Identity and Violence

Amartya Sen (2006)

W.W. Norton & Company, NY/London

Preface

• Major source of potential conflict in contemporary world is presumption that people can be uniquely cate-
gorised based on religion or culture - ‘illusion of unique and choiceless identity’ (xv). Implicit belief in over-
arching power of a singular classification can make the world v flammable. This goes against both the be-
lief that all humans are v much the same but also against the less discussed and more plausible notion that
we are diversely different (xvi) - ‘miniaturisation of people’

Chapter 2 - Making Sense of Identity

• Belonging to each one of the membership groups can be quite important depending on the particular con-
text. When they compete the individual has to choose the relative importance of to attach to respective
identities. Two issues: (1) recognition that identities are ‘robustly plural’ and (2) a person has to make
choices about the relative importance (19). Both of these demand reasoning and choice, but this has to be
understood once we have taken note of other influences that restrict or restrain the choices one can make
(24)
• Two forms of reductionism: ‘identity disregard’ (ignores/neglects the influence of any sense of identity with
others, on what we value and how we behave e.g. modern economics) and ‘singular affiliation’ (any person
preeminently belongs to one collectivity only (20). Latter is unlikely to have any plausibility when we con-
sider the diversity of groups and categories human beings belong to
• ‘Classification is cheap, but identity is not’ - whether categorisation can plausibly generate a sense of iden-
tity or not depends on social circumstances (26) even if this categorisation is arbitrary/capricious (27)
• We choose identities within particular constraints (31)

Communitarian identity and the possibility of choice

• Alleged priority of one’s community-based identity found in communitarian philosophy. Not only prioritises
belonging to one particular community group rather than another but often tends to see community mem-
bership as a kind of extension of one’s own self (33)
• A person doesn’t have access to other community-independent conceptions of identity or,
• Problematic - stronger version argue that no other criterion apart from that which holds in the community
to which the person belongs, can be invokes. So these judgements can only be ethically assessed within
these groups. Plus individual’s own norms drive from those of the community to which they belong
• But people can still have choice and reason (34)
• Basic cultural attitudes and beliefs may influence the nature of our reasoning, they cannot invariably
determine it fully
• There are variations within cultures - no unique and defined set
• Choices continue to exist even in any encumbered position one happens to occupy (35)
• Identity is a matter of discovery but communitarian identity will be recognised as of paramount importance
anyway
• Sandel: ‘Community describes not just what they have as fellow citizens but also what they are, not a rela-
tionship they choose but an attachment they discover, not merely an attribute but a constituent of their
identity’ (36)
• But, enriching identity need not be obtained only through discovering where we find ourselves
• Plus have different ways of identifying ourselves even within given locations - community belonging need
not obliterate others. Don’t ‘discover’ but ‘decide’ (37)

Chapter 3 - Civilisational Confinement

• ‘Clash of civilisations’ - especially clash between ‘Western’ and ‘Islamic’ (41)

• Problems
1. Viability and significance of classifying people according to the civilisations to which they allegedly
‘belong’ (reductionist) (41); and even if replacing a negative stereotype for a positive one a stereo-
type nonetheless
2. People thus classified must somehow be antagonistic
• ‘Civilisational partitioning is a pervasively intrusive phenomenon in social analysis, stifling other - richer -
ways of seeing people. It lays the foundation for misunderstanding nearly everyone in the world’ (42)
• Also local clashes

• Problems with invoking civilisational categories is the ‘illusion of singularity’ and also the crudeness with
which civilisations are characterised - then to be more homogenous and insular than they actually are. (‘de-
scriptive crudeness and historical innocence’ - p.58)
• Illusion of sign. comes from presumption that a person is just a member of one particular collectivity - not
with many affiliations
• E.g. ‘the West’ - toleration, liberty, democracy seen as quintessentially Western which is alien to the non-
Western world

Chapter 8 - Multiculturalism and Freedom

• ‘Demand for MC is strong in the contemporary world’ (149)

• Can take two distinct approaches: (1) promotion of diversity as a value in itself and (2) the freedom of rea-
soning and decision-making, and celebrates cultural diversity to the extent that it is freely chosen as possi-
ble by persons involved (150)
• Foundational questions of MC centre on how human beings are seen (as persons with many affiliations or
inherited and unchosen identity) and assessing the fairness of MC by the extent to which people are ‘left
alone’ or by the extent to which their ability to make reasoned choices is positively supported through so-
cial opportunities e.g. education
• What particular form should MC take?

• Distinction between ‘plural monoculturalism’ and MC (156) . Plural monoC occurs when more than one
style/tradition coexists side by side without actually meeting. Defence of MC is actually not much more than
this (157)
• Unless defined oddly, MC cannot lead automatically to giving priority to the dictates of traditional culture
over all else (158). But this narrow approach to MC has assumed a preeminent role in some of the official
British policies in recent years (with serious moral and social implications) e.g. faith schools - ignores ev-
erything other than faith and that’s to obliterate there reality of concerns that have moved people to assert
their identities that go well beyond that religion (160)
• Official British policy has been for British citizens of diverse backgrounds to act ‘through’ their ‘own commu-
nity’ rather than interact with each other in civil society (163)
• Broader issue - should citizens of immigrant backgrounds see themselves as members of particular com-
munities and specific ethnicities first, and only through that membership see themselves as British?
• Future depends on being able to act together as citizens (164)
• ‘federation of communities’ can hardly be called MC