This assignment has two parts.
I. Respond to the following discussion prompt .
Identity politics is defined as “political positions based on the interests and perspectives of social groups with which people identify.” As the diversity narrative continues to grow, the logical outcome is the creation of more and more of these social groups with a secondary result being a more and more fractured society.
Is there a proper place for identity politics? Has identity politics gone overboard, or is identity politics the mark of positive evolution in our society?. Feel free to keep the discussion brief 2-3paragraphs.
II. Briefly read and respond to the discussion post responses. I’ve attached 2 responses to the prompt to and in 2-3 sentences provide a response stating whether you agree/disagree and why, things that stood out to you, or however you felt about the individual’s statements.
A) Identity politics have positive aspects such as its ability to serve as a tool for organizing people from minority groups and also serving as a motivating factor for participation in politics. However, I think its drawbacks outweigh its positive aspects. If it is not practiced in the right way it can go overboard.
Identity politics brings segregation among people from different interest groups. In her speech, Politics of Fiction, Elif Shafak said that communities of the like-minded are one of the greatest dangers of the globalized world. She emphasized that we tend to form clusters based on similarities and we produce stereotypes about other clusters of people. Elif said during her schooling days, when her class was made up of people from different nationalities, whenever something negative about a region or a state the child representative was mocked, ridiculed, and bullied. Identity politics becomes enjoyable only when the subject favors one’s interest group. Usually, people from majority groups try to push aside the interests and ideas of those from minority groups. If we consider the interests and perspectives of people from other social groups, it will make society more united.
B) Identity politics is a big issue, and therefore results in people having different views about it. Some say it gives power to groups who have faced hard times. It lets them talk about their lives and get support. Identity Politics allows some marginalized groups to build solidarity among themselves, which can make the groups feel strong and not alone.
But the other side of the aisle insist that it creates a division among groups. They advocate the ideology that identity politics leads tot he polarization of groups as they learn to distinguish themselves form other groups. Instead of finding things that are shared, the people that oppose identity politics claim that it pushes focus on what makes the groups different. Deriving form that logic, identity politics creates resentment and discord between groups, making collaboration difficult, and sowing resentment between the groups.
I believe that the key to the dilemma about identity politics is that it is stuck between the bounds of both points of views. We need to be able to acknowledge the importance of groups spaces that allow fro marginalized people to open up. We need to be to discuss profound topics such as the justice system, and some unnerving topics such as systemic racism in America. However, we also need to be careful with what rhetoric we are reinforcing to make sure that a message of hate and mistrust is not cultivated between the groups. Therefore, my stance on identity politics is that, it is necessary for evolution of society as it promotes communication between marginalized groups, and also dangerous as it can spark fierce enmity between certain groups. I do believe that identity politics has been excessive in the recent years but, I would not describe it as going to far.
Resources will be attached separately!!
