Ideology and Action in the Political Organization - Essay Example

Identity politics grown in prominence in recent years Introduction A lot has been explored about contemporary ethni and nationallism in its many forms, whether the focus is channeled towards the multicultural nature of different societies, like from the case of the North American society (Turton, 1997). A lot has been explored about the indegenous rights movements as opposed to the balance of multiculturalism. In the post-soviet society, different parts of Eastern and Central Europe have been characterised by ethonationalism; in Western Europe, Islamic revivalism and urban minority dilemmas have continued to span the society. In Latin America, indigenista movements have become the norm of social talks, and in Africa, the processes of political fussion and fission have been a major aspect of society (Turton, 1997). By definition, identity politics refers to political organization, ideology and action, which reflects the interests of the groups in question, through the review of the essential traits of the group, including ethnic religion and religion: the legitimacy of these characteristics work as supports to the different groups. The membership of these groups is ordinarily assigned, unlike that of other political groups, including trade unions, liberal and socialist groupings. The differences and the parrallels of the different conflicts will demonstrate the common threads between different forms of identity politics, including that many were grounded on the ideologies of identity and culture. Through this paper, the author will explore the concept of identy politics, with the aim of explaining why it is a highly formidable force within the contemporary world. Discussion The increase in the prominence of identity politics, in the recent years, can be explained through the exploration of the anthropology of social identity. The 20th and the 21st century came with the dramatic re-conceptualiztion of many concepts related to social identity, including society and culture, within the scope of social sciences and society. For example, until the 1960s, there was a major overlap between ethnicity and culture, as well as between nationality and culture. The misconceptions that came with these overlaps include that nationhood and culture were disregarded throughout scolarly fields. However, during the recent years, social studies have time and again, showed that there is no direct realtionship between ethnicity and culture (Barth, 1969). Social studies have given evidence that cultural differences are common and shared across ethnic boundaries, showing that ethnic identity is based on cultural differences that are socially endorsed and bordered; cultural differences do not have real boundaries. The dissimilarity between ethnic identity and culture demonstrates that ethnic identity is traceable to the common ancestry of people or a group, while culture is the set of shared norms, representations and practices. The differences between the two shows that two people or groups can have major cultural differences, but show little or no cultural differences. On example that shows this case is that of the differences between the English working class and the English middle class (Lash and Urry, 1994). In North America, the typical concept of culture has featured in domestic identity politics, leading to the development of controversial policies to guard the multicultural society; some groups are accorded special rights, due to their ethnic origin. The increased role of culture, etnicity and social groupings in the affairs of the society have led to the widening of the role of identity in political among other social spheres. The result was that the increased attettion offered to these differences has made the society more sensitive and open to identity politics, which has led to its demonstration in different societies and through different forms (Turton, 1997). The role of culture in the breakkup of different groups and nations, including Yugoslavia has led to the increased promincence of identity politics in the recent past. The breakup of Yugoslavia in 1991 was followed by three wars skirmishes; the conflicts led to instability and tension in many parts of ex-Yugoslavia (Schopflin, 1993). In Europe, the Yugoslavian case was interpeted differently, by many commentators. Among the members of the press, who are an instrumental force behind the shaping of society, it was often interpreted along Hobbesian and sociological lines. The press among other groups emphasized that human groups are driven by the instincts of aggressiveness, and that these instincts emerge from the breakup of the social fabric that binds the society together. In the case of Yugoslavia, it was the social fabric organized as factions based on kinship (Turton, 1997). There was also another popular view, among European Nationalust right-wing groups, which maintained that the conflict between the different ethnic groups was inevitable, due to the integration of the different groups into the same society, through the use of force (Schopflin, 1993). On the other hand, many scholars have emphasized that feuding in the Balkan society, the economic crisis behind the conflict or the emergence of Serbian supremacy, throughout the 1980s were responsible for the identity clashes. The increased attention offered to the role of ethnicity, culture and social groupings in the success or the failure of the society has led to the increased promincence and the popularity of identity politics. For example, through the information communication role of the press, different groups in Yugoslavia, Europe and the world as a whole, received different explanations about the sources of the Yugoslavian conflict (Schopflin, 1993). The promincence of identity politics in recent years has been triggered by the emergence of cultural, ethnicity and social classifications in politics. One influential example was that of democratic Fijian politics before the year 1987, which was described with the delicate variables of power-sharing and balance (Kelly, 