Intersectionality is Opposed to Individual Rights
Let’s start where all good discussions must start, with a definition.
What is intersectionality? It is most plainly defined as “multiple identities that “intersect” to make up who we are and which result in layers of oppression or privilege that overlap and reinforce each other.”
You can already see that the language of intersectionality mirrors that of classic Marxism as found in all its iterations. The world is divided into two groups and everything is then interpreted solely through this lens.
Let’s explore the origins of the concept itself. Intersectionality originated as a legal concept in the late 1970’s and was used to argue for standing in suing corporations on behalf of black women who believed that they were being discriminated against in hiring practices. What the court refused to do was to consider standing of being both black and female as creating a specific class which could be discriminated against. Instead the courts basically required them to sue either on grounds of being black or on grounds of being female. However, when they attempted to sue only on grounds of racism, the courts would most likely say that the hiring rates of blacks in general (ie including black males) by these companies did not support their claims. If they tried to sue only on grounds of sexism, the courts could point to hiring rates for women in general (ie including white females) by these companies as not supporting their claims. So the argument for legal standing was proposed on the “intersectionality” of being both black and female and that the intersection of these two identities when held together provided legal standing for them to sue because they were being discriminated against as a class uniquely consisting of black females.
This fairly straight forward argument over “legal standing” highlights many of the faults of the very concept of legal standing. It was and still is used both appropriately (you were not an actual injured party) and inappropriately (you may have been injured but we don’t recognize you as a protected class). Even in this day and age, courts love trotting this argument out whenever they want to avoid making a decision on a divisive issue. The same was true during the period of time identified above. So within a legal context of standing, the argument for intersectionality of protected classes under the law carries some weight given our courts’ penchant for abuse of the legal vagaries of “standing”.
It loses that weight however when extrapolated outside of that narrow legal perspective into a social criticism. Why is this such a bad concept to bring into our cultural and social arena? It all has to do with its definition and the origin of the ideas expressed in that definition.
Let revisit that definition and unpack it a little: multiple identities that “intersect” to make up who we are and which result in layers of oppression or privilege that overlap and reinforce each other. We much first recognize that the term “multiple identities” does not refer to your individual characteristics. Instead it points to your various group identities as defined by those promoting this concept. For example, your multiple identities do not consist of what truly defines you as a person, but rather which immutable traits do you share with others such as your sex, skin color, ethnicity, etc. Thus the first issue with intersectionality is uncovered.
Intersectionality is Diminishing to the Individual
On its face, intersectionality should be an effective and powerful concept of individualism – the intersection of all of the uniqueness that makes up a single individual. Instead, anything not belonging to an identified “oppressed” group is ignored and negated. The very thing that should celebrate your unique and wonderful personal identity is subsumed into a meaningless and valueless morass of “group membership”. More horrific is that your identity is reduced to immutable characteristics over which you have no control: Your sex, your skin color, your ethnic origins, etc. There is nothing about you the person – your beliefs, your values, your hopes, your dreams, your character, your compassion, your work ethic, your creativity, your loves, your dedication, your diligence . . . there’s nothing about YOU! The true essential you is hidden behind a façade of “group identity”. You, the real you, is diminished to just a couple of big group identities while all that make you truly unique is hidden away and ignored.
Why are these essential personal characteristics treated this way? It is because they do not factor into the dichotomy of power as espoused by those trying to aggregate your personal power for their own purposes. The part of you that values conversation with friends over a wonderful Greek dinner as you ponder stoic philosophy cannot factor into their political equation and thus does not grant to them any power or influence, so it is negated. The group identity of Stoic philosophy lovers who are also epicurean fans of Greek cuisine doesn’t translate into a viable political group with vast millions of members who can be then led by self-appointed “leaders” who seek to use your power for their own purposes. But those self-same group leaders can take advantage by supposedly representing millions of people with the same immutable traits such as skin color, etc.
You the individual are not important to these socialist elites beyond your forced membership in a group over which you have no control. They don’t care about you individually and they will not do anything to benefit you individually either. You are a useful pawn in their political machinations and nothing more. The reality is if you were seen for all of your wonderful intersections of identity that make you up as a true individual – you would be a party of one. Completely useless to those seeking political and social power. But if, on the other hand, they can reduce you to nothing more than the color of your skin or the chromosomes you were born with – then in aggregate those millions of “individuals” gives them immense power as they presume to speak for all of the members of the group. No one elected them. They didn’t get your input or agreement to their position of power over the group. They assumed it without your consent and wield it without your input.
If we place the implied, yet unspoken term “group” into the definition it reads as; “multiple group identities that “intersect” to make up who we are and which result in layers of oppression or privilege that overlap and reinforce each other.” If the only identity that matters then is group identity, then how does oppression and privilege factor into this definition?
Intersectionality as defined is one of the principle concepts of Critical Race Theory which originated within Critical Legal Theory which originated from Critical Theory as gleaned from the writings of Marx, Kant and others. In other words, CRT is the grandchild of the Marxist poison of the dichotomic views of Oppressed and Oppressor. The poison of Marx twists something potentially insightful into something grotesque and inhuman. As we just saw, what it means as a social concept is that your individual identity is primarily and intrinsically one of Group Identity. In other words, your individual identity only has merit or value when viewed through the lens of group identification.
