The identity trap A story of ideas and power in our time

Yascha Mounk, 1982-

Book - 2023

"One of our leading public intellectuals traces the origin of a set of ideas about identity and social justice that is rapidly transforming America-and explains why it will fail to accomplish its noble goals"--

Saved in:

2nd Floor Show me where

305/Mounk
1 / 1 copies available
Location Call Number   Status
2nd Floor 305/Mounk Checked In
Subjects
Published
New York : Penguin Press 2023.
Language
English
Main Author
Yascha Mounk, 1982- (author)
Physical Description
401 pages ; 25 cm
Bibliography
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN
9780593493182
  • Introduction: The Lure and the Trap
  • Part I. The Origins of the Identity Synthesis
  • 1. Postwar Paris and the Trial of Truth
  • 2. The End of Empire and the Embrace of "Strategic Essentialism"
  • 3. The Rejection of the Civil Rights Movement and the Rise of Critical Race Theory
  • 4. The Identity Synthesis
  • Part II. The Victory of the Identity Synthesis
  • 5. The Identity Synthesis Goes Mainstream
  • 6. The Short March Through the Institutions
  • 7. Dissent Discouraged
  • Part III. The Flaws of the Identity Synthesis
  • 8. How to Understand Each Other
  • 9. The Joys of Mutual Influence
  • 10. Speak Freely
  • 11. The Case for Integration
  • 12. The Path to Equality
  • 13. On Structural Racism, Gender, and Meritocracy
  • Part IV. In Defense of Universalism
  • 14. A Response to the Identity Synthesis
  • 15. A Brief Case for the Liberal Alternative
  • Conclusion: How to Escape the Identity Trap
  • Appendix: Why the Identity Synthesis Isn't Marxist
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • Index
Review by Choice Review

Mounk (international affairs, Johns Hopkins Univ.) challenges the so-called identity myth which encourages people to conceive of themselves chiefly as members of competing racial, ethnic, or sexual groups, rather than as individuals equally entitled to the rights that classic liberalism upholds. Emphasizing group identity prevents people from "broaden[ing] their allegiances" so as to promote "sustainability, solidarity, and social justice" (p. 14). It also misleads individuals about how to attain "the sense of belonging and social recognition" they seek, while alienating those who seek mutual understanding or do not fit neatly into one group--e.g., mixed-race individuals (p. 15). Instead of reducing identitarianism to a form of cultural or race Marxism as other critics have done, Mounk traces its origin to "the rejection of grand narratives" (including Marxism) by postwar French intellectuals such as Michel Foucault and Jean-Paul Sartre, who influenced critical legal theorists disaffected with the American Civil Rights Movement like Derrick Bell and Kimberlé Crenshaw (p. 19). At the extreme, advocates like Gayatri Spivak simultaneously affirm and deny the reality of essentialist categories like sex, depending on strategic imperatives. Mounk stresses social media's role in popularizing such esoteric doctrines. While acknowledging identitarianism's appeal, Mounk, a professed philosophical and political liberal, urges its transcendence. Summing Up: Highly recommended. General readers through faculty; professionals. --David Lewis Schaefer, College of the Holy Cross

Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.
Review by Publisher's Weekly Review

In this poorly argued polemic, political scientist Mounk (The Great Experiment) offers an intellectual history of "identity synthesis"­--a term of his own devising, which is hard to distinguish from the more familiar "identity politics"--and warns of its dangers. After tracing the intellectual legacy of several 20th-century theorists--with a focus on Michel Foucault and postmodernism, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak and postcolonialism, and Derrick Bell and critical race theory--Mounk explains that these thinkers' ideas were synthesized into an antiliberal, censorious, segregationist dogma on college campuses and online in the early 2000s. This "ideology" went mainstream in the mid-2010s, especially in medicine and education, where institutions began to adopt theoretical frameworks under which it was believed the best way to achieve equity for students and patients was not to treat everyone equally, but to offer "preferential treatment" and exclusionary experiences (like Black affinity groups in educational settings) to members of marginalized groups. Mounk cautions against this mindset (citing antiwhite workplace sensitivity trainings and unjustified cancelings over "cultural appropriation," among other things), and recommends that the political left-of-center return to a liberalism characterized by freedom of expression and equal treatment of all. Throughout, though, evidence and examples are not thoroughly explained; instead, Mounk crafts bulleted lists of "key takeaways" that sidestep complication and essentially render his central argument as one being waged against a gargantuan straw man. Readers will not be convinced. (Sept.)

