Chapter 8: Politics, Society and Identity

Terms
Society = a collection of people who occupy the same territorial area, characterized by
regular patterns of social interaction that suggest a social structure; a stable set of
relationships that involve a sense of connectedness, mutual awareness and a measure of
cooperation. Societies usually have social divisions that reflect inequality; the origins of
these divisions and the political significance of it differ from society to society.
Status = a person’s position within a hierarchical order, characterized by the person’s
role, rights and duties. Status hierarchies are not that significant in modern societies, but
are actively operating in relation to factors such as family, gender and race and ethnicity.
Multiculturalism = used as both a descriptive and a normative term. As a descriptive
term, it refers to cultural diversity arising from the existence within a society of two or
more groups whose beliefs and practices generate a distinctive sense of collective
identity. As a normative term, multiculturalism implies a positive endorsement of
communal diversity, based on either the right of cultural groups to respect and
recognition, or the alleged benefits to the larger society of moral and cultural diversity.
Multiculturalism, in this sense, acknowledges the importance of beliefs, values and ways
of life in establishing a sense of self- worth for individuals and groups alike.
Interculturalism = an approach to diversity which strongly emphasizes the benefits of
dialogue and interaction between cultures. As such, it has been seen as a response to the
question how to live in, rather than with, diversity. The intercultural approach is based
on three key assumptions. First, it rejects the idea that cultures are fixed and
unchanging, instead emphasizing that they are fluid and internally differentiated.
Dialogue thus takes place within cultures as well as between them. Second, contest,
debate and argument are seen to be intrinsically worthwhile, reflecting an underlying
faith in reason. Third, cultures are taken to be distinguished more by what they have in
common than by what divides them.
Intersectionality = a framework for the analysis of injustice and social equality that
emphasizes the multidimensional or multifaceted nature of personal identity and of
related systems of domination. In this view, women do not just have a straightforward
gender-based identity but rather one in which, for instance, race, social class, ethnicity,
age, religion, nationality and sexual orientation can overlap, or ‘intersect’, with gender.
This implies that women may be subject to interlocking systems of oppression and
discrimination, as sexism becomes entangled with racism, xenophobia, homophobia,
and so on.
Secularism = the belief that religion should not intrude into secular (worldly) affairs,
usually reflected in the desire to separate the state from institutionalized religion.
Secularization thesis = the theory that modernization is invariably accompanied by the
victory of reason over religion and the displacement of spiritual values by secular ones.

Society shapes politics:

 The distribution of wealth and other resources in society has an impact on the
nature of state power
 Social divisions and conflicts help bring about political change (legitimation crises)
 Society influences public opinion and political culture
 The social structure shapes political behavior (who votes, how they vote, who joins
parties)

There are different views on the nature of society:

 Marxists: society is characterized by conflict
 Liberals: societies can live harmonious, they are an artifact made by individuals that
want to meet their own needs
 Conservatives: society is a natural necessity

Politics does not only take place in a social context, it is a social activity. Some view it as
simply the process that describes and resolves conflicts of society. Therefore, it’s
important to look at the political implications of how society is structures and how it has
changed and is changing.

Transition from agrarian societies to industrial societies: new levels of social

connections and new political ‘battle lines’.
Industrialization has increased geographical mobility through urbanization, influencing
social connectedness. This is shown by Ferdinand Tönnies, who distinguishes
Gemeinschaft, the community (found in traditional societies, characterized by natural
affection and mutual respect) and Gesellschaft, association (found in urban and
industrial societies, characterized by loose, artificial and contractual bonds).
Industrialization also changed the structure of society, because the economic social class
became the central organizing principle of society, rather than status and land
ownerships. This idea of class politics is seen in the Marxist tradition, but has been
declining. Max Weber developed a theory of stratification that combined economic and
class difference with the importance of political parties and social status; the
occupational class. In drawing attention to status as a ‘social estimation of honour’
expressed in the lifestyle of a group, Weber helped to prepare the ground for the
modern notion of occupational class. The late twentieth century meant the end of class
politics, and thus the political significance of class. A reason for this decline is the
emergence of postindustrial societies.