The reason that group identity and intersectionality is so important (as opposed to individual identity) is the premise that all identity is based on power and structures. The whole world, all of humanity, is reduced to who has power and who lacks power and from there to who controls the structures of power and who suffers under the structures of power. That’s it. This is the sum total of their expression and the very reason why intersectionality as a component of CRT will NEVER benefit the individual. It was not designed for the benefit of the individual. It was designed to attack which ever power structure those espousing it wish to destroy and replace with a power structure of their own. It assumes that the only solution to centralized power is to replace the elite group who supposedly controls that centralized power with another elite group. It literally amounts to nothing more than one tyrannical elitist group attempting to replace another tyrannical elitist group with NO thought for the actual individual. It does not even countenance that there could be a better path, a way to benefit ALL individuals equally.
So now the full definition of Intersectionality reads like this: “multiple group identities that “intersect” to make up who we are and which result in layers of oppression for the Oppressed or privilege for the Oppressors that overlap and reinforce each other.” It is because of this definition that our next point is true.
Intersectionality is Detrimental to the Conversation
Is there merit to having the discussion about how specific groups are treated in our society as a whole? Absolutely. Please do not mistake my criticism of CRT and Intersectionality as opposition to the eradication of racism and xenophobia. These are terrible traits for any individual to possess and we all individually must seek their extinction in our own behavior and values. Moreover, we should be free to discuss them openly and publicly.
Sadly though, there is no room for dialogue in a world where everyone is divided into oppressed and oppressor based on immutable physical traits. That’s the point. Those who created and promote CRT are not seeking dialogue nor do they seek to advance our shared human experience. They are seeking political control and power.
They ignore the realities of history, the uniqueness of the individual, the necessity of personal effort and character and the true humanity of us all. Rather than being judged on your individual actions and words. You are judged to be an oppressor solely on the fact that you do not belong to a group because of factors totally and completely out of your control. It doesn’t matter if you never had any real political, economic or social power. It doesn’t matter if you were kind, generous and loving to every person you met in life. You are not part of the oppressed group, so you are collectively guilty of any acts committed by the oppressor group to which you belong due to factors you could not control.
How do you have dialogue when there is not any opportunity to recognize individuality? Here’s the painful truth of intersectionality – as pointed out above – you do not matter individually regardless of which side of the group identity barrier you fall into. How do we progress forward together as human beings who are members of the same society if the conversation starts with original sin on the part of individuals who never committed the actual supposed transgression and inherited the stain of that original sin from people they never knew and based entirely on factors over which the individual had no actual control? There is no fix, no solution, no path forward when these are the terms of the conversation. If everyone gets painted by the same broad brush regardless of their own action and guilt assigned by mere twist of genetic fate – what hope is there for anyone?
That’s the point! It’s not about moving forward. It’s not about having an open and honest dialogue. It’s not about becoming a better society or more inclusive society where ALL individuals are protected and appreciated for being the unique individuals they truly are. Which brings us to the next truth about intersectionality.
Intersectionality is Damaging to Society
In a world of extremes, where there is no middle ground, where you either an oppressor or an oppressed, where you have no personal choice, where your individual actions and values do not matter – there can only and always be division and strife. This dichotomic view of life offers no hope. It gives no path forward. One group must always and forever be punished and denigrated and another group must always be rewarded and promoted. There is no definable future state where harmony and unity are realized. It promises eternal division and disharmony.
How do you build a cohesive society on such a foundation? The answer is as plain as the question. You cannot build a society when one side is perpetually harmed and the other is perpetually harming. This is the greatest failure of identity politics. It may serve your short-term political ambitions, but in the long run it will - by its very nature - destroy everything.
The better course is to weigh everyone on their own actions and words and remove forever this divisive view of humanity. We have NO control over our immutable traits and possess control only over our own individual acts. So, if we are to progress forward and to have any unity as a society – it must be based on our individuality and not on our “group” identities. Are there racists and xenophobes in our society? Of course, there are. Is it the defining feature of our entire population? Definitely not. They are racists because of their individual actions and values – not because of their immutable physical traits. Their guilt is not assigned because of the color of their skin, it is earned by the color of their actions. This individual responsibility is the final victim of Intersectionality.
Intersectionality is Destructive to Personal Growth and Responsibility
If I am an oppressor solely based on my skin color or my gender – then my personal actions are meaningless. There is no rationale within this worldview for me to be a better person if my mere existence is already an oppressive act to an entire swath of the population. If my guilt is assigned for things I did not do, then nothing I do can undo that burden of guilt. I cannot possibly undo actions which I never committed.
Under this worldview, I may never have committed a racist act in my entire life, but I am a racist purely based on the fact that my skin is lighter than others. How do I ever become a non-racist under this definition? I cannot. No matter how good of a person I become, I will never be able to escape my racism. What would be the point then? Conversely, if I will always be detrimentally harmed regardless of how well I do in my personal life, then I will always fall short of my potential because I am perpetually held back regardless of my success. No measure of success will ever be the amount of success I should have had. It is a double-edged sword that destroys any drive to improve or achieve, because after all – I’m oppressed or oppressing simply because of my existence.
Just like personal individuality doesn’t matter, personal growth and responsibility are given no weight or importance in this worldview. This is the real evil of this power structures definition of the world. It serves no benefit to the individual and poisons everything it touches.
There is a better way. It was the bedrock of the great American experiment – protect and preserve individual freedom and liberty. It is why after millennia of failed tyrannical governments, Liberty was finally raised as the beacon of hope for all humanity. To protect any individual’s intrinsic rights, we must protect every individual’s rights. Not majority rule, not divine rule, not tyrannical rule – but self-rule. United as Individuals.
What are your thoughts?