| I've read this entry in the Stanford online encyclopedia, and I seem to know a lot of people now who make use of rhetoric that can broadly be understood as identity politics, but I would like to see this explored a little, here. Is there a sense in which this is a good thing? In what ways does it make sense to subsume the IP associated with GLBTQ with that associated with race, with disability, with class, with gender, and with culture. What is excluded and does this matter? Can one criticize IP as IP? What kind of anthropological assumptions are presupposed in this kind of politics? |
