“Identity politics” is one of the most controversial terms in recent debates about the arts. And now, the most powerful people in the United States are blaming almost everything about “Dei” and “Wokeness.” The very concept of diversity as a positive ideal appears to be under threat.
At the same time, so far, it hasn’t been anywhere near the protest you’re hoping for. Civil society feels unfair. At least some of it seems confused about what’s wrong to take us here, and the population section has almost dominated advances in mainstream culture just a few years ago It appears to reject or adjust ideas.
Perhaps repulsion was always inevitable. But how do we find a way to move forward? How do you talk about the real criticism of what has recently disrupted or alienated the social justice culture of the past without adopting the conditions of the present truly destructive culture war?
A few weeks ago, we asked art critic Dean Kissick on a podcast to talk about Harper’s magazine’s December cover story. In my essay on ArtNet in response to him, “Will the art world be back in 2025?” I think anyone looking for constructive ways should read the theorist Olúfẹ́miO. Táíwò Book Elite Capture That concluded. Powerful took over the politics of identity (and everything else).
Táíwò teaches philosophy at Georgetown University and writes for stores such as foreign policy, nation, and New Yorkers. He has written two books on political theory, reconsidering reparations and elite capture. The concepts he developed are very helpful in thinking about some of these issues, such as “elite capture,” “politics of respect,” and “being in the room.” The problem of the day – I wanted to take him to discuss it.
– Ben Davis
