In “It’s Not ‘Identity Politics,’ It’s Anti-White Politics,” I questioned whether the term “identity politics” vaguely comports with our racial politics on tera firma. The answer was a resounding “no.”

For, “Whatever is convulsing the country, it’s not identity politics. Blacks are not being pitted against Hispanics. Hispanics are not being sicced on Asians, and Ameri-Indians aren’t being urged to attack the groups just mentioned. Rather, they’re all piling on honky.”

Since the ire of America’s multicultural multitudes is directed exclusively at whites and their putative privilege, not at each other, anti-white animus is the more appropriate term.

The “identity politics” term is an elaborate construct hot-housed in the postmodernist university. Yet, commentators, conservatives too, cleave to abstracted definitions developed in citadels far removed from reality. Duly, the author of “Why Identity Politics Kills Democracy” harps on the “political selfishness” that comes with a “fanatical fetishization” of “group identity.”

“A politics of whiteness is a scourge. A Hispanic politics is a scourge. An LGBT politics is a scourge. A plutocratic politics is a scourge. A feminist politics is a scourge.” The only “true politics,” bewails our author, is one that “unites individuals under a single identity: citizen.”

Group hug.

In relation to reality, this kind of conservative political preening is a bit of a farce. Why so? Because undergirding the factional identity politics so roundly condemned is a practiced anti-whiteness. Hispanic, LGBT, plutocrat and feminist: All would concur. The road to their political salvation is in collaborating to extinguish “white dominant culture.”

Used in the main by media conservatives, “identity politics” is invoked, consciously or unconsciously, it would seem, because conservatives want to be nice. To be nice, one must remain in denial of things not nice. Conservatives refuse to come to terms with the fact that our politics are almost exclusively anti-white, and not anti-Other, more exotic identities.

It’s also considered politically incorrect or “racist” to advocate on behalf of whites—even if whites qua whites are being dangerously maligned and marginalized; even if there is an anti-white sentiment that runs through our institutions, both public and private.

And woe betide those who perpetuates the idea of white ethnocide, say in South Africa. She herself is, then, libeled as a racist.

The logical paradox is that to warn of systemic hatred against browns and blacks is considered racially virtuous; to fear the same for whites is deemed incorrigibly racist.

For fear of being dubbed racists, media conservatives simply look the other way, refusing to acknowledge our anti-white politics.

Here’s how conservatives hide from the bruising realities of anti-white politics:

They pretend that “identity politics,” being an excrescence of Democratic politics, aims to divide one and all. To that end, conservatives routinely resort to the “Dems are dividing us” routine. By so doing, conservatives, ever eager to get along, also virtue-signal their position as seekers of national unity. “We’re in this together; Democrats aren’t.”

ORDER IT NOW

That’s a whole other level of denial, given that, it’s not exclusively identity politics that Democrats are presiding over, but politics dangerously anti-white. Blacks are not berating Hispanics for dominating industries they previously dominated; Asians aren’t complaining about Ameri-Indians being given university slots they’ve earned. Rather, blacks, Hispanics and the rest are all piling on whites.

Denial in action was radio talker Tammy Bruce. When quizzed about Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke’s apology over his “whiteness,” on the Tucker Carlson Show, Bruce reflexively pivoted away from the reality of racist, endemic, anti-white hatred.

Expected as she was to answer as to why men like Beto keep apologizing for their existence, Tammy Bruce might have opened, reasonably, by pointing out that, to distinguish from white men, black men don’t apologize for their existence.

Instead, Tammy headed for the proverbial hills, turning away from whiteness—the thing that informed O’Rourke’s apology—and the question she was asked to answer, to … wait for this: “Humanity.”

Asserted Bruce: It’s a Democrat thing to apologize for the sins of humanity. Climate change, for instance.

At that point in the show, I scratched my head and wondered how Bruce got from A (whites expiating over their whiteness) to B (Democrats’ hate of humanity).

To those who cleave closely to the contours of an argument, the pivot will seem inorganic. But to the Republican maze rat it’s rote.

Our politics are an anti-white show and sham . Yet, conservatives mistake leftist, multicultural politics for the problem. They think that by coming together as citizens, the diverse cults and clans of America will transcend their white-hot hatred of whites.