language, hectored into disclosing his favorite Mexican band, and were directed to provide a list of his favorite Mexican foods. Then imagine Hannity chiding Castro into a command performance in Spanish. Dudgeon would be stratospheric, and a pitchfork-wielding mob would immediately descend upon the corner of 50th and Rockefeller. On the contrary: because Castro is on the side of the “Allied Expeditionary Force”, to use Isaac Lee’s parlance, his non-mastery of Spanish is magically absolved, and his authenticity remains unquestioned.

The problem is hardly limited to Halperin, in other words, and Halperin is by far not the most malicious player in this particular game. (I’m inclined to think Halperin was sincere in his apology, although perhaps not entirely honest with himself about his motivations.) Getting caught out in this manner might be the best outcome for politics in general, I argue in my column today for The Week, because it’s the purest form of identity politics — at its most obviously embarrassing:

The media loves it when Democrats engage in identity politics, but get a little more critical when Republicans attempt to even the field. Ethnic and gender identity are accepted without question among Democrats, but the media routinely challenges Republicans who run, or even appear to be running, on the basis of identity.

The scrutiny of Republicans on identity always carries with it an implicit suggestion, if not outright accusation, that the claim of identity is somehow illegitimate. Joni Ernst got dismissed as an attractive nutcase. Carly Fiorina is similarly discounted for relying only on her gender identity, even though Fiorina has engaged voters and the media much more on her record than Hillary Clinton has. Clinton’s use of gender politics is a core part of her candidacy — but one on which she is rarely challenged by the media. …

This should serve as a lesson to the rest of the media. Halperin’s example was only the most obvious of the double standard in the media’s handling of identity politics, and an object lesson into how embarrassing the whole concept truly is. Politics should not be about group identities, but about policies, experience, competence, and integrity. Let’s stick to authenticity tests on those qualities, and dispense with checkbox identity politics altogether.

Ernst and Fiorina are both interesting examples of this phenomenon. When Fiorina entered the race, the media tended to focus on her identity as a woman to underscore her lack of seriousness. “I don’t think we would be taking her seriously at all if she weren’t a woman,” Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus told Meet the Press on Sunday. Why not? After all, people took Steve Forbes seriously in 1996 when he ran for the Republican nomination that eventually went to Bob Dole. Forbes had made a fortune in the financial sector, but had never run for public office before. H. Ross Perot turned his spectacular business career into the first viable independent run for president in decades, helping Bill Clinton to defeat George H. W. Bush in 1992, a campaign that delighted the media. Fiorina certainly has enough of a similar background to be taken seriously or not seriously on the basis of her record without dismissing her impact as only gender-based, especially when the national media spent considerable time over the last couple of decades lecturing Republicans on the need to find women for public office.

Ernst ran for former Senator Tom Harkin’s seat after he retired on the basis of her conservative track record in the Iowa state legislature and her experience as a military officer. Harkin tried to boost Democratic candidate Bruce Braley by telling Iowa voters that Ernst was “really attractive and sounds nice,” but “she votes like Michele Bachmann.” The media did criticize Harkin for that comment, but let pass an analysis from Politico’s Dave Price titled “Can Hillary Overcome Iowa’s Woman Problem?” Price argued that Iowans hadn’t elected a woman to statewide or federal office, ignoring Lieutenant Governor Kim Reynolds, who had been in office for four years at that point. The only hope of overcoming this gender inequity, Price suggested, was for Iowa to reverse its 2008 outcome and back Hillary Clinton for president – even though Ernst was on the ticket in just five weeks, whom Price finally mentioned in the 37th paragraph.

There are two problems with the media and identity politics. One is that they play it with two different standards for Republicans and Democrats. The other is identity politics itself. Halperin will have done this nation a great favor if he embarrasses the media into ignoring identity and focusing on achievement and policy.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Everybody belongs to a group. African-American, Latino-american, Gay, female, union, teacher…. And Republicans HATE your group. They want to see members of your group DIE. They are at WAR with your group.
But the left is the politics of peace, love and gun control and object to the violent rhetoric of the right.

tdarrington on May 12, 2015 at 2:09 PM

Halperin will have done this nation a great favor if he embarrasses the media into ignoring identity and focusing on achievement and policy.

And if I had wings, I could fly, which would probably be a lessor miracle.