(c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
Review by Kirkus Book Review

A passionate book about how the things we have in common are greater than the things that divide us. Early on Mounk reminds us that, during the Covid-19 pandemic, some health authorities decided that the limited supplies of the newly created vaccine should be allocated to people according to race even though it meant that fewer lives would be saved. This led him to the conclusion that the conflict between identity politics--his preferred term is identity synthesis--and liberalism is the critical struggle of our time. Mounk, the author of The Great Experiment and The People vs. Democracy, should not be dismissed as a reactionary basement scribbler: He is a respected academic at John Hopkins University, a contributor to the Atlantic, the founder of Persuasion magazine, and he has published prolifically about the dangers of far-right extremists and nationalistic demagogues. An unabashed liberal, the author acknowledges the lure of identity politics, with its quasi-religious fervor and Manichaean simplicity. The trap is that by placing group identity at the center of all discourse, it locks in a victim mentality and a pattern of destructive conflict. Mounk also notes that identity politics deliberately ignores the social progress made since the 1960s. For years, identity politics was a marginal academic interest, but the explosion of social media and the election of Donald Trump took it mainstream. It found its way into media organizations, government agencies, corporations, and schools, and its advocates were always ready to shout down and punish anyone who disagreed. For it to spin out of control, Mounk writes, it only requires that good people stay silent. Hardcore proponents and detractors alike may not be won over, but there is a vast middle that can be reached through open debate and plain common sense. This book is a solid launching point for further constructive debate. A thoughtful deconstruction of identity politics well worth discussing. Copyright (c) Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.

Copyright (c) Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.