Transition from industrial societies to postindustrial societies: social class is less

significant and technological change  ‘hollowing out’ of social connectedness
Because of deindustrialization, the labor-intensive ‘heavy’ industries (coal, steel and
shipbuilding) declined, and thus the strong union organizations with solidarity culture
and political loyalties. The heavy industries were replaced by service industries, which
allowed individualism, leading to atomism (the tendency for society to be made up of a
collection of self-interested and largely self-sufficient individuals, operating as separate
atoms) and thus weakening of social connectedness. Piore and Sabel viewed the shift
from industrial to postindustrial society as part of a shift from Fordism to post-
Fordism. Fordism refers to the large-scale mass-production methods pioneered by
Henry Ford in Detroit in the USA. These used mechanization and highly regimented
production-line labor processes to produce standardized, relatively cheap products.
Fordist societies were structured largely by solidaristic class loyalties. Post-Fordism
emerged as the result of the introduction of more flexible microelectronics-based
machinery that gave individual workers greater autonomy and made possible
innovations such as subcontracting and batch production. Post- Fordism has been linked
to decentralization in the workplace and a greater emphasis on choice and individuality.

Daniel Bell further characterized the postindustrial society as an information society:

intellectual capital is increasingly more important than material capital, thanks to the
‘third’ modern information revolution; the arrival of digital media; notably, mobile
phones, cable and satellite television, cheaper and more powerful computers, and, most
importantly, the internet. These are technologies of connectivity (links between
devices, affecting the speed, ease and extent of information exchanges), leading to the
information society, information age and knowledge economy (an economy in which
knowledge is the key source of competitiveness and productivity, especially through the
application of information and communications technology). Digital media has also
contributed to globalization, according to hyperglobalist theorists globalization
became inevitable when the information and communication technologies became
widely available. Manuel Castell explained the link between the information society
and the weakening of social connectedness with his notion of the network society:
hierarchies are replaced by networks, businesses by network corporations, trade unions
by social movements. In this sense, networks are a means of coordinating social life
through loose and informal relationships between people or organizations, usually for
the purpose of knowledge dissemination or exchange. Ivan Illich argued that
technology gives individuals access to specialized knowledge, making them less
dependent on technocratic elites and thus empowering citizens and limiting
government power. However, critics point out that the Internet is a platform for both
neutral views as for political extremism and that the cult of information is growing,
which makes it harder for people to distinguish information from knowledge,
experience and wisdom; digital media may make people stupid, rather than better-
informed.

The decline of the traditional working class has led to ‘two-thirds, one-third’ societies:
two-thirds are relatively prosperous. Galbraith linked this to politics by pointing out
that the ‘contented majority’, the two-thirds, are encouraged to be politically
conservative because of their material affluence and economic security. They have
provided the electoral base for the anti-welfarism and tax-cutting policies that have
become popular since the 1980s. The ‘one-third’ has become the underclass (a poorly
defined and politically controversial term that refers, broadly, to people who suffer from
multiple deprivation: unemployment or low pay, poor housing, inadequate education
etc.), thus battling with social inequality and social exclusion.

