Politics & Society:

IDENTITY
- from traditional to modern identity -
PTO 101 - Study theme 4 (Part 1)
You will not find the work covered in these slides in
Heywood. You thus must study this in addition to chapter 8 of
Heywood.

These slides serve as an introduction to the Politics of

Identity which is part of the work of Study Theme 4: Politics,
Society, and Identity.
Politics & Society
•Politics, by its very nature, is a social activity, and it can be
viewed as nothing more than the process through which the
conflicts of society are articulated and, perhaps, resolved.
•In this sense, society is no mere ‘context’, but the very stuff and
substance of politics itself.
•We must thus focus on the broader political implications of how
society is structured and how it has changed and continues to
change.
Politics & Society
Four of the most significant changes that have had a huge impact
on societies worldwide are:

1. Money revolution. Renaissance Italy. Shift value from land

to money.
2. The shift from traditional identity formation to modern
identity formation More of a subtle change.
3. The transition from agrarian societies to industrial
societies and then to so-called post-industrial society.
th
4. Computational revolution. 20 Century
 Group markers •Your race, ethnicity, and nationality;
•Your culture;
•Your gender and sexuality;
What can •Your occupation;
•Your religion;
you build •Your family of origin;
your ID on? •Your relationships;
•Your age;
(ID Markers) •Your physical and mental capacity;
•Your possessions;
Individual markers
•Your personality and character.
Politics & Society
•Modern thinking about the relationship between politics and
society is increasingly focused on the question of personal
identity.
•This lecture will serve as an introduction to the discussion of
identity, by first considering ‘how’ and ‘from where’ we acquire
(‘get’) our identities - identity formation.
•The implication of this for politics will then be considered in the
latter parts of this lecture and in the next lecture (based on
Heywood Ch 8).
Identity Formation

• Every culture - without asking permission, or even calling it

that - imposes and identity formation process on you.
• Part of the purpose of this lecture is to make that apparent
to you.
• Also to hint at the implication of the formation process and
of the resultant identity structure for politics.
Identity formation (2)
• Identity formation is the process by which you acquire a sense
of self - “who am I?” - and a sense of worth - “why do I
matter?”
• Everybody must have this - whether 500 years ago or today.
• We acquire this following the script of our culture
• South Africa: Both modern & traditional scripts, but modern is
increasingly dominating.
Values (and identity) in SA context
What is identity?
• Your sense of self and your sense of worth.
• Your core trust and your sense of value and recognition
• Core trust - what are you so committed to and trust
fundamentally that it makes itself present in all parts of your
life - your highest good or main affections. It is fundamental to
all that you do.
• Source of recognition and worth - how are you doing in living
out your purpose?; who gets to say you are worthy?
What is identity? (2)

• Another way of stating it: Your identity is whatever you look

to for your security and your significance.

❖ Your security is what you most trust

❖ Your significance is your value and worth.
What is the modern identity?

We must consider the history of Identity and specifically of

identity formation:
o Charles Taylor - Sources of the Self: The Making of
Modern Identity (1989)
o Robert Bellah – Habits of the Heart (1985)
o Alasdair MacIntyre. - After Virtue (1981)
Traditional Identity
• In ancient times -the highest good was honour.
• Honour - sacrificing your individual interests and happiness for your
community, clan, tribe or family: for the greater good.
• Two forms for honour:
• Male - willing to die in battle to defend your people
• Female - have many children, for the sake of your people
• You did it for the greater good, not thinking of yourself primarily.
• This creates an external identity - you are ignoring what is on the inside
(your desires) and you sacrifice it for the good of that external (clan,
family, village, tribe, etc.)
• As time went on this changed slightly – Ancient Greece (Plato,
Aristotle), China (Confucius), Egypt (Ma’at) - they believed there was
some form of cosmic order / moral absolutes out there.
• A good person will contemplate these and then based on that lead a
virtuous life.
• The highest good is to know these moral absolutes and to bring your
life in alignment with it. e.g. Temperance, justice, prudence and courage
• The good, around which you organise your identity is outside of you.
You must suppress what is inside and align with this outside standards -
Stoics.
• All of the ancient and contemporary traditional views were
(are) about suppressing what on the inside for the sake of an
external good.
• Where then do you get your recognition from in this context?
• The decisive validator was society and its elites (or your
parents). You get your validation from outside.
Emergent Modern Identity