In the late summer of 2020, Kila Posey asked the principal of Mary Lin Elementary School, in the wealthy suburbs of Atlanta, whether she could request a specific teacher for her seven-​year-​old daughter. "No worries,"the principal responded at first. "Just send me the teacher's name." But when Posey emailed her request, the principal kept suggesting that a different teacher would be a better fit. Eventually, Posey, who is Black, demanded to know why her daughter couldn't have her first choice. "Well," the principal admitted, "that's not the Black class." The story sounds depressingly familiar. It evokes the long and brutal history of segregation, conjuring up visions of white parents who are horrified at the prospect of their children having classmates who are Black. But there is a perverse twist: the principal, Sharyn Briscoe, is herself Black. As Posey told the Atlanta Black Star , she was left in "disbelief that I was having this conversation in 2020 with a person that looks just like me--a Black woman. It's segregating classrooms. You cannot segregate classrooms. You can't do it." The events at Mary Lin Elementary School, it turns out, are not the continuation of an old and familiar story; they are part of a new ideological trend. In a growing number of schools all across America, educators who believe themselves to be fighting for racial justice are separating children from each other on the basis of their skin color. Some public schools have started segregating particular subjects. Evanston Township High School, in the suburbs of Chicago, now offers calculus classes reserved for students who "identify as Black." Many more are embracing race-​segregated"affinity groups." A school district in Wellesley, Massachusetts, for example, recently hosted a "Healing Space for Asian and Asian American Students." As an emailed invitation emphasized,"This is a safe space for our Asian/ Asian-​American and Students of Color,*not* for students who identify only as White." The Fourteenth Amendment and the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Brown v. Board of Education establish narrow limits on the extent to which state institutions can discriminate between citizens on the basis of their skin color. As a result, the adoption of racially segregated classrooms and safe spaces at public schools has inspired legal challenges and even a federal investigation. But what happened in Atlanta, Evanston, and Wellesley has long since become common practice in private schools, which are subject to less stringent restrictions. At some of America's most elite schools, from Boston to Los Angeles,teachers now routinely divide students into different groups based on their race or ethnicity. In many cases, such groups are effectively mandatory. In some, students are so young that their teachers need to tell them which group to join. At Gordon, a storied private school in Rhode Island, teachers start to divide children into affinity groups--which meet every week and are divided by race--in kindergarten. "A play-​basedcurriculum that explicitly affirms racial identity," wrote Julie Parsons, a longtime teacher at Gordon, which was recently honored for its efforts at diversity, equity, and inclusion by the National Association of Independent Schools, is especially important "for the youngest learners."Dalton, a prestigious school on New York's Upper East Side that educates the children of the city's elite, has gone out of its way to explain the pedagogical goals that animate such practices. According to statements and outside resources hosted on Dalton's website, anti racist institutions must help their students achieve the right racial identity. A conversation between experts convened by a prominent organization that has worked closely with the school and is fittingly called EmbraceRace points out that when students are young, "even a person of color or Black person might say:I don't see myself as a racial being. I'm just human." The task of a good education is to change that attitude: "We are racial beings." And the first step toward that goal is to reject the "color-​blindidea" that our commonalities are more important than our differences. Of late, some schools have even started to encourage their white students to define themselves in racial terms. Bank Street School for Children,on New York's Upper West Side, for example, is one of the most renowned early education institutions in the country. Proud to be at the vanguard of progressive pedagogy, it serves both as a K-8school and as a training college that educates hundreds of future teachers every year. Recently,Bank Street has started dividing its students into a "Kids of Color Affinity Group" and an (all-​white)"Advocacy Group." The goal of the white group, a slide from the school explains, is to "raise awareness of the prevalence of Whiteness and privilege," encouraging students to "own"their "European ancestry." It is this new approach to pedagogy that inspired Sharyn Briscoe, the principal of Mary Lin Elementary School, to create a "Black class." Briscoe grew up in the suburbs of Philadelphia, attending a predominantly white private school in which she often felt isolated. When she earned a degree in education at Spelman College, she imbibed a new set of ideas that was meant to save children from the fate she herself had suffered. As Beverly Daniel Tatum, a renowned education scholar and former president of Spelman, asks in a highly influential book, "If a young person has found a niche among a circle of White friends, is it really necessary to establish a Black peer group?" Answering in the affirmative, Tatum recommends that schools ensure that all students make friends within their own racial group "by separating the Black students" for at least some portion of every week. Kila Posey strongly disagrees with this idea. An educator herself, she believes that "putting my daughters in a class with a whole bunch of people who look like them isn't necessarily going to give them community." Picking and choosing which classmates her two daughters should make friends with on the basis of their skin color, she told Briscoe in one of their first encounters, "is not your job." When I interviewed Posey about her multiyear battle with Atlanta's school district, she spoke with great composure, recalling facts and figures with the precision of somebody who has become consumed by a righteous cause. Only when I asked her to describe what hopes she harbors for her daughters' futures did her voice betray her emotions. "For my girls, the sky is the limit. They can do and be whatever they want," she said with a suppressed tremor in her voice. After her daughters watched Kamala Harris's inauguration as vice president of the United States, they grew determined to follow in her footsteps. But whatever they might ultimately choose to do, Posey insisted, "they're going to be at the table. And they need to be able to get along with everybody." The profound disagreement between Kila Posey and Sharyn Briscoe is just one small skirmish in a much larger battle of ideas. In the place of universalism, parts of the American mainstream are quickly adopting a form of progressive separatism. Schools and universities, foundations and some corporations seem to believe that they should actively encourage people to conceive of themselves as "racial beings." Increasingly, they are also applying the same framework to other forms of identity, encouraging people to think of their gender, their cultural origin, or their sexual orientation as their defining attribute. And of late, many institutions have taken yet another step: they have concluded that it is their duty to make how they treat people depend on the groups to which they belong--even when it comes to such existential decisions as whom to prioritize for lifesaving drugs. Excerpted from The Identity Trap: A Story of Ideas and Power in Our Time by Yascha Mounk All rights reserved by the original copyright owners. Excerpts are provided for display purposes only and may not be reproduced, reprinted or distributed without the written permission of the publisher.