Identity Politics

Identity Politics VS Reality

Imagine the following courtroom scene. A man accused of murder stands before the judge.  The old judge asks him gravely, “Son, how do you plead to the chargers of murder?”

The defendant looks up and says, “Not guilty.”

“On what grounds?”

“I do not identify with having done that.”

“Case closed.  You are free to go,” the judge responds.

Imagine a job interview in a typical office in a major city.  The interviewer, holding the applicant’s resume, says, “It says on your resume that you worked as the CEO of XYZ, but when I called XYZ for a reference, they said they’d never even heard of you.”

“While that may be true,’ says the applicant, “It is also true, that I identify as having worked there.”

“You’re Hired!”

With these two scenes in mind, what is the difference between identifying as being something, which you are not, and identifying as having done something or not done something?

Thus far the first is accepted or at least tolerated.  

It’s difficult to imagine anyone seriously pushing the I don’t identify with having done that idea.  One can only hope anyone attempting that would be laughed off the face of the earth and ultimately, I hope, back to sanity. 

I guess the question is, how slippery is this slope?  

Either way, the real protest is against reality, and reality can’t be beat.