1998). In the case of the Fijian case, Indians had gathered unsurmountable political power, and the situation led to the common agreement that the Fijians were supposed to remain highly paramount in politics (Williksen-Bakker, 1991). The situation that led the Fijian society, as well as the world society as a whole, to detect the problems related to identity politics included that there were indications that the equilibrium model had been subjected to severe pressure. The extreme points of the pressure were felt during the early to the mid years of the 1980s, and the situation culminated after the 1987 elections, after the coalition supported by many Indians won the elections. Many Fijians, depite having a Fijian prime minister, saw that the government would offer Indians, the vehicle for their communal politics (Williksen-Bakker, 1991). During May and September of 1987, the military took power through a succession of coup detats, with the aim to protect the interests of the interests of native Fijians. After the coup trials, many Indians emigrated out of the Fijian society. The significance of ethnicity and culture issues in the affairs and the politics of the Fijian community served as a pacesetter for the world as a whole, which led to the accordance of more attention to the issues related to identity politics. Another group that demonstrated a case, which is similar to that of the Fijian society was that of Muslims in Bosnia, which was established that the native groups living within the Bosnian territory (Eriksen, 1992). The experiences of the two groups and the experience globally, demonstrated that the segregation between different groups in cultural and social domains is likely to work as the force behind the united or the divided nature of the society. Following the experience of different societies, different societies and groups have used identity politics in shaping political and social affairs, which has led to the increased prominence of identity politics (Eriksen, 1992). From the societies discussed previously, identity politics arises from the competition of different groups, over scarce resources (Horowitz, 1985). The conflict of the two groups is mainly traceable to the perceptions of scarcity, the struggles of attaining or retaining power and the efforts to maintain equality. The situation shows that the increased prominence of identity politics in recent years has resulted from the competition for resources, which heightens the perceived and the distinctive identities of different groups. The second factor underlying the increased promincence of identity politics is modernization, which actualizes the differences between different groups, thus instigating social conflict. The conflict between the two groups, which has led to the increased prominence of identity politics is the intgration of the initially distinctive groups into a shared political and economic systems. The integration of systems and groups makes inequalities more visible and increases the comparative evaluation of the different groups’ strengths and weaknesses. The third factor underlying the increased prominence of identity politics is the self-recruiting nature of the different groups. This situation is evident among the different societies, through a variety of indicators, including that intermarriages are rare, and that kinship works as an important organizing principle. This is particularly the case, noting that kinship has another social dimension, apart from its symbolic aspect which is demonstrated through the metaphoric, symbolic and fictive constructions. Behind the increased prominence of identity politics, there are also some ideological similarities among the different groups, including that cultural similarity overrides social unity; images of past injustices and suffering are uncovered and the political rhetoric and symbols of the societies trigger the resurgence of personal experiences. Other ideologies underlying the increasing prominence of identity politics include that new-comers are viewed like invaders and the intrinsic complexity of society is viewed in terms of areas of contrast. Conclusion Identity politics is a concept refering to the political organization, ideology and action that reflects the interests of the group in question. The increased prominence of identity politics can be explained on the basis of the anthropology of social identity, the role played by culture in the breakup of different groups or nations, and the emergence of cultural, enthnic and social stratification in the modern society. Identity politics has increased due to the impacts of different factors, including the competition for resources, modernization and the self-recruiting nature of different groups. The ideologies behind the increasing prominence of identity politics include the centrality of cultural similarity in the place of social unity, the evocation of past suffering and injustices and the view that new-comers are invaders, among others. Reference List Barth, F. ed., 1969. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press. Eriksen, T.,1992. Us and Them in Modern Societies: Ethnicity and Nationalism in Trinidad, Mauritius and Beyond. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press. Horowitz, D.,1985. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press. Kelly, J.D., 1998. Aspiring to Minority and Other Tactics Against Violence. In G. Dru, ed. Making Majorities: Constituting the Nation in Japan, Korea, China, Malaysia, Fiji, Turkey and The United States. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. pp. 173-197. Lash, S. and Urry, J.,1994. Economies of Signs and Space. London: SAGE Schöpflin, G.,1993. The rise and fall of Yugoslavia. In: J. McGarry and B. O’Leary, eds. The Politics of Ethnic Conflict Regulation. London: Routledge. pp. 172-203. Turton, D. ed.,1997. War and Ethnicity: Global Connections and Local Violence. Woodbridge, Suffolk: University of Rochester Press. Williksen-Bakker, S., 1991. Fijians in business: A study in the transformation of symbols. Ph. D. (thesis) University of Oslo. Read More