VorDaj on May 12, 2015 at 2:09 PM

Halperin will have done this nation a great favor if he embarrasses the media into ignoring identity and focusing on achievement and policy.

I don’t think the media can be embarrassed.

trigon on May 12, 2015 at 2:10 PM

The left hasn’t lost the media yet, they never will.

tdarrington on May 12, 2015 at 2:12 PM

Joni Ernst got dismissed as an attractive nutcase.

It’s funny that Ernst got that criticism, when Braley was the clear nutjob who thought it was savvy to criticize farmers in a rural state.

blammm on May 12, 2015 at 2:12 PM

Sadly, this media wont be embarrassed and will continue their double standard

cmsinaz on May 12, 2015 at 2:14 PM

Halperin will have done this nation a great favor if he embarrasses the media into ignoring identity and focusing on achievement and policy.

Ed is man of great faith. Faith maybe great enough to move mountains. But a media mountain of manure?

de rigueur on May 12, 2015 at 2:14 PM

Clinton’s use of gender politics is a core part of her candidacy — but one on which she is rarely challenged by the media. …

Show us your LBJ!

Arnold Yabenson on May 12, 2015 at 2:20 PM

Nothing embarrasses liberal, progressives. They have been indoctrinated into believing their position is the only position and that the ends justifies the means, so lying, cheating, libel and slander are all good.

Neitherleftorright on May 12, 2015 at 2:22 PM

Two things:

1. Ruth Marcus is a man in drag and no one should take that scumhag seriously, ever.

2. This guy dared to call Cruz “not Hispanic enough” when he might be illegal…and when he skimmed the good people of NM by billions. He s/b in prison, with Hillary’s bro.

Schadenfreude on May 12, 2015 at 2:25 PM

Nothing embarrasses liberal, progressives illiberal tyrannical thugs. They have been indoctrinated into believing their position is the only position and that the ends justifies the means, so lying, cheating, libel and slander are all good.

Neitherleftorright on May 12, 2015 at 2:22 PM

Quit humoring the thugs. They are never liberal/progressive.

Schadenfreude on May 12, 2015 at 2:28 PM

Enough of E pluribus pluribus.

E pluribus plures.

Tzetzes on May 12, 2015 at 2:29 PM

Halperin will have done this nation a great favor if he embarrasses the media into ignoring identity and focusing on achievement and policy.

Won’t happen. They’re shameless.

myiq2xu on May 12, 2015 at 2:31 PM

Quit humoring the thugs. They are never liberal/progressive.
Schadenfreude on May 12, 2015 at 2:28 PM

I understand your feelings, but those words have long since been lost.

Nevertheless, I will attempt to remember to address them as socialist democrats, if I can remember. I have already made it a choice to try to no longer use the word gay for homosexuals.

Neitherleftorright on May 12, 2015 at 2:37 PM

I get it now. Identity politics are only good if you identify as a gun owner, evangelical Christian, aggrieved white male or AARP member. Identifying as a woman or an African American is bad, bad, bad.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 2:46 PM

Ed: “Halperin will have done this nation a great favor if he embarrasses the media into ignoring identity and focusing on achievement and policy.”

Seriously? Then prospect is so ridiculous on its face that you needn’t have wasted the pixels giving it hopeful consideration.

IronDioPriest on May 12, 2015 at 2:47 PM

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 2:46 PM

So you’re a choomer too?

Neitherleftorright on May 12, 2015 at 2:57 PM

I think a key factor missing here is that

the Left really and truly believes that women and people of darker hue to be inferior.

They are more than happy to use identity politics to further their own ends, but a dark layer of racism and misogyny underlie everything they do.

The progressive thought process is this; “I know that women are dumber than men, so if a Republican woman is in a particular race or position, she will undoubtedly be a stupid bimbo and Republicans are only promoting her for the vajayjay factor. This is unquestionably true because women are dumb.”

Now, plug in the word black, or Mexican or Cuban and you have what underpins the real Party of Racist White Guys and Self-Loathing Everybodies.

They love identity politics because it supports their fundamentally inequitable view of the human race, wherein they are the pinnacle of evolution and you’re not.

