NOTE: While I did support certain candidates in the 2019–20 Democratic primaries because of their ideas (e.g. UBI, anti-war, broad tent approach), it doesn't mean I endorse their other positions.
Welcome to Moral Libertarian View, a podcast style program where we discuss big ideas to see if they can contribute to more individual liberty and equal opportunity, values that are at the heart of the Moral Libertarian idea. My aim is to untangle the confusions and seek the truth, in the areas of civilizational values, economic policy, and culture. I hope you subscribe if you are interested.
A while ago, I uploaded a video where I made the case for Dave Rubin to get Andrew Yang on his show. You know, two individuals big on freedom, coming together to have a chat. And it appears that Rubin has done exactly what I wanted him to do! Last week, the Rubin Report featuring Andrew Yang was finally released, and they discussed some very interesting topics. One of these was identity politics. Rubin, as you all know, is very concerned about identity politics taking over the Democratic Party. As I always say, there is actually plenty of identity politics on both sides, and it's not just the Democrats. But the Democrats do have an identity politics problem, as evident in the platforms of candidates like Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren, who even said that 'race matters'. I'm sorry Warren, but race shouldn't matter!
So how does Yang see identity politics? He is, from what I see, not in favor of it. Yang thinks there should be less identity politics, and more consensus building, more bridge building. I totally agree. I mean, I am all for listening to people who are doing it tough, and if people are discriminated against because of their immutable characteristics I'm all for preventing it from happening. I have no problems with things like the Equality Act currently before the US Congress, and I believe Andrew Yang is on the same page as myself there. But the thing is, when it comes to dealing with structural issues and social norms in general, it is best to have universalist solutions that everyone can benefit from equally, regardless of race, religion, gender, sexuality, or political affiliation. For example, Yang understands that economic disadvantage affects many different demographics, and it may affect each demographic in specifically different ways. But his solution is to let everyone have the Freedom Dividend. After all, at the end of the day, economic disadvantage is economic disadvantage, and fixing it doesn't require looking at skin color or gender. There is no point in making this issue divisive along those lines. It's much better to emphasize our commonalities and bring people together. Having solutions where everyone is treated equally, like how everyone gets $1000 per month with the Freedom Dividend without discrimination, is the best way to bring people together.
Another thing I often talk about is how identity politics is actually a substitute for the strong bonds of society that we once had. In a world where families and traditional institutions are weak, people are prone to instead make bonds over identity markers. Therefore, making family structures and the social fabric strong again is perhaps the best solution to combating identity politics. Andrew Yang's platform is very pro-family, from the Freedom Dividend to money for marriage counselling, and he also cares about making communities healthy again. In other words, Yang doesn't just say he wants to move away from identity politics; he has actual policies that will help make it a reality.
Of course, I have to emphasize again that the problem of identity politics doesn't just exist on the Democratic side, and in some ways this is particularly relevant to candidates like Andrew Yang. For example, I have heard from people who said that they won't support Yang simply because he is a Democrat. Ironically, this is often supported by the argument that the Democrats are the party of identity politics. Apparently, Yang is a Democrat, so he will play identity politics just like Hillary Clinton, even if he says otherwise. Well, guess what. That is also a form of identity politics! Stereotyping people by their associations, defining one's position against others based on identity markers of any kind, that's very much identity politics. As individualists true to the classical liberal tradition, we should reject identity-based considerations, and we should be consistently for ideas over identities all the time. Ideas over identities. We can do this by considering every person, every candidate, and every issue on its merits. Yang has a big platform of policies, in fact there are at least several dozen of them. He should be judged on those policies, and not how others in his party behave.
That's all for today. I'll be back next time to discuss another big idea. Subscribe if you want to follow our story. The transcripts are available on my website, and my Medium profile. And remember to resist the hive mind and stay individualistic. The world depends on it.