Post industrialism and digital media might have encouraged the ‘thinning’ of social
connectedness, but individualism also plays a part. In traditional societies, individual
interests and identities were not important: people were seen as members of the social
groups to which they belonged, and the character of these groups largely determined
their lives and identities. However, industrial capitalism confronted people with a
broader range of choices and social possibilities, which gave rise to economic
individualism (the belief that individuals are entitled to autonomy in matters of
economic decision-making; economic individualism is loosely linked to property rights).
Individualism has been strengthened by consumerism and the general shift in favor of
neoliberalism.
However, there is debate about the consequences and speed of individualism. Some say
that it has weakened community and our sense of social belonging. Émile Durkheim
spoke of anomie: the association of the weakening of social values and normative rules
with isolation, loneliness and meaninglessness, increasing the number of suicides.
Modern communitarian thinkers link the weakening of social duty and moral
responsibility with the growth of egoism, atomism, selfishness and greed. On the other
hand, liberal theorists see individualism as social progress, linking it with progressive
and social values of toleration and equality of opportunity. They argue that
individualism questions all forms of disadvantage or discrimination. They also say that
the link between individualism and expansion of choice and opportunity is seen in the
spread of social reflexivity (the tendency of individuals and other social actors to
continuously reflect on the conditions of their own actions, implying higher levels of
self-awareness, self- knowledge and contemplation) through mass education, digital
media and globalization. Regarding the speed of individualism: it has been mostly
embraced in the English-speaking world, but not within Catholic societies and anti-
individualist societies in Japan. On top of that, the view of modern societies being
dominated by ‘thin’ forms of connectedness is undermined by evidence of the
resurgence of ‘thick’ social connectedness in many societies; through the rise of identity
politics.
Identity politics
Modern thinking about the relation between politics and society focuses on the question
of identity. This is visible in identity politics (also the ‘politics of difference’): an
orientation towards social and political theorizing which focuses on the political
significance of race and ethnicity, gender, religion and culture and that aims to challenge
and overthrow oppression by reshaping a group’s identity. Identity politics has two core
beliefs: stereotypes and values developed by dominant groups structure how marginalized
groups see themselves and are seen by others, and this can be challenged by reshaping
identity (e.g. ‘black is beautiful’ or ‘gay pride’).
Identity politics originate from postcolonial theories, but it is very diverse since identity
can be shaped around many principles: (1) race and ethnicity; (2) cultural diversity; (3)
gender and identity and (4) religion and politics.
(1) The link between race and politics is seen in political theories in the 19 th century that
defended European imperialism; anti-Semitism in the late 19 th century; Nazism;
Apartheid; campaigns against immigration. Opposite forms of racial or ethnic politics
have developed out of the struggle against colonialism and racial discrimination and
disadvantage. Black nationalism in the USA has constituted the prototype for identity
politics with its emphasis on consciousness raising: strategies to remodel social
identity and challenge cultural inferiority by an emphasis on pride, self-worth and self-
assertion. The black conscious movement originates from the ‘back to Africa’ movement
of the early 20th century, and intensified during the 1960s with the emergence of
reformist and revolutionary wings of the movements. The reformist wing was
committed to the struggle for civil rights (Martin Luther King; NAACP), the
revolutionary wing supported black separatism and promoted use of violence (Black
Panther Party; Black Muslims; Malcom X). In 2013, Black Lives Matter was founded,
which campaigns against violence and systemic racism towards black people. In non-
West societies, ethnic consciousness is linked to colonialism. The divide-and-rule
policies led to tensions and civil wars (Biafran war; Sudan; terrorism in Sri Lanka;
genocide in Rwanda). In Eastern Europe, the collapse of communism led to ethnic
rivalries and tensions (rebellion of Chechens in Russia; fragmentation of Yugoslav
republic).
(2) International migration has led to growing cultural diversity: countries have multi-
ethnic, multi-religious and multicultural populations. Some see the maintenance of
political stability in these societies as the central political challenge of the 21 st century.
Attempts that are made regarding this challenge are reflected in multiculturalism,
which stresses cultural differentiation based on race, ethnicity or language and
recognizes that these differences should be respected and publicly affirmed (mainly
seen in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and much of Europe).
Multiculturalism sees individual identity as culturally embedded, arguing that
distinctive cultures should be protected through minority or multicultural rights
(‘special’ rights). Will Kymlicka identified three kinds of minority rights: self-
government rights, polyethnic rights and representation rights. Self-government
rights belong to ‘national minorities’, peoples who are territorially concentrated,
possess a shared language and are characterized by a ‘meaningful way of life across the
full range of human activities’ (e.g. Native Americans, Inuits in Canada, Maoris in New
Zealand, Aborigines in Australia). Polyethnic rights are for ethnic groups and religious
minorities and would provide legal exemptions (e.g. exemption of Jews and Muslims
from animal slaughtering laws, the exemption of Sikh men from wearing motorcycle
helmets, the exemption of Muslim girls from school dress codes) Representation rights
attempt to correct the under- representation of minority or disadvantaged groups in
education, and in senior positions in political and public life (e.g. practice of reverse or
‘positive’ discrimination in the USA). Their justification is not only that they ensure full
and equal participation, but also that they are the only means of guaranteeing that
public policy reflects the interests of all groups and peoples, and not merely those of
traditionally dominant groups.
There are three main models of multiculturalism: liberal multiculturalism, pluralist
multiculturalism and cosmopolitan multiculturalism. Liberal multiculturalism is
committed to freedom and toleration, as long as the views, values and social practices
are compatible with personal freedom and autonomy. Pluralist multiculturalism is based
on the idea of value pluralism (the theory that there is no single, overriding conception
of the ‘good life’ but, rather, a number of competing and equally legitimate conceptions)
and thus provides firmer foundations for cultural diversity. Isaiah Berlin argues that
people are bound to disagree, resulting in moral conflicts. Liberal or Western beliefs
therefore have no greater moral authority than rival beliefs. Pluralist multiculturalism
focuses on unequal power relations and the domination of the Western culture in
Western societies, exposing the ‘corrupt’ nature of Western culture (this is very
controversial in relation to Muslim minorities in Western societies). Cosmopolitan
multiculturalism views cultural diversity and identity politics as transitional states
towards a cohesive society.
There has been a backlash against multiculturalism, especially seen in a retreat from
official multiculturalism (e.g. bans of wearing veils by Mulsim women in public places).
This backlash can be associated with the rise of populist nationalism. Criticisms of
multiculturalism are that people are drawn to similar others and that multicultural
societies thus would be fractured and full of conflict; that multiculturalism diminishes
cross-cultural understanding; that it endorses diversity at the expense of unity; and that
it disadvantages the minority groups that it should protect, because they have to pay a
high price to integrate in a multiculturalist society. An alternative for or update of
multiculturalism would be interculturalism.
(3) Gender equality in politics is associated with feminism (liberal, socialist and radical).
Equality feminism is a form of feminism that aims for gender equality, based on the
distinction between sex and gender (Simone de Beauvoir: “Women are made, they are
not born”). However, difference feminism suggests that there are differences between
women and men; biological differences are reflected in social and cultural
characteristics. Postmodern feminists question whether sex is rightfully distinguished,
seeing as that some women cannot bear children, some women are not sexually
attracted to men, and so on. They see a biology–culture continuum rather than a
biological/cultural divide. Within feminism, identity politics is seen again: instead of just
emphasizing that women are different from men, greater attention has been given to
differences between women. Modern feminism is characterized by diversity, hybridity
(social and cultural mixing) and intersectionality.
The trans movement also challenges thinking about gender. The theme of trans politics,
or trans theory, is rejection of the binary conception of gender. Instead, it stresses
gender and sexual ambiguity. They view gender as self-definition, rather than a societal
or cultural stereotype. Judith Butler challenged feminist thinking that enforced a binary
view of gender identity and views both gender and sex as social constructs. These new
influences have changed feminism: whereas trans theories first were seen as
problematic by traditional feminists, feminism now has a more personalized and
nuanced approach to gender and an awareness of parallels between sexism and
transphobia.
(4) Liberal secularism is not anti-religious, but it does restrict the impact of religion on
political life by establishing a ‘proper’ sphere and role for religion through the
public/private divide (religion then is private). Since the 1970s, the secularization
thesis has been proven wrong by the religious revivalism, demonstrated by
fundamentalist Islamism (e.g. the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran), Christianity (e.g.
new Christian Right in the USA) and Hinduism and Sikhism (in India). Religion can
regenerate personal and social identity in modern circumstances, and it gives people a
moral orientation in a world with moral relativism (deep and widespread
disagreement over moral issues).
Fundamentalism in Islam is an intense and militant faith in Islamic beliefs as principles
of social life and politics. Islamic fundamentalism in practice therefore is the founding of
a theocracy, the Islamic state, ruled by a spiritual authority that applies the Shari’a.
There is a difference between Islam (a religion), Islamism (a political ideology) and
fundamentalist Islamism (militant Islamism). The three core aims of fundamentalist
Islamism are the promotion of pan-Islamic unity, purification of the Islamic world by
overthrow of secularized or pro-Western leaders of Muslim states and lastly removal of
Western (especially US) influence over the Muslim world. The rise of fundamentalist
Islamism can be interpreted as evidence of an emerging clash of civilizations (the idea
that twenty-first-century conflict will be primarily cultural in character, rather than
ideological, political or economic) between Islam and West.

