I use my Asian, non-white, Muslim and apostate identities and intersectionality to defend persecuted minorities i.e apostates, Jews, moderate Muslims, occasionally "birth only radfems" (i use that term as TERF is a slur) from attacks from the social justice crowd.

The very fact I am doing so is proof many don't even understand the game they are playing. I only use identity politics on SJWs. It often works, however it doesn't work in all situations, if I use it I also accept I have to understand the argument through the lens of their lived experiences and maintain an understanding of their perception of offence/oppression.

So I generally use this argument against white male SJWs. Which is most of them.

I also apply 1% privilege, class privilege and wealth privilege where appropriate. Usually when arguing with the Guardianista set. ie millionaire trust fund feminists from wealthy Wall St families have no right to claim victimhood and oppressed status.

At other times you just address the underlying theory, most of which, due to identity politics postmodern critical theory roots, can be argued against using evidence, facts, reason and logic as working, practical application outside of its academic roots is rare. I believe privilege theory, safe spaces, triggers and arguments that use lived experiences are broken, and are not universal catch all theories that help with equality activism and are regressive ideas that promote social apartheid and balkanisation, and that society is less equal now than it was a decade ago due to this.

All of this is from a fairly hard left, egalitarian outlook.

My subreddit is a wealth of articles from across the spectrum arguing against identity politics and for free speech and form a basis for my thoughts.