> Christians of every era have their political goals too. And of course, claimed to own peace, equality and justice.
Christianity has been fairly expressly political for most of its history post-Constantine, and the divisions between different Christian subgroups have often turned more on the political divisions than any notional theological divides.
> The question is whether the mass movement and the institutional and cultural mass are even ‘aware of’ let alone ‘coordinating for’ these political ambitions.
And the answer is, quite clearly, that yes, they are.
> Contrast this with union activity, the temperance movement, civil rights era – etx.
And…what? I’m rather deeply familiar with all of those — while I’m currently working in technology, this is actually the domain that I studied deeply. The division you are drawing is absolutely without any substance whatsoever.
> This ‘identity-fist politics’ is not a politics; its a religious awakening for a new era of identity.
That is no more true than it was of the rise of labor unionism or the civil rights movements, which had an equally “religious” (and quite often overtly religious, as well) character…and an equal focus of political objectives.
The dichotomy you are trying to draw is bogus.
> You will no doubt find genuine politics going on, and evangelists like Colbert appearing to champion them – but this isnt a political awakening. It isnt the 20s or 60s.
Well, sure, if I were comparing the modern BLM movement, for instance, to the Civil Rights movement, I would compare it more to the mid-1950s than the 1960s. But that’s not a difference of degree of political nature of the movement, but degree of political leverage that comes from successful mobilization around a broad concept that brings the power to not merely have a variety of competing political demands within a movement subordinate to the broad problem statement, but actually be in a position to have the leverage to be in a position to implement them.
M4BL itself fairly explicitly acknowledges this (without the historical comparison): “Our movement and Black communities are not currently in a position to set agendas to scale, control the institutions that affect our lives, or create mechanisms to mitigate harm. This assessment should not be interpreted as a failure of our social movements, but it does expose a critical gap. We have created a popular strategy to guide us through the next five years; it is rooted in transformative goals that can impact the millions of Black people looking for direction and leadership in this moment. Chiefly, Black governance and ultimately positioning our communities to set agendas sits at the heart of M4BL Project 2024: Black Power Rising.” [https://m4bl.org/black-power-rising/]
> They are there to demand respect for their newly minted identities.
The idea that black identity is a novel development of the recent activist movement is amusing, but ludicrously false; even the broad outline of the substantive political demands aren’t, mostly, new. All that is new is the sense of urgency for political and institutional change change.