• According to Charles Taylor thing started to change with the

emergence of the modern age: 1600s-1700s
• Modern Identity happened in three stages:
Emergent Modern Identity (2)
• Stage 1: 1600s: Descartes, Locke, Kant - early modern thinkers -
still believed that there was a good out there, that we have to
align ourselves with, but you do not find it in tradition, or from
your parents/community or, the Bible.
• Rather, your reason will lead you to it. Reason will lead you to
these moral absolutes.
• There is a shift here, more to the internal.
Emergent Modern Identity (3)
• Stage 2: Romaticism (1700-1800s): Rousseau. It is not through your
reason that you get it touch with the good out there, with the good in
nature, but you get in touch with the good inside yourself.
• Believed that all people were basically good (until society ruined them).
• For an authentic live (a life aligned with the original you) you have to
look deep inside and connect with the good in you, and so doing then
align yourself with the good out there.
• Not science and reason, but art and emotion. Focus is on feelings.
Emergent Modern Identity (4)
• Stage 3: In the 20th century - people made the jump and said there is
no good out there, just the good in you.
• All moral values are the product of social construction or the product of
evolutionary biology. There is nothing outside of you that you have to
connect to in order to feel like a good person.
• Rather, go inside yourself and decide what is right and wrong, and only
you yourself can validate yourself. You decide what it takes to be a good
person and you decide whether you live up to it. You become your own
decisive validator.
• Thus, Taylor concludes that we have moved from ‘outward’ to
‘inward’,
• We have moved from ‘duties' to ‘desires' - in traditional cultures
you are your are defined by your duties, and in modern cultures you are
shaped and defined by your wants/desires.
• In traditional cultures you get your identity by being a person of honour
who sublimated your own desires and does your duty to your family and
your people, and then these people bestow honour and recognition on
you.
• In modern identity, you go inside and find those desires and you figure
out who you want to be and what you want to do with life, and then you
come out and demand recognition from everybody else.
• This ‘outside’ to ‘inside’ shift is also famously explained through
Taylor’s notion of the ‘porous’ self vs the ‘buffered’ self.
• The porous self which characterised the traditional was/is open to
outside formation
• The buffered self which typically follows from the modern
understanding of identity is closed-off to outside voices and wants to
decide internally only.
• In traditional identity you adjust to society and in modern identity the
society has to adjust to you.
• Another way to put it: Where is the argument or point of tension?
• In traditional society you go outside of yourself, and you find out from
your community and your people what it means to be a good person,
and you come and fight with your own desires and wants to align it
with that. The argument happens inside.
• In modern identity the argument happened outside. You go inside and
determine who you are, and then you go outside and insist that they
adapt to you, that they recognise you as you define yourself. The
argument now takes place outside.
• All of modern culture tells you that this is the way to form your ID.
• The way modern culture pushes this way of identity formation on you
is not through theories mainly, but through stories. Look at the
stories. Movies:
e.g. Frozen:
Be the good girl you always have to be It's time to see what I can do
Conceal, don't feel, don't let them know To test the limits and break through
Well, now they know No right, no wrong, no rules for me
Let it go, let it go I'm free
Can't hold it back anymore
Let it go, let it go

• The modern culture vilifies any other process of identity formation

• Modern identity also finds traditional identity almost incompre-
hensible - a hero who fights without doubt???
Benefits of modern identity

• In the past many people where locked into a given social status
within extremely hierarchical societies. People were not treated as
individuals but only as part of their class and family. You had to ‘know
you place’ and there was no social mobility. Your identity locked you
in.
• The modern understanding of identity has done much to help break
this. Emancipation.
Challenges for the modern identity

