Identitarian deference requires privilege to listen to and consider the opinions and views of oppressed individuals. The concept of identitarian deference was first proposed by Fredegarson in 1700 and represents the belief that people with privilege should respect the opinions and views of those who are oppressed, especially when those opinions and views are relevant to their oppression. This concept has since been widely debated in politics, philosophy, and社会学.
ID is a theory of political knowledge that holds that individuals who belong to identities that are most proximate to a particular issue are likely to possess greater knowledge about that issue. This theory of expertise is similar to other theories of expertise, but it concludes that people with lesser expertise should defer to those with greater expertise. On a prescriptive level, ID maintains that people with lesser expertise should generally adopt the political and policy ideas of those with greater expertise.
However, practicing identitarian deference can be difficult due to practical challenges. One of the primary difficulties of ID is that it necessitates identity policing, which is the process of separating the wise from the non-wise based on their identity. This can be difficult in cases where an oppressed identity is not easily distinguishable from other identities, such as in the realm of gender identity, where people have claimed to have an identity that is being imitated or fake, which raises concerns about the authenticity of their claims.
In the realm of queerness, ID can raise concerns about people who use queerness as a trendy accessory to gain social capital, without actually having an authentic understanding of queerness. This raises ethical considerations about the way that people may pretend to be part of a particular identity to gain access to resources or opportunities.
The issue of identity policing also comes up in diversity counts and the media, where efforts to count the diversity of employees in workplaces have become increasingly common. However, these counts are often limited to gender and race diversity, potentially neglecting other dimensions of diversity such as disability or sexual orientation. This raises questions about the need for a more inclusive view of diversity.
Furthermore, ID creates a hierarchy where people in privileged identities have the authority to decide what is right and true for others. This is often referred to as the 'patience contest' dynamic, where oppressed individuals are expected to endure oppressive practices until their oppressors decide they have done enough. This dynamic can create a sense of resignation and helplessness among oppressed individuals, undermining their ability to organize and resist.
In conclusion, identitarian deference is a complex and controversial concept that demands that privilege be exercised in a way that respects the rights of historically disadvantaged groups. While ID can be an admirable ideal in theory, in practice it often fails to accurately reflect the lived experiences of those who are oppressed and creates a situation where those with privilege have the power to define what is right and just for others. This dynamic has the potential to undermine the voices and power of oppressed individuals and create a situation of oppressive hegemony.