Dolce Far Niente on May 12, 2015 at 3:04 PM

I get it now. Identity politics are only good if you identify as a gun owner, evangelical Christian, aggrieved white male or AARP member. Identifying as a woman or an African American is bad, bad, bad.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 2:46 PM

Get back to us when you change your opinion on what your own racial make-up or sex is. Because policy positions and personal beliefs are apparently exactly the same as DNA in Your Little Pony Universe.

Dolce Far Niente on May 12, 2015 at 3:08 PM

I get it now. Identity politics are only good if you identify as a gun owner, evangelical Christian, aggrieved white male or AARP member. Identifying as a woman or an African American is bad, bad, bad.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 2:46 PM

Glad to see you’ve grasped the media’s pigeonholing of the conservative candidate.

Too bad you have no interest in having them change their behavior and treat people as people. Which we conservatives thought was the whole point of equality under the law.

The Schaef on May 12, 2015 at 3:14 PM

Or, it could be that people who share certain genetic traits share certain interests, as well — particularly if they’ve historically been marginalized based on those genetic traits.

But, as I said, voting for a black candidate because he’s blacknis no better or worse thsn voting for a Baptist because they’reBaptist. Repubublicans criticize identity politics only because it works against them — though conservatives have plate to white voters for a generation (and dome still do).

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:16 PM

The left hasn’t lost the media yet, they never will.

tdarrington on May 12, 2015 at 2:12 PM

The MM is the left.

Cherokee on May 12, 2015 at 3:17 PM

As opposed to your pigeonholing of Democratic voters? Having read thousands of posts on Minority and women voters on this site, I know how laughable any claim to see them as individuals is.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:19 PM

I get it now. Identity politics are only good if you identify as a gun owner, evangelical Christian, aggrieved white male or AARP member. Identifying as a woman or an African American is bad, bad, bad.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 2:46 PM

And here’s the first strawman from SocialD’s starting lineup. Looks like their gameplan will be common trolling accented with intellectual dishonesty again. Phil, we’re going to cut to commercial here in a second, when we come back we can talk about Hot Air’s potential strategy to overrun what seems to be a pretty meager offense.

Guest play-by-play provided by Charon. ©2015 HA-Entertainment

PXCharon on May 12, 2015 at 3:20 PM

Or, it could be that people who share certain genetic traits share certain interests, as well.

Like what, fried chicken and orange soda? What’s your favorite African-American food, urban?

Repubublicans criticize identity politics only because it works against them — though conservatives have plate to white voters for a generation (and dome still do).

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:16 PM

Conservatives criticize identity politics because it exchanges the truth of qualifications for the lie of “historic elections” or whatever. If it works against them, then essentially, you’re saying that party who cares about qualified applicants is harmed by a phenomenon that substitutes marginal traits for true merit, and I don’t see why anyone should have to apologize for being on that side of the line.

A number of people may have voted for Romney, but to say that conservatives did it because “he’s the white guy” or “I can identify with him personally” or even “I agree with his political platform” is a gross overstatement.

The Schaef on May 12, 2015 at 3:25 PM

Coservatives use identity politics every day. The just call it something different because the target gun owners and Christians, which plays on the exact same sense of belonging to a persecuted group (even though Christians and gun owner ez are hardly persecuted). They don’t care about qualifications any more or any less than Democrats. They just want to win.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:36 PM

As opposed to your pigeonholing of Democratic voters? Having read thousands of posts on Minority and women voters on this site, I know how laughable any claim to see them as individuals is.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:19 PM

It is Democrats who try to plant their flag on the mountain of minority and female voters, and expect them to vote Democrat specifically because they are minority or female.

So yes, as opposed to my pigeonholing of Democrat voters. Because I don’t.

The Schaef on May 12, 2015 at 3:38 PM

Very glad I took Mandarin rather than Spanish in high school.
Helps with the Chinese real estate investors we’re getting as clients.

MichaelGabriel on May 12, 2015 at 3:38 PM

Coservatives use identity politics every day. The just call it something different because the target gun owners and Christians, which plays on the exact same sense of belonging to a persecuted group (even though Christians and gun owner ez are hardly persecuted). They don’t care about qualifications any more or any less than Democrats. They just want to win.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:36 PM

So you’re saying that I only vote for gun owners? Or are you saying that I vote for second amendment advocates because I am a gun owner?

