These questions, among others, relate to the relationship between the individual
and groups in democratic societies. The imperative of equality before the law
and in the political process puts the individual at the centre. The ballot box is the
principal mechanism to mediate interests and determine policies. This ideal
could perhaps work in a perfectly homogeneous nation state; however, in many
democratic countries the internal diversity has produced and perpetuated
structural disadvantages for racial, ethnic, gender, and religious groups.
Originally, identity politics was a response to the inability to reconcile diversity
with equality. Though motivated by the emancipatory intent to combat
discrimination, it was met by an identity politics of a different kind, one that flies
the flag of excluding and demonizing the Other.
The present-day question about identity in politics then is this: what role should
and will identity politics play in the future development of pluralistic
democracies?
Conclusions
Identity in politics is thus a challenge to democratic rule rooted in the principle
of self-determination. As a natural child of nationalism it gives rise to conflicts
that political scientists study at multiple levels. At the subnational level, the
focus is on ethnicities and other group affiliations and, at the supranational level,
they are concerned with civilization identities (e.g. Western, Islamic, Sinic).
Considering conflicts in terms of civilization identities is sometimes persuasive,
sometimes not, for there is the risk of stereotyping, while identities are
historically contingent and can be instrumentalized for political purposes of
various kinds. Because identities tend to be presented as non-negotiable, identity
politics is hard to reconcile with deliberative democracy as it makes compromise
difficult to achieve.