This Martin Luther King Day, I revisited something I wrote about racism, specifically aimed at white people since I can only share my experience as a white man.
I’ve noticed many white Buddhists strongly oppose “identity politics,” thinking it contradicts Buddha’s teachings. But what exactly is “identity politics”? According to Satya Mohanty, it involves collective action by people who share a marginalized social characteristic like ethnicity, gender, class, or religion, and have common political interests.
By this definition, movements like civil rights, Black Lives Matter, women’s suffrage, and gay pride are all examples of identity politics.
Often, critics of identity politics describe it very differently from academic definitions. For instance, some believe it means valuing group identity over individuality, or classifying and judging people based on group identity. These interpretations often add negative connotations and are far removed from what identity politics really means or how it operates in real life.
I’ve never met someone from a minority who prioritizes their ethnicity above all else. Typically, people define themselves by multiple aspects such as being a parent or a spouse. People usually only become acutely aware of their race during discriminatory encounters, like being stopped by the police repeatedly or questioned about their origins.
The real issue isn’t what critics describe. It’s that white people often see identity politics as a surrender of individuality or as an assertion of superiority. However, these problems aren’t unique to identity politics. They can appear in any group endeavor, including spiritual communities. Campaigning for equal rights doesn’t necessarily mean adopting group-think or rejecting individuality.
The aim of identity politics is not tribalism but equality. It’s about rectifying unfair treatment, not oppressing others. Most people advocating for rights and equality don’t view the groups oppressing them as inherently evil but as capable of change.
Concerns about superiority and inferiority within identity politics do exist, but they are not inherent to it. Discrimination and oppression are real, and focusing on these does more good than blaming oppressed individuals for their reactions.
The fear of losing individuality or claiming superiority can happen in any group setting, even in religious communities. Yet, collective actions often include maintaining individuality and avoiding a superiority complex.
Identifying as part of a marginalized group is a necessary step toward achieving equality. Ignoring race won’t solve racism; recognizing oppression and actively opposing it will. Martin Luther King Jr. understood this. His fight for equality wasn’t about being color-blind, but about acknowledging and combating racism.
Critics of identity politics often resemble the white moderates King criticized—those who prefer order over justice. As a white Buddhist, I feel it’s my duty to not only recognize but oppose passive attitudes that allow racism to persist. Speaking out and acting against oppression and racism is crucial.
Additionally, while fighting for human equality, it’s important to recognize our anthropocentric views and how they lead to the exploitation of other sentient beings. As a Buddhist, I find teachings against human superiority very compelling and integral to a holistic approach to equality and compassion.