The Issue Of Identity Politics

It’s evident that identity politics is nothing more than labeling as described in the case of Susie Guillory Phipps. She sued the Bureau of vital record for declaring her negro according to the state of Louisiana anyone with one-third-second would be labeled black. The government began to label the different ethnic groups and according to them it was all in the name of science. According to them the reason for the record keeping was for the prevention of genetic diseases. Before the nineteenth century there was no labeling for sexual preference. Since the beginning we follow the example of Adam and Eve assuming that is the normal and anything else unnatural and abnormal. The “normal” became so powerful that no one would question one could say

     Identity is one of the main questions throughout all of our readings, because it is hard for people to accept who they are in society. Accepting their identity as a minority with little if any freedoms

Prior to the French and Indian War, colonists were somewhat satisfied with Great Britain. The laws imposed on the colonies were usually unenforced giving the colonies free reign over most aspects of their life. Despite the distance between North America and the mother country, colonists considered themselves equal with British citizens living on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean. At this point, the colonists had no intentions of breaking off from the mother country. As John Murrin says in his essay “The Dilemma of American National Identity”:

(Merriam-Webster.com). In other words, identity consists of the various collection of ideas and morals that humankind hold themselves dear to, whether it be related to religion, ethnicity, ideology, politics, or any other general factor. Indeed, one could suggest that it shapes the formation of a country, as identity creates people and people create the basis of nations. The United States of America, for instance, provides a prominent example of this theme. Built on a foundation of

What made me believe Abbot's intentions appeared for good is when he mentioned "law's critics 'turn a blind eye to illegal voting and instead rail against voter ID as discriminatory."' I believe Abbot was just fed up of the voter fraud and although knowing he may lose popularity votes, he chose to fight in what he believed in.

1. Randall Kennedy, an African American law professor at Harvard, has written that identity politics is “mere superstition and prejudice.” “I eschew racial pride,” says Kennedy, “because of my conception of what should properly be the object of pride for an individual: something that he or she has accomplished. I can feel pride in a good deed I have done or a good effort I have made. I cannot feel pride in some state of affairs that is independent of my contribution to it. I did not achieve my racial designation” (Atlantic Monthly, May 1997, p. 56). Do you agree? Explain, indicating how you think Kymlicka and Young (Part 4, Chapter 18) might respond.

Suzanna Walters, a professor of sociology at Northwestern University, disagrees with the common criticisms of identity politics. She believes that the common critiques of identity politics are not just fabricated, but also dangerous, pointing out the fact that “immigrants are being rounded up at their homes… there are mosques on fire… Jewish cemeteries in rubble…” (Walters); in her opinion these issues are just as relevant as the economy. She does not think that this blatant discrimination is a symptom of economic unrest or other social issues, instead stating that discrimination is an issue of its own. When writers like Mark Lilla evaluate issues of identity as lesser that “generalized” issues like terror, the economy, and climate change, he frames issues of racism and sexism as small and inconsequential (Walters). Other critics of identity politics argue that we are living in a “post-identity” world. Walter’s believes that post-anything (racism, feminism), is only ever introduced by white men who would much rather ignore still existing issues of identity: “Asking marginalized people to renounce their identity, or to make it secondary or tertiary to ‘class interests,’ is white supremacy”

Identity is an interesting structure because its very fabrication is intertwined with discrimination and subordination. Bryan Stevenson discusses this idea of identity in his lecture “we need to talk about an injustice,” he states that identity is power. I believe this statement to be appropriate because looking back into history identity has been fragmented into multiple factions—such as age, gender, race, and ets —and within America we have witnessed many deplorable actions come about do to one’s specific belonging to an identity.

However, today I will be arguing against this concept as a suitable method of dealing with issues as I believe that identity politics encourages segregation in society. I will let you know that I am not against the concept of identity politics as a whole because there are benefits from the idea. But I am against how it has been executed since it encourages division based on personal factors, dismisses individualism in situations and promotes the idea of only being able to contribute towards an issue if part of a specific group.

I think the theme of Identity is very relevant to today’s world because most people are still addressing the issues towards the racism and the issues of racial and ethnic identities has attempted to identify and compare subgroups within each of the major racial and ethnic groups, and these categories are primarily social/ construction that have changes and will continue to change over time ,but to this today is still remains .

Identity refers to the way people see themselves--the groups they feel a part of, the significant aspects of themselves that they use to describe themselves to others. Some theorists distinguish between collective identity, social identity, and personal identity. However, they are

Would you ever vote for a candidate simply because they came from the same ethnic background as you, even without knowing any of their political views? In the article “When ‘Identity Politics’ Is Rational,” written by Stanley Fish, a strong argument is made explaining and defending instances where identity politics is used and why it is important that citizens understand that it exists. Identity politics is when a candidate is only supported because of his or her identity, not their political views or beliefs. Through Fish’s mixed use of logical reasoning, somewhat strong reliability and a minor use of emotional appeal, he is able to construct a solid argument as to when identity politics are appropriate. Fish explains a multitude of examples in a cogent manner that allows the reader to easily follow along. He then continues by using credible evidence, which he provides citations for, that add an immense amount of validity to his article.However he does also make certain assumptions that he does not provide evidence for. Fish also includes a subtle amount of emotion that grasps the reader and pulls them deeper into the article. Fish argues that certain cases exist where identity politics is valid and appropriate, however, depending on the way one understands the definition of identity politics, it can be used in a way that it incorrect and biased.

Living in a country where instead of fighting a war with other countries the war is being fought inside our own country and in our government. Identity politics what exactly does this mean? Identity politics generally means when a group particular people like religion, race, social background, etc and this people from a type of exclusive political alliances, moving away from the most common and traditional two political parties. Identity politics thrives on division and the president has become the icon of a divided nation. Stereotypes and misconceptions, this two simple opinions people make towards others can cause harm deeply in others.In the book Whistling Vivaldi by Claude Steele We can see that the book is made of Stereotypes misconceptions, and many examples of identity contingency on stereotype threats usually race related. People and things in our society like race base stuff and things that David French brings up like the left hand side of the political view. He also brings up things like cisgender people and the white supremacy in the United States. This white supremacy and things believed by some politic, especially the left side of the political views can be said to be white supremacist and has caused more division than associations to this nation. Race is the major conflict in this political fight. Where instead of fighting these wars inside our nation we should come together as a nation and make a solution. Many points, ideas, and facts can be found all over

President Zeman and others are also using the social identity theory to create the ‘us’ vs ‘them’, which the automatically divides and creates prejudicial attitudes towards the ‘them group’. The securitization theory and the social identity theory are both political in nature as once the population accepts the threat or ‘us v.s. them’ ideaology, then it enters the political policy agenda. The policy agenda will be pushed with momentum by the perceived reality of the threat, which creates solution to the problem.

Identity is a word that is used very commonly and regularly by people in their daily life. Identity formation is a process of developing distinct, separate identity. “A person’s identity has many attributes. It is a representation of one’s unique personal experience, memory, ethnicity, culture, religious orientation, gender, occupational role, amongst various other factors. Erikson refers to identity as “some belief in the sameness and continuity of some shared world image.”Identity may be defined as one’s consciousness of one self and others’ perception of one’s individuality”, (Yamin, 2008).