Critics of identity politics argue that the focus on issues of race, gender, and sexuality distracts from “real” politics—by which they typically mean the struggle between labor and capital over the distribution of material resources.
But this view of politics assumes that class identity is an objective fact—a sociological datum or an index that can be read off a map. In fact, class identity can only be known through its embodiment in words and actions. It is as subjective or performative as, for example, gender is understood in queer theory.
Allow me, therefore, to defend identity politics by challenging the three assumptions of its critics. First, they take it for granted that any deviation from the universalism of the Enlightenment is also a threat to the idea of equality and human rights. Second, they believe that identity politics is essentialist: social roles are assigned based on social origins, which precludes the attainment of a chosen individuality.
