In the last 30 days, Jewish-American voters, who historically swing reliably left, have been confronted with a harsh reality. Many of their emerging politicians and many of their fellow Democrat voters are at best apologists for antisemitism and at worst full-throated supporters of the rape, murder, kidnapping and mutilation of Jews in Israel and abroad. This is especially true among younger Democrat voters, many having gone through the trouble to tear down flyers drawing attention to kidnapped Jews currently held by Hamas. While this dynamic is an extreme example, it has already played out among other warring factions in the make-believe world of the American Left, from female athletes to left-leaning university professors. The through line is consistent. When your time comes to be the effigy of oppression, no punishment is too severe.
A culture war on the fringes is in full escalation. Not the main culture war in the U.S., mind you, but the results of radicalization amidst one side of that war and the filling of its ranks with a cobbled-together confederacy of different minorities of varying degrees of fashionableness. All are trained and indoctrinated with a central narrative: “You are oppressed, and people who don’t look, use the bathroom or take others to bed like you are to blame for your troubles.”
If you’ve been part of a particularly uncomfortable struggle session brought to you by your HR department at work, or your kids home from college ruined your holiday meal, odds are intersectional politics played some role. Intersectionality is the basic building block in a larger oppression calculus as a sort of rock, paper, scissors process to determine who holds the moral high ground in any given situation. Indeed, from DEI to the larger economic framework of ESG, intersectional identity is considered au courant while simultaneously destined for collapse.
Intersectionality is imploding because its founders lacked the forethought to play out their theories to their logical ends. It was always an inevitability, as self-destruction was built into its flawed foundational assumptions. These assumptions undergird the theoretical framework meant to explore how social and political identities (primarily race, sex and sexual orientation — a poor predictor of outcomes compared to other, more reliable variables — intersect and overlap. In other words, largely aggregated multivariate analysis, to anyone who examines or analyzes data. This is partly what is wrong with it. It is not only not granular enough. It examines some of the least informative variables about a person. But following the logic to its end is anathema to the founders of intersectional theory, the roots of which can be found in early feminist thought. Feminist, meaning advancing the cause for women’s rights. Remember this point as it will make a later appearance.
Why?
It wasn’t hard to see the rift coming in women’s sports when the trans issue became the fashion of the day. In the same sense that Rudy Giuliani used the freshly-drafted RICO statute to define his career as a New York prosecutor only to potentially fall victim to his own monster some 40 years later, the concept that arose from the depths of feminist theory at the hands of Kimberle Crenshaw is now erasing women from the history books. The irony here is that the mediocre male athletes dethroning the female greats are largely white males, many of whom, as in William ‘Lia’ Thomas’ case, happen to be straight. What do all these straight white male super athletes who wouldn’t make the men’s collegiate team have in common? You’d have to think politically to answer that.
Along the same lines, we’ll see a break among an increasing segment of the LGBs from the TQ+s in the future, largely due to the Marxist cultural revolution baked into the Qs and the use of the Ts as a weapon against everything that was until five minutes ago basic biological fact throughout human history. The latter is a cudgel with which the former attempts to further tear down the functioning Western world. This claim is further supported by the fact that bisexuals and pansexuals serve to hold the same placeholder, though their prefixes hint at the structural incompatibility of two separate religious denominations.
That is a major foundational difference that pales in comparison to the rift coming once the data on early onset gender identity dysphoria (GID) is more widely known and understood. Of the youth diagnosed with GID when they were too young to legally get a tattoo, between 61% and 88% across multiple studies were no longer gender dysphoric upon follow-up, and between 47% and 50% of the desisting respondent males identified as homosexual. How many gay adults my age or older can honestly say that they, had they grown up in this generation, wouldn’t have fallen victim to this phenomenon largely driven by political radicalism and healthcare industry profits? The division coming once this is more widely known means another schism in the alphabetical theology.
It’s poetic that the trans symbology forms a wedge on the more militant variation of the pride flag. Someone either knew what they were doing or truly did not.
Meanwhile, those who would otherwise enjoy a higher status in the intersectional calculus but who oppose this madness are neither really black, really gay or really women. Of course, the raised Marxist fist was never about intersectional identity, only the collection of human fists aimed at a common enemy – the foundations of Western thought.
What traumatized Jewish-American voters are learning is that their greatest sin, according to many of their fellow Democrat voters, is aligning with the West against barbarism and intimidation — the American Left’s stock-in-trade.
Brooks Crenshaw is a writer, columnist, and speaker who focuses primarily on philosophy, economics, and policy while serving as a manufacturing and technology consultant. With a background as a Naval Special Warfare intelligence professional and an economic advisor for the Commonwealth of Kentucky, he holds an MBA from Vanderbilt University.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.