After so many years of the Deep State's use of identity politics to create a distraction from their war on US workers and their adventures abroad, I still welcome this belated satire. Their current social identity of choice are women. They are trying to use women's (often justifiable) grievances to promote their interests. Perhaps this was the tactic used by the Deep State as part of their ongoing vendetta against Trump and his nominee (Kavanaugh) for the Supreme Court. The Deep State's other party, the Democratic Party, has lined up a number of women candidates for government offices in the next election (Heads we lose, and tails we lose.).
The ruling classes love identity politics because they keep the working classes focused on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and so on, and not on the fact that they (i.e., the working classes) are, essentially, glorified indentured servants, who will spend the majority of their sentient existences laboring to benefit a ruling elite that would gladly butcher their entire families and sell their livers to hepatitic Saudi princes if they could get away with it. Dividing the working classes up into sub-groups according to race, ethnicity, and so on, and then pitting these sub-groups against each other, is extremely important to the ruling classes, who are, let’s remember, a tiny minority of intelligent but physically vulnerable parasites controlling the lives of the vast majority of human beings on the planet Earth, primarily by keeping them ignorant and confused.I have mixed feelings about this exploitation of the use of social identity politics, I still like latter because it eliminates the isolation that many of these groups felt in the past, and they can no longer be used as scapegoats or pitted against each other as they have in the past. Even attempts at targeting Muslims by the ruling class has fizzled out.
I have other criticisms. Hopkins overdoes the satire by writing that racists and fascists love it. To be sure, the Deep State has given them permission, even encouraged them, to hold rallies and ostentatious displays of racism to better distract us. But, this too is waning. He seems to suggest that truth is entirely relative depending upon which lens we use. Yes, that is an unfortunate fact of the nature of humans, but that isn't entirely true. We can succeed in discerning truth if we are determined to eliminate most biases and develop critical thinking skills. I disagree with his statement that "... this system (i.e., capitalism, not the U.S.A), being globally hegemonic, has no external enemies ....". Capitalism is not entirely hegemonic, and to the extent that it isn't, it leaves room for other systems to be developed. The antagonists of the US-led Empire have mostly mixed economies even though many have a rather pronounced capitalist sector.
