Essay A Western Identity Crisis

In his 1971 paper “Personal Identity”, Derek Parfit posits that it is possible and indeed desirable to free important questions from presuppositions about personal identity without losing all that matters. In working out how to do so, Parfit comes to the conclusion that “the question about identity has no importance” (Parfit, 1971, p. 4.2:3). In this essay, I will attempt to show that Parfit’s thesis is a valid one, with positive implications for human behaviour. The first section of the essay will examine the thesis in further detail and the second will assess how Parfit’s claims fare in the face of criticism.

America is a melting pot of different people, culture, and religion. Although there are millions of different people from different parts of the world, it 's citizens would like to appear united and patriotic. To foreigners, every person living in the United States is an American; however, within the country, there are divisions among the society through a concept called race. No citizen calls themselves an American to another American. The individual labels themselves "Hispanics, Asians, [or] Africans," (Rodriguez 119). America may appear uniform, yet it’s citizens seem to want individuality. And here is the paradox: those same citizens also detest the concept of race. When one is deemed by society as different because they are unable to be labeled, the individual hates this sense of distinctiveness. Richard Rodriguez 's memoir, Brown: The Last Discovery of America, discusses this peculiar concept of race by appealing to the reader 's pathos and logos in order for one to obtain a greater understanding of the idea.

Having understood what identity and culture mean, it is now much easier to navigate their significance in global politics and IR. I argue that there are two main drivers of these nodal points in the contexts of this paper. The first is at the individual level, where people utilize identity and culture to locate other individuals of similar or identical nature, almost as a kind of social radar as described by Hale when discussing ethnicity (2004). In reality, Hale’s argument fits well within this one due to ethnicity arguably being a subdivision of identity. This conception

America’s storied history of immigration has resulted in their being many different cultures from across the globe interacting with each other within the same defined boundaries, complicating the process of identity for many. One such case wherein migrants have a divisive role is along the US-Mexico border. Amongst conservative Americans ― especially White Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPs) ― national identity, the introduction of foreign migrants, Mexican immigrants in particular, threatens their own traditionalistic national identity (Gries 2016, 24). This difference in identity has resulted in heated conflicts between WASPs and immigrant communities in general. Furthermore, this conflict has expanded exponentially since the election of President Donald Trump, with many attempts being made to protect the “traditional” (and relatively homogeneous) American identity (Biskupic 2017).

Scholars no longer believe identity as an organic coherent phenomenon; rather, they are discursive constructions taking form within rich material, economic, and social contexts, and are multi-layered, fluid, and oft-changing, and sometimes contradictory, largely dependent on where and in relation to whom they are constituted.

Although the purpose of this study is not to change policy or influence political agendas, it is meant for a deeper understanding of identity and its construction. This way, everyone can acknowledge similarities and celebrate difference that spawn from location to location. It is an opportunity to reflect on the interdependence of nationality, religion, race and language.

“Identities are influenced by society”: “our identities are formed through communication with others.” Where we are positioned – by our background and our society – influences how and what we see, and, most important, what it means

In the past, individual’s identities were often assigned to them by the hegemonic culture, largely based on their conceptualization of sameness. The hegemonic culture dominated identity discourse by drawing distinct boundaries between racial and cultural groups, separating and defining them. Modern discourse however, has seen individuals taking the power of assigning identity signifiers for themselves often in periods of great social change. While times of resistance are often the most easily recalled examples of this, subtle trends in society a tremendous impact, often without the conscience knowledge of the society. In the past two decades, Western Culture has been witness to a radical transformation in identification processes.

The notion of identity is an enduring subject that sociologists have been analyzing for a period of time. Richard Jenkins connotes that ‘identity is our understanding of who we are and of who other people are, and, reciprocally, other people’s understanding of themselves and of others’ (Jenkins 2004, p5) Our identity dictates the manner in which humans interact with one another and by doing so, people create relationships with one another. Thus, human relationships are molded by two, or more, individual identities uniting. There are various ways one can be identified, such as race, religion or sexuality. These terms, or labels, can determine how society interprets an individual and influence their behavior towards the one person, thus their relationship with one another. For example, the

“In the post-Cold War world,” said Samuel Huntington, “the most important distinctions among peoples are not ideological, political, or economic. They are cultural” (21). Although some of his notions have caused a big controversial debate, his foresight on the importance of culture has been proofed. Homi Bhabha in his The Location of Culture (1994) has paid a special attention to cultural identity, and Stuart Hall in his article, “The Questions of Cultural Identity,” has divided identity into two categories—personal identity and community identity—claiming that the latter one is social or cultural identity. And as far as I am concerned, personal identity in a sense can be counted as cultural identity. Inhabiting in a cultural and social world

The concept of “identity” in a person’s life often emanates from systemized sense of social representations and relations. Actors in the identity criterion have a sense of belonging characterized by a capacity of self-reflection, entailing a process that constantly reaffirms one’s status and differentiation from others. Identity produces consciousness of action and becomes formalized, with symbolic character and recognition found within specific limitations that are confined in a particular environment (Montserrat 10). Therefore, an individual’s uniqueness directly creates a singular person’s identity, which is an essential element in the development of national identity. It is the summation of those individuals’ identities that leads

The subject of identity more fittingly identities, chameleon like character is highly contested and has been greatly discussed in the social sciences provoking a wide range of views in the form of ethnic identity, cultural identity, political identity, and national identity (Diagne, 2001). Etymologically the concept of identity originates from the Latin word “idem” which means sameness. This sameness is founded on culture, shared history, religion, language, and ethnicity (Eriksen, 1996). The language acts as a binding agent when it comes to relations among people; Religion sets a moral standard by which people ought to live by; A shared history builds solid bonds between people as the shared myths and history gives them their identity (Eriksen,

We are not born with an identity and of the most important responsibilities of any culture is to assist its member in forming their identities. Through countless interactions we discover who we are. "We learn our identities through socialization. Charon.

The moment you enter an academic setting as young as 4 years old, there is a constant question asked that is troubling for many to answer . It always amazes me how conscious I was in understanding that we did not belong in some spaces. This understanding of knowing that in some spaces my family did not belong was a result of my parents not being United States born citizens. Early on I learned that we could not go past certain cities because of the high concentration of “migra” or ICE in those cities. I remember some classmates asking if I had gone to seaworld and legoland, but I knew we could not go because it was close to the border. I remember my dad, before he became a US citizen, had a residency card. Somewhere in the back of that card it said the word “Alien.” I remember thinking to myself “Why does it say alien?” I remember I was around 5 years old at that time and in my head all I could think of was those green characters with big black eyes in cartoons and think to myself “my dad looks nothing like those.” Our identity is shaped by our experiences, with whom we interact, and by our parents. As Jessica Tovar and Cynthia Feliciano point out in “Not Mexican-American, but Mexican: Shifting Ethnic Self-identifications Among Children of Mexican Immigrants.” our identities are fluid and are shaped by internal and external factors.

The two countries I chose are China and Russia. The two activists I looked into are Liu Xiaobo from China, and Nikolai Girenko from Russia. Both activists are now dead, and both activists were heavily against nationalist extremism in their own country.