Case study: Canada – Multiculturalism that works?

Canada is seen as the first country with a policy of multiculturalism and calls itself a
‘nation of diversity’. In 1982, section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights was created,
which states that the Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the
preservation and advancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians. In 1988, the
Multiculturalism Act was created, which declares that multiculturalism reflects the
cultural and racial diversity of Canadian society and acknowledges the freedom of all
members of Canadian society to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage 
rights of the indigenous people, English and French as official languages, minorities’
rights to enjoy their cultures. Under the 1991 Broadcasting Act, the Canadian
broadcasting system is required to ensure that broadcasting content reflects the
diversity of cultures in the country.
This is significant because Canada’s framework of official multiculturalism is very
advanced and comprehensive, and it uses cultural recognition to achieve political
stability and civic unity. This is in line with the view that people are more wiling to
participate in society when they have a secure sense of identity. Canada’s approach to
multiculturalism has proved flexible in the 21st century, when it stressed integration and
acceptance of immigrant communities.
There is also criticism on Canada’s official multiculturalism. Quebec nationalists say that
Canada’s definition of itself a binational country isn’t sufficient, because there are biases
in favor of the English-speaking majority. Thus, they want Quebec to be a sovereign
state. Some are afraid that the biculturalism or binationalism silences other political
voices (especially from the indigenous peoples). Another critique is that by
strengthening people’s sense of cultural belonging, official multiculturalism tends to
make them more distant from members of other group, weakening the nationality and
culture of Canada as a whole.

