Identity

Identity explains the evolution of identity politics and how they lead the way to deep political divisions, giving suggestions about what we can do to alleviate this ever-growing problem.

Remember the first time you got a certificate or medal for something? Maybe it was for sports, dancing, or a spelling bee. Do you remember how amazing you felt? Even as adults, we crave for recognition. It’s a natural part of being human, and even back in Ancient Greece, Socrates had a name for it: thymos. Thymos was a distinct part of our souls that longed for positive judgments from others about our dignity and worth.

If we receive positive judgments about our worth from the people around us, it makes us feel happy and valued. When we don’t, it can make us feel undervalued or ashamed. Thymos is important in understanding identity politics because it has to do with particular groups fighting for recognition. An example of this is in the gay marriage movement.

Before gay marriage became legal in the United States, gay people could enter into civil unions. These civil unions gave them the same legal and economic advantages of a married couple. So if they had the same rights, why did they fight for marriage? It comes down to thymos. They didn’t want their bond to be considered different than heterosexual marriage, and they wanted the same dignity. So they came together and didn’t stop until they achieved an equal status from the government.

Dividing and conquering was an effective military strategy used by the British Empire when they were trying to colonize. They would encourage divisions internally within the colony to suppress resistance. The problem with identity politics in today’s world is that we get a similar effect. It has splintered the political left in recent times.

In the twentieth century, the left fought for class issues and equality. They were concerned with welfare and economic equality. In the 1990s, left-wing politics began to shift toward the center, to be more market-oriented, and they lost support. The decline of a left concerned with economic equality coincided with the rise of wealth inequality. And that inequality is worse than ever today.

Instead of returning to broad equality, the political left we have today is split into too many groups, all competing for attention. Though things like race issues and LGBTQ rights are crucial still, these small groups have fragmented the left. Where left-wing politics used to fight for the 90 percent who wanted income equality, Fukuyama argues their identity politics hinder them from being able to help with the broader reasons for the inequality.