Identity politics rarely fares well under direct scrutiny

In March, the NSW Liberal government retained power somewhat against the odds. In May, the Coalition won the federal election against the collective wisdom of almost the entirety of the political class.

More important was how the elections played out, especially in the case of the UK and Australia. Though Shorten is not in the same ideological space as Corbyn, both lead their parties leftward, taking a slew of boldly left-wing policies to the election.

Both made the pitch that the country was fundamentally on the wrong track. Both lost.

Despite these setbacks, centre-left parties across the western world continue to move firmly back and to the left, reviving left-wing ideas (such as Shorten’s living wage push) and standard-bearers from the 70s and before.

And, though this year’s election results suggest that electorates are not yet following them, it’s no time for complacency for the centre-right.

After all, it’s unlikely the left will reverse course again any time soon and embrace the free market, and it would be bold to assume the voters are unreservedly abhorred by the socialism at the heart of these progressive agendas.

The most worrying thing – such is the dominance of socialism among the young – is that if voting was restricted to those under 50 years of age, Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn would be receiving congratulatory snapchats from President Bernie Sanders and Prime Minister Bill Shorten (even though ironically none of those three would be eligible to vote for themselves).

Polls suggest Labour in Britain won an absolute majority of those aged 18 to 34 and outpolled the Tories by as much as 50 per cent among those aged 35 to 44. Voting alignment used to be based on socio-economic groups – where the Tories basically won every group – but is now much more based on age.

In Australia, the Labor party decisively won among voters under the age of 35 at the 2019 election, and polling by the Centre for Independent Studies last year found that almost 60 per cent of Australian millennials had a favourable view of socialism.

And age only heads in one direction.

Morrison and Johnson aren’t just showing how to win elections, they are revealing the hollowness of the modern left.

The counter-argument is that it is easy to want to upend the system when you are young and have no skin in the game, are working a low-income entry-level job and living in a share house. It’s another thing altogether when you have something to lose.

Whether Gen Y continues its leftward trajectory into middle age is one of the most important questions for the future of politics.

However, the immediate risk is that the lesson learned from these defeats is not to abandon the left’s failed policies but to focus on finding charismatic messengers who can gloss over the unpleasant reality of those policies.

As is clear from the Labor post-election review, Shorten’s unpopularity was a significant contributor to the election loss. Indeed, the ANU Australian Election Study data suggested he was the least popular leader of a major political party since 1990. No-one with a popularity level that low has won an election in the history of the study.

Corbyn too was a huge problem for the Labour party in the UK. He had decades of questionable connections with fringe groups and support for Communist dictators, and he was seen as enabling anti-semitism in the Labour party.

Yet in New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern – who was president of the International Union of Socialist Youth prior to her election to parliament in 2008 and described capitalism as a “blatant failure” – is Prime Minister and seemingly popular.

In the US, congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who says she is a ‘democratic socialist’, is fast making a name for herself and securing support for her ruinous ‘Green New Deal’.

But as “AOC” likes to put it herself, these younger millennial socialists insist it’s not about the ‘Red Scare boogeyman’ – a statement which unwittingly reveals a potentially surprising truth.

Though much has been written about the supposed influence of Marxism on the emergence of identity politics, less focus has been given to the reverse proposition. Modern socialism is just another marker for identity politics. It’s no longer a set of discrete beliefs, and it’s sure not about the working class: it’s an anti-capitalist affectation for the disaffected middle-classes.

Identity politics prizes subjective experiences even over the objective evidence. It focuses on the intention of actors, not necessarily as heavily on their results. It emphasises overwhelmingly the importance of symbolism and gestures. It obsesses over minute issues. And it frequently borrows the injustices of another age to ignore the evidence of progress in this one.

And thus the historical materialism of 19th century Marxism, becomes amorphous 21st century identity socialism.

Of course, unlike their Marxist forbears, the modern identity socialists aren’t so keen on surrendering the gains of capitalism – they won’t forgo their smartphones or affordable air travel – they just have some vague feeling that the system should be ‘fairer’.

In a sense, this vacuousness reveals where Shorten and Corbyn went wrong, and likely explains recent falls in the polls suffered by US Democratic ‘candidate with a plan for everything’, Elizabeth Warren. They provided far too much detail, especially on the real life cost of their progressive policies.

Identity politics rarely fares well under direct scrutiny.

Such a flaw lies at the core of all genuinely progressive agendas: the state isn’t a benevolent entity with infinite resources to provide whatever you want, free of charge.

Many ordinary people are rightfully worried they will be worse off. Which, just as a reminder, was the lesson of the fall of Communism too.

All of this is truly great news for the right. Morrison and Johnson aren’t just showing how to win elections, they are revealing the hollowness of the modern left. What remains to be seen is whether the new politics of the right is similarly hollow.