The Schaef on May 12, 2015 at 3:40 PM

Halperin will have done this nation a great favor if he embarrasses the media into ignoring identity and focusing on achievement and policy.

You are so cute, Ed.

GWB on May 12, 2015 at 3:47 PM

The just call it something different because the target gun owners and Christians, which plays on the exact same sense of belonging to a persecuted group (even though Christians and gun owner ez are hardly persecuted).

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:36 PM

Two major differences.
– First is that anyone can be a gun owner or a Christian. They can be black or women or gheys or Martians (if they’ve gone through the appropriate immigration procedures) or whatever.
– Second is that both of those are things protected specifically by the Constitution as rights. The defense of those rights is not identity politics, but … politics. It’s about the rights, not the people. (You arguing otherwise would show a serious lack of observational and reading comprehension skills in the majority of the comments about those topics here at HotAir.)

GWB on May 12, 2015 at 3:54 PM

Don’t underestimate the pull of the professional political class. Their rejection of Fiorina and Ernst may simply be the desire to circle the wagons to keep out those who haven’t dedicated their entire lives to politics.

In other words, if you didn’t follow one of these two pathways:

college –> journalism school –> reporter –> opinionator

OR

college –> law school –> temp legal job –> first elected office –> national elected office

then you have no right to raise your head into the starry heights of politics. Get thee back, peon!

HakerA on May 12, 2015 at 4:15 PM

I get it now. Identity politics are only good if you identify as a gun owner, evangelical Christian, aggrieved white male or AARP member. Identifying as a woman or an African American is bad, bad, bad.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 2:46 PM

You can eliminate AARP from your list — the organization (not necessarily the members) support the dems. There was a Letter to the Editor in the Chicago Tribune from the local AARP administator that supported the elimination of nuclear generating stations which would raise the cost of electricity for seniors as well as everyone else. It’s the only orgnization I belong to (only for medical prescription insurance purposes) where the organization hierarchy selects the people who come to it’s convention who will elect the organization’s officers. No ordinary member, such as me, is allowed to vote.

We Are An Multi-Ethnic, Not Multi-Cultural, Nation!

polarglen on May 12, 2015 at 4:18 PM

But, as I said, voting for a black candidate because he’s blacknis no better or worse thsn voting for a Baptist because they’reBaptist.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:16 PM

In other words, you regard voting for or against someone because of their DNA to be exactly the same as voting for or against someone because of how they choose to behave.

That’s a very revealing admission.

GrumpyOldFart on May 12, 2015 at 5:03 PM

So yes, as opposed to my pigeonholing of Democrat voters. Because I don’t.

The Schaef on May 12, 2015 at 3:38 PM

I pigeonhole them. They all go in the idiot file.

trigon on May 12, 2015 at 5:25 PM

Coservatives use identity politics every day. The just call it something different because the target gun owners and Christians, which plays on the exact same sense of belonging to a persecuted group (even though Christians and gun owner ez are hardly persecuted). They don’t care about qualifications any more or any less than Democrats. They just want to win.

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:36 PM

Speak English

Schadenfreude on May 12, 2015 at 5:57 PM

But, as I said, voting for a black candidate because he’s blacknis no better or worse thsn voting for a Baptist because they’reBaptist. Repubublicans criticize identity politics only because it works against them — though conservatives have plate to white voters for a generation (and dome still do).

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:16 PM

Back to school, idiot. You should be ashamed to call yourself an “elitist”.

Schadenfreude on May 12, 2015 at 6:03 PM

Mainstream media takes its cues on these matters from Hispanic media generally, and from Univision specifically.

Well, they have to get their “cues” from somewhere, right?

jbspry on May 12, 2015 at 6:11 PM

Coservatives use identity politics every day. (Blah. blah. blah. some more crap.)

urban elitist on May 12, 2015 at 3:36 PM

And your democRATs don’t!?

Are you delusional…or a liar?

Or both?

Solaratov on May 12, 2015 at 10:56 PM

So you’re saying that I only vote for gun owners? Or are you saying that I vote for second amendment advocates because I am a gun owner?

The Schaef on May 12, 2015 at 3:40 PM

Notice how urban, having dropped his troll bombs, abandons the thread rather than answer basic questions to clarify his position.

The Schaef on May 13, 2015 at 11:09 AM