Debating: Does social equality matter?

Yes No
Inequality and social dysfunction: Inequality and economic growth:
social inequality leads to resentment, Social equality is linked with economic
hostility and conflict; studies showed that stagnation, because it removes the
it leads to shorter, unhealthier and incentive for enterprise and hard work. It
unhappier lives (reflected in increase of even is arguable to say that inequality
teenage pregnancies, violence, obesity, benefits the poor, because living standards
imprisonment and addiction). may be higher in relatively unequal
societies than they are in relatively equal
societies.

Justice as equality: Justice as inequality:

Poverty and social disadvantages damage Inequality is just because people are
people’s opportunities and life chances. It’s different, and to treat them as equals
morally seen just to have social equality, would be injustice. Aristotle argued that it
which is achievable through policies of is not only injustice when equals are
welfare and redistribution. John Rawls treated unequally, but also when unequals
stated that if people were unaware of their are treated equally. Justice may then be
personal attributes and qualities, most equality of opportunity, but not of
would favor equality over inequality outcome (equality/equity)
Inequality and a well functioning Politics of envy:
democracy: Socialists base their principle of equality
Equality is necessary for healthy on social envy, which encourages the less
democracy and meaningful citizenship; well-off to resent the wealthy instead of
minority or disadvantaged groups focusing on improving their own
(women, ethnic minorities, unemployed) conditions. As this politics of envy grows,
regard themselves as ‘second class individual freedom is diminished.
citizens’, which correlates with low voter Redistribution is legalized theft: the
turnout and civil unrest. government transfers wealth from one
group to another without consent.
This issue lies at the heart of ideological debate and arguments: left-wingers tend to
support equality, seeing it as the key to social justice, whereas right-wingers typically
accept inequality as inevitable if not desirable.

Some study questions about the content:

 How does society shape politics?
 What are the different views on the nature of society?
 What have been the political implications of the emergence of industrial societies
from agrarian societies?
o What is the role of urbanization?
o What is the theory of Ferdinand Tö nnies?
o What is the theory of Max Weber?
 What have been the political implications of the emergence of postindustrial
societies from industrial societies?
o How can this be shown in the theory of Fordism and post-Fordism?
o What is Daniel Bell’s theory about information society? Is the ‘information
society’ a myth or a reality?
o What is the theory of hyperglobalist theorists?
o What is Manuel Castell’s theory on network society?
o What is Ivan Illich’s theory?
o What criticism can be made on these theories?
o What is meant with ‘two-thirds, one-third’ societies? ( Galbraith &
underclass)
o How has the growth of individualism affected community and social cohesion?
What is the debate on the consequences and speed of individualism?
 What exactly is identity politics?
o How have race and ethnicity, gender, religion and culture provided the basis
for identity politics?
o Is identity politics a liberating force or a political dead-end?
o What are examples of consciousness raising?
o What is multiculturalism? What are the differences between liberal, pluralist
and cosmopolitan multiculturalism?
o What are Will Kymlicka’s three kinds of minority rights and how do they relate
to multiculturalism?
 o What is the backlash against multiculturalism? Would interculturalism be an
alternative?
o What is the relation between gender equality and feminism?
o How has feminism changed over the years? What is its relation with hybridity,
intersectionality and trans politics?
o What is the clash of civilizations?
 Why has social connectedness become ‘thinner’?
 Has class conflict in modern society been resolved or merely suppressed?
 Has the network society substituted ‘virtual’ communities for real communities, and
with what consequences?
 Is individualism the enemy of social solidarity and cohesion?
 Does consumerism liberate people or enslave them?
 What are the main factors explaining the growth of identity politics?
 Is identity politics a liberating or an oppressive force?
 Why do multiculturalists believe that diversity provides the basis for a stable
society?
 On what grounds have liberals argued that cultural diversity may be ‘excessive’?
 To what extent is there tension between cultural rights and women’s rights?
 Do women and men have the same ‘essential’ nature?
 Is the secularization thesis still sustainable?
 How does multiculturalism in Canada work? What is the criticism on it?
 What are the main arguments around the debate of social equality?
 How does material inequality, particularly income inequality, affect politics and
society?
 Do governments have a moral obligation to promote social equality, and, if so, on
what grounds?