In those last ten years, Republicans have been utterly obsessed with "identity characteristics". From pushing back against gay marriage, abortion, civil rights... It's basically all they talk about in political rallies today. Not the economy or anything else, just how it is important to never talk about trans people, and how they should not exist.

In my observation, every time a prominent conservative breaks the law, all I hear from the right is how “he’s a good man,” “he learned his lesson,” “he was acting in good faith,” and so on — even if the crime is as egregious as homicide or pedophilia. The same generosity is never granted to someone not in the in-group: just look how Crystal Mason was treated when compared to the scores of Republicans who were caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

In other words, identity politics to a T.

The guys closing polling places in black neighbourhoods? The guys denying women and trans people healthcare?

Identity politics has always been a conservative project.

My understanding is the earliest application of identity politics comes from thinkers like Fanon and Wollstonecraft, would you categorize them as being conservatives?

Again, you are ignoring the identity based systems they describe, that have been in place for centuries before either of them were born.

You know which ones I mean.

"In-group" doesn't necessarily mean identity characteristics. In today's (US) conservative party, it distinctly means "pledges personal allegiance to party leader."

As an example: The "conservative" judge who threw out 40 years of precedent on a technicality to prevent the American public from learning whether their former and potentially future president sold, gave away, or otherwise exposed national security secrets after he undoubtedly stole those documents.

There's a fundamental asymmetry in "the movement" on the left - which essentially rounds out to whatever annoying undergrad student showed up in your Twitter feed today - and the actual elected, governing leaders of the right, doing things like throwing out very strong criminal cases on matters of deep public importance.

It's probably a bad idea and it will likely backfire but nevertheless motivation matters and a lot of people are willing to cut some slack to that political movement because they're honestly convinced it was done in good faith to restore a balance and give some power to disenfranchised groups.