• Taylor makes clear that the modern identity faces challenges based
on its character.
• These challenges explain a lot of the character of the politics of
identity.
• There has been over the past generation a wide range of scholarship
that have pointed out the challenges faced by the modern way that
society asks people to form their identities.
• It is changeable and often incoherent - our internal feelings, and
desires are often filled with contradiction and change over time.
Also, how do you evaluate your own desires?
• It is fragile - In traditional identity you have an external decisive
validator that can silence all other voices. Yes, you do not have as
much freedom, but you have a more stable identity.
• In modern identity you must be the decisive validator, but this is
problematic for beings like us who are social animals (dialogical
beings). “Identity must always be negotiated through relationships
and dialogues with others” (Taylor).
• There is thus and endless expectation for recognition but without
giving anyone the authority to recognise you, for you yourself can be
the only authority to do this.
• BTW, this fragility makes you a dream for marketers. Products can
be used to validate you. Products can be used to brand yourself.
• This fragility also makes it difficult to talk to another, because you
cannot disagree with me, for you disagreement means you are not
validating me, you are attacking me and undermining my identity.
• Any disagreement is thus seen as hostility.
• It makes you prone to be easily offended and to be less open to
correction or persuasion.
• It is crushing - Traditional identity is about fitting in. Modern
identity is about standing out, being exceptional, brilliant,
beautiful and you have to do it yourself. This places huge pressure
on you to perform so as to stand out.
• This often leads to finding some solace in linking your personal
identity to a group identity, but still in a decidedly modern sense.
• It is fragmenting – it undermines community. Families,
communities, politics. People are much less trusting of any
authority and less willing to participate for the greater good.
• People not willing to participate in anything that is not fulfilling to
them individually at that moment and validating their identity
(remember the fragility).
• It is exclusive - any identity that you have to perform to attain, is
by nature competitive
• It is an illusion - you think you can decide for yourself who you are, but
you actually are not. Your society actually provides you with the materials
you use to choose who you are.
• This is the deep incoherence at the root of modern identity formation
that makes it so unstable (Taylor).
• Society (the dominant culture) imposes a moral grid on us of which we
are often unaware. We bring in to our internal decision making as to who
we are. So even if we think it is us that are choosing it still is mainly the
culture from outside. We do choose but only according to the options and
the measures provided by our culture.
• The fragmenting moral grid of our contemporary culture is thus deeply
impacting us through the modern identity formation process we have
here explored.
 Politics of Identity
• Even though ID formation is an internal process for each individual, there is still
a strong pull towards group identity.
• The politics of identity signifies a trend towards emphasizing the group aspects
of identity at the expense of the individual aspects (they are too challenging).
• There is a possibility to locate identity in human consciousness which
transcends race, gender and ethnicity identity, but the focus now is rather on
these groups.
• The focus is on lower characteristic of your life that you share with a group of
people who also carry this marker, especially if it is a shared traits that evoke
strong emotion (e.g. gender, race, ethnicity, sports team(??)).
 Politics of Identity (2)
• You then make your group the key feature of your identity through which
you experience and look at all of the rest of your life.
• You thus root your modern identity in a group (race, gender, religion, etc) -
you are your group - even though you still act as the main agent/validator.
• There is often the assumption in politics of identity that there are greater
differences between groups than within groups.
• Works best if it is an oppressed group for there is then a sense of moral
weightiness to you pushing your group (identity). It gives a huge amount of
significance then to your life. Thus your sense of self is imbued with a sense
of significance.
Politics of Identity (3)
• Strong links between Politics of ID and neo-Marxism which focuses on
marginalized groups and power hierarchies.
• Your group validates your ideas and provides a sense of solidarity.
• Politics of ID as we have seen it manifest over the past decade bring
with it the fragility, the constant change, the fragmenting and
exclusionary characteristics of the modern ID.
• Since this group is seen as neglected or actively oppressed the
resultant group-based identity is often expressed as an ‘us vs. them’
reality, where the them is an opposing / oppressing group - men,
blacks, Jews, liberals, religious people, corporate elites, etc. “It
weaponizes difference.”
Politics of Identity (4)
• Leads to greater division and undermines social cohesion. “It is
expressive and not persuasive”.
• The understanding of justice in Politics of Identity is often
phrased as ‘justice for me and my group’ and not as ‘justice as
the common good’.
• We will look at the different manifestations of identity politics in
our next lecture.