Intersectionality Dilutes Class Struggle

In his article “Marxism, Identity, and Intersectionality,” published in this daily on August 25, 2024, this author examined class struggle and intersectionality in social movements. Upon further reflection, a refined perspective emerges: while intersectionality provides insights into layered oppression, it risks fragmenting the unity needed for economic justice. Rooted in Marxist thought, class struggle remains the most powerful framework for addressing oppression because it targets the core cause, financial exploitation. Although intersectionality reveals specific struggles, only class struggle provides the cohesion necessary for substantial change. This is especially relevant in Nepal, where caste, ethnicity, and gender issues intersect with economic conditions, underscoring why class struggle must remain central to social movements.

Social conflict

Class struggle, a cornerstone of Marxist theory, posits that class divisions drive social conflict under capitalism. Historically, this idea has fuelled labour movements worldwide, uniting diverse groups around shared economic goals and achieving progress for working communities. In The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels describe a conflict between the bourgeoisie, who control production, and the proletariat, who are exploited for their labour. This framework unites people across identities by focusing on shared economic injustices. Unlike identity-focused approaches, which may divide groups, class struggle provides a foundation for collective resistance to systemic exploitation. From early labour movements to modern anti-capitalist efforts, unity based on class has driven meaningful social change. While intersectional frameworks expand our understanding of oppression, they risk fragmenting movements by diverting focus from the economic structures that sustain inequality.

Legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw introduced intersectionality in 1989, highlighting compounded discrimination from overlapping identities like race and gender. For example, Crenshaw argues that a Black woman may face discrimination differently than someone experiencing only racial or gender bias. This concept offers insights into compounded oppression. However, prioritizing individual identities within social movements can lead to group-based grievances over unified, class-based action. Scholar Nancy Fraser critiques this shift toward identity politics, noting that it often “displaces” socialist concerns with economic inequality by focusing on diversity over shared experiences of exploitation. As movements splinter into identity-specific struggles, intersectionality can dilute the strength of class-based organising for transformative change.

This dilution effect is visible worldwide but is particularly relevant in Nepal, where caste, ethnicity, and gender intersect with economic disparities. Here, intersectional approaches have gained traction, especially in movements addressing caste discrimination, ethnic representation, and gender equity. For example, caste-based advocacy remains crucial in tackling the marginalisation of Dalit communities, who still face discrimination in many regions of Nepal. However, focusing narrowly on caste identity risks fragmenting the broader movement against economic injustice, potentially diverting resources from initiatives that address economic hardship affecting all lower-class Nepalis. While caste-based movements are essential for advancing social justice, they could be more impactful when combined with a unifying class-based agenda, as economic disadvantage often crosses caste lines, affecting all marginalised groups.

Supporters of intersectionality argue that recognising diverse identities strengthens social movements by spotlighting unique forms of oppression different groups face. This view holds significance in Nepal, where caste, ethnicity, and gender inequalities are closely tied to economic hardship. They argue that fully understanding social dynamics requires acknowledging and respecting differences within the working class itself. By highlighting specific challenges faced by groups like Dalit women, intersectional frameworks can raise awareness about the need for policies addressing particular vulnerabilities. However, while intersectionality broadens our understanding of oppression, it can unintentionally weaken collective action if overemphasised. Social movements that focus heavily on individual identities risk creating factions instead of coalitions, dividing resources, and dissipating energy.

Adolph Reed Jr. critiques identity politics for promoting a “left-wing version of multiculturalism” that can obscure the economic roots of oppression. This concern is especially relevant in Nepal, where economic hardship affects most people regardless of identity. Reed argues that focusing on individual experiences can distract from the core cause of inequality, economic exploitation. Centring social justice around class struggle fosters solidarity among diverse groups who, despite different backgrounds, share a common need for economic justice. History shows that prioritising class struggle has consistently led to social advances. For instance, early 20th-century labour movements achieved gains by uniting workers around economic demands, resulting in better wages, safer conditions, and shorter hours. In Nepal, class-based movements also have historical precedents, such as labour strikes and the 1951 revolution, where economic discontent united people across backgrounds. These examples show how shared economic grievances can bridge identity divides and foster meaningful change.

While intersectionality often reveals complex layers of oppression, it also risks creating divisions. By centring economic concerns through a class-based approach, movements can form a more inclusive coalition that addresses the shared experiences of the working class, rather than fragmenting into groups focused on specific grievances. This approach fosters unity, as individuals from different identities recognize their common interest in resisting economic exploitation. Such solidarity is essential in Nepal, where economic inequality cuts across caste, gender, and ethnic lines, creating shared struggles for those facing systemic oppression.

Systemic change

Ultimately, while intersectionality has a role in social movements, class struggle remains the most effective path toward systemic change. A class-based approach to social justice has shown its ability to unite diverse populations, focusing on dismantling structures of economic oppression. In Nepal, where caste, ethnic, and gender identities intersect with economic hardship, the importance of class struggle cannot be overstated. Intersectionality provides insights but should be balanced within a framework emphasising class-based unity to achieve meaningful progress. Only by focusing on class struggle can we build a cohesive movement capable of addressing inequality’s root causes and fostering lasting transformation. For Nepali society, as for others, prioritising class struggle enables a vision for a future where economic justice serves as the unifying cause for all.

(The author is an associate professor at TU)