Math nerds? Help formulate class vs. identity marker formula
adding to our arsenal of arguments, even though most libs and conservatives are irrational at at this point
I was arguing in a civilized manner with some one who is very smart and part of a liberal org about identity politics and class. He said we cannot do away with identity markers and that many people thought that we had transcended class struggle as the maker of history. I didn’t want to get all nerdy about Marxism and modes of production because we had time constraints and my interlocutors were not going to nod along if I cited Karl, no matter how convincing my reading of the old mole might be. (Marx falls on one side of the debate and I was talking to thoughtful liberals who did not want to sign on the bottom line of historical materialism as the method with which we can best understand politics and culture).
I was like sure, O.K., but these two categories are not fungible. One points at the possibility of universalism the other at an additive pluralism. But no, that was too Marxist too, so I used a mathematical formula I’ve been thinking about a lot, but my memory of Calculus and Geometry is pretty shaky since I last took a math class in freshman year of college to fulfill a requirement. But here goes! And math nerds, please help!
If we were to write identity as an equation, class is the function and the other identity markers are variables.
Functions are not variables and variables cannot be functions. Functions however determine the ability of the variables to relate to other equations whether through differentials or equivalences.
OK, that’s all.
I was also talking to Matt G. about ‘persuading’ people of the importance of class in progressive politics, and he said he was bad at making arguments. Matt — you’re not bad at making arguments. There are certain situations where persuasion simply does not work. We don’t speak in an abstract, Platonic plane of reason, although as a Frankfurt Schooler, I believe we should aspire to reason and objectivity as much as possible. We should find truths adequate to our shared reality in order to inhabit the world with others, either in love or conflict or indifference. We share the world.
But help math people! I want to learn!
“Transcended class struggle?”
Pardon my French, but what the fuck is wrong with this guy? When’s the last time this person had to work a retail job, assuming he’s ever had one? Or has any retail/customer service workers in his social circles?
This isn’t any help with posing the concepts as a math equation—Mark’s formulation is especially well put—but perhaps helpful to recall a simple explanation made by the Fields sisters: “class and race are concepts of a different order; they do not occupy the same analytical space, and thus cannot constitute explanatory alternatives to each other.”
Btw, I asked ChatGPT to explain Mark’s equation and present a snippet of the explanation below: “the result of applying the function Class to a specific set of inputs suggests that identity is not an additive sum of traits but the structured output or position resulting from the way these traits are mediated through class.” ChatGPT then goes on to offer a conceptual meaning to the above: “class is not just one identity category among others, but the organizing principle (the function) through which the meanings and material effects of other identities are constructed and experienced.”