Strategic Essentialism

Description

1. From the Wikipedia:

"It refers to a strategy that nationalities, ethnic groups or minority groups can use to present themselves. While strong differences may exist between members of these groups, and amongst themselves they engage in continuous debates, it is sometimes advantageous for them to temporarily 'essentialize' themselves and bring forward their group identity in a simplified way to achieve certain goals.

Strategic essentialism, a major concept in postcolonial theory was introduced by the Indian literary critic and theorist Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak."

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_essentialism)

2. Steven Lawrence:

"In the Atlantic article, Where the New Identity Politics Went Wrong, Mounk introduces the term and provides useful information about the history of the unfolding influence of postmodern philosophers, anti-racist legal scholars, and decolonization activists in the development of this ideology, which, according to Mounk based on his research on postcolonial thinkers (see Gayatri Spivak), relies heavily on the adoption of “Strategic Essentialism” to achieve a socially just world. Strategic essentialism means that we intentionally adopt a strong and sturdy identity based on our sociocultural characteristics (or demographic makeup) and to assign traits to the inner lives and outer actions of all people based on their membership in a demographic group. Embracing essentialism means that there are essential characteristics of all Black people, all white people, all women, all genders, all men, and so forth. It is from the foundation of strategic essentialism that scholars have developed the almost metaphysical categories of Blackness and Whiteness, as though there were something deeply true at the core of each metaphysical category — a kind of spirit or vibe that is said to suffuse the entire existence of those who belong to these groups, including thoughts, beliefs, actions, behaviors, and even assumptions about all of reality in all its dimensions.

As Mounk (and decolonization scholars themselves!) has noted, it doesn’t matter that the “essence” that is spoken of is empirically falsifiable (able to be discovered through objective analysis of facts). What matters is that the strategy of assigning a totalizing essence to entire groups is effective in winning rights for those groups that have been deemed marginalized or oppressed. To put it in oversimplified cartoonish terms, this strategy involves the design of a heuristic (an intentionally simplistic teaching tool or framework) that depicts one demographic group as essentially bad and another demographic group as essentially good, then whatever we do to the bad demographic group becomes justifiable."

(https://groundexperience.substack.com/p/carrying-a-message-further-part-8)

Discussion

Steven Lawrence:

"In 2021, I wrote an essay called “The Problem of Group Identity Essentialism” (the second essay of the All We Are series), in which I explore some of the scholarship around what I’m calling Group Identity Essentialism and the potential dangers inherent in any scenario in which this approach to human relations becomes central on any scale of influence (for example, the classroom, college admissions, medical care, home loans). Adopting the belief in the essential differentness of people from distinct demographic groups and assigning stereotyped characteristics to all or most individuals who belong to those we consider to be members of outgroups runs the risk of creating social hierarchies that actively discriminate against the outgroups.

In the following passage, Mounk further expresses dismay over the negative impact on workplace relationships, the primary mission of institutions (mission creep), and the boldness with which adherents of this ideology are willing to outright discriminate against disfavored groups as a kind of correction for historical wrongs.

As the identity synthesis has gained in influence, its flaws have become harder to ignore. A striking number of progressive advocacy groups, for example, have been consumed by internal meltdowns in recent years. “We used to want to make the world a better place,” a leader of one progressive organization complained recently. “Now we just make our organizations more miserable to work at.” As institutions such as the Sierra Club and the ACLU have implemented the norms inspired by the identity synthesis, they have had more difficulty serving their primary missions.

The identity synthesis is also starting to remake public policy in ways that are more likely to create a society of warring tribes. In the early months of the pandemic, for example, a key advisory committee to the CDC recommended that states prioritize essential workers in the rollout of scarce vaccines rather than the elderly, in part because “racial and ethnic minorities are underrepresented” among seniors. Not only did this policy, according to the CDC’s own models, have the probable outcome of increasing the overall number of Americans who would perish in the pandemic; it also placed different ethnic groups in competition with one another for life saving medications."

(https://groundexperience.substack.com/p/carrying-a-message-further-part-8)