If there is any theory that stands tall in the history of leftism, it is Marxism. A grand system pulling together politics, economics, history, culture, and more, Marxism has shaped world history by becoming the official ideology of, among others, the USSR and China.
One appealing advantage of Marxism is that it lays out fairly clearly who the bad guys are. The bourgeoisie leeches off of the proletariat in a way that is not only unjust, but also ultimately doomed to collapse. While the specific policy prescriptions of each society may be a bit different, the big picture remains: The proletariat must fight against the bourgeoisie.
This clarity is shared among many other strands of leftism. Socialism shares with Marxism a deep-seated hatred of capitalism and capitalists. Anarchism, in most its forms, sees the state as its main enemy. There may be a number of other enemies (capitalism, patriarchy, white supremacy) but the state stands high as the big bad, and it must be overthrown, its leaders deposed and agents reduced, if justice is to be ensured.
However, this is not the only way leftism has presented itself. Over the past few decades, there has been a major revolution in how leftists think. A lot of leftists now believe that even if there is a clear enemy (and they don’t always), injustice also largely resides in a vague and challenging enemy: The ebbs and flows of societal power. While evil often retains a clear name like racism or sexism, it is not as simple as finding an evil person and removing them from power.
In the popular anti-racist books How to Be an Antiracist by Ibram X. Kendi and White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo, the enemy is not white people. They make very clear that being white does not make you a bad person. The enemy, instead, is a societal structure that gives white people more power than Black people. Similarly, in Justice and the Politics of Difference by Iris Marion Young, a lot of injustice is located in bureaucracy and meritocracy as structures and ideals. “Performative Acts and Gender Constitution” by Judith Butler is another example, pointing out how even while many people take a very essentialist view of sex and gender, their anxiety at gender variance and the societal structures in place to punish gender variance show that, on some level typically just below consciousness, there is an understanding that gender is not a solid, pre-ordained, biological, essential structure, but rather a cultural idea that is repeated and reinforced over time.
This last example is important. These new(er) leftist theorists are pointing out that often, we are doing something we are not quite aware of. Sometimes, we are not fully aware of what we are doing when we are being unjust. This not only shifts the focus on effective praxis from unjust people to unjust patterns, but also brings into question our own ability to fully be just. It calls us to be humble and realize that even if we are committed to being anti-racist, we may still do racist things; even if we are wholeheartedly devoted to doing good, we may still screw up and not even be aware of it.
(Picture below: A street intersection. Intersections are where two roads meet, but the rules that govern an intersection are more than the rules that govern each road.)
Interestingly enough, this viewpoint opens up a new place of collaboration between leftism and liberalism. As Jacob T. Levy points out in his essay “Of Groups, Intersections, and the People Who Inhabit Them,” intersectionality’s focus on the way society is structured places remarkably well with the emergent order discussed in thinkers like Adam Smith and Friedrich Hayek. Levy writes, “It is possible for each of us to be led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of our intention. And there is no reason to suppose that such ends are inevitably beneficial or salutary.”
Of course, this change in perspective among some leftists has drawn the ire of others. It is an ongoing revolution, one that likely will not be settled for a long time. However, I think the newer leftists are on to something. It would be a mistake for liberals to dismiss them.