Is appointing a special envoy for combatting antisemitism an exercise in identity politics? What about the forthcoming envoy for Islamophobia?

I wouldn’t have thought of asking this a week ago, but fretting about such things has become something of a national sport since Senator Fatima Payman’s defection from the Labor Party, and the Muslim Vote movement – which seeks to mobilise Muslim voters, possibly behind pro-Palestinian independents – started making headlines. Now, presumably, it’s the frame through which all political actions must pass.

Senator Fatima Payman.Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

In those cases at least, the prevailing verdict seems clear. A steady stream of editorials and opinion pieces lament Payman’s embrace of identity politics. The prime minister didn’t use that specific phrase, but he struck the same pose in warning that “faith-based political parties” would “undermine social cohesion”, and a “faith-based party system” would simply cause “minority groups to isolate themselves”.

This echoes one of the most common criticisms of identity politics: that by organising groups around one or two identities, it can only lead ultimately to separatism; that it makes building broad coalitions across society just about impossible. It is precisely in this vein that Anthony Albanese celebrates the Labor Party, whose members come from many different religions, as a better model: “That’s the way you bring cohesion.”

Which is funny, because the government now faces precisely the same style of argument against its antisemitism envoy, most notably from the Australian Jewish Council. “What does it say when only Jews are singled out?” asked a........

© The Age