traditional notions of cultural identity and nationalism // manifestations of self online and in the virtual world // notions of self in second life: a global perspective
Within global issues theory, the traditional starting point for understanding how we construct our identity as individuals begins with a discussion of
nationalism. As previously noted, IR theorists -
realists in particular but also
liberalists,
neo-conservatives, and a host of others -
privilege state actors above all other entities. As nationalism is directly associated with a particularly nation state, it follows that this is the key cultural signifier for theorists who prescribe to concepts of state supremacy. Symbolically, we are inundated with this assumption through physical cultural signifiers, be they flags, passports, or other visualizations of the nation-state that separate one group from another.
This understanding of culture and identity is steeped in notions of modernity, particularly within the idea of a singular self. Citizens of any given nation state are first looked at as representatives of a larger whole - a piece part in a greater entity. This, combined with an assumption that culture is "an explanation as a last resort", leads to an oversimplification of grandiose proportions.[
C.13/P.3] One need only look at the prevalence of Samuel P. Huntington's 'clash of civilizations' thesis - a theory that defines two static systems of identity as unwavering and headed for inevitable conflict - within prominent IR journals, theoretical explanations, and in the mainstream news media to recognize this trend.
Realism in particular has a peculiar relationship with notions of cultural identity. As observed by Beate Jahn, realists look to culture as definitional for the nation-state, separating the "domestic from the international."[
C.12/P.8] Cultural difference between societies is in and of itself unimportant. In realist theory, that one state privilege specific traditions and practices is of note only in that it draws a distinction between nations - the nuances of its particular culture are relatively immaterial. This theoretical choice is relatively easy to digest - without clear lines dividing states as singular, realism fails to function in any meaning way. Culture must be homogenous, otherwise the actions of states on an international level are not so easily understood in reference to an anarchic system, or as Jahn and others phrase it, the state of nature.
While Huntington and his theoretical compatriots continue to dominate the discourse of global issues, there lies an alternate school of thought that focuses on the post-modern tenants of multiplicity and social construction. Yosef Lapid and Friedrich Kratochwil chastise realist thinkers such as Kenneth Waltz for their decision to consider nationalism only as "an omission in [...] the currently emerging structure of international politics."[
C.14/P.110] They similarly upbraid John Mearsheimer's notion of 'hypernationalism' as a reductionary means to understand neorealist principles such as the security dilemma or the balance of power. Realist thought relies on universalism to maintain its theoretical worth, and as such, disregards culture as it does not fit inside its worldview.
In an effort to understand a more dynamic notion of identity, we must look first towards notions of multiculturalism. Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor argues for an understanding of multiculturalism as the demand for a "politics of equal recognition" and "equal status of cultures and genders."[
C.26/P.27] While these two tenants are important to the multiculturalists agenda, they again rely on singular notions of self. While accepting of a multitude of identities, a more complete understanding of multiculturalism allows for this manifestation of cultural diversity to be both internal and external.
Cultural theorist Stuart Hall, in an effort to compare and contrast modern and postmodern notions of a cultural self, proposes two concepts for cultural identity.
The first is defined in "terms of one, shared culture, a sort of collective 'one true self', hiding inside the many other, more superficial or artificially imposed 'selves', which people with a shared history and ancestry hold in common."[
C.10/P.223] This definition allows for "our cultural identities to reflect the common historical experiences and shared cultural codes which provide us, as 'one people', with stable, unchanging and continuous frames of reference and meaning."[
C.10/P.223] This construction of cultural identity is one that takes place on an everyday basis - by interacting in the world around us we inevitably absorb local cultural codes. This is in and of itself is insufficient. Hall thus proposes a second definition: that while understanding these shared points of cultural construction as real and important, we must also understand that "critical points of deep and significant difference which constitute 'what we really are'; or rather - since history has intervened - 'what we have become'."[
C.10/P.225] To Hall,
it is nearly impossible to speak of, "one experience [or] one identity" without a realization that this definition is incomplete . Hall continues:
"Cultural identity, in this second sense, is a matter of 'becoming' as well as of 'being'. It belongs to the future as much as to the past. It is not something which already exists, transcending place, time, history and culture. Cultural identities come from somewhere, have histories. But, like everything which is historical, they undergo constant transformation. Far from being eternally fixed in some essentialised past, they are subject to the continuous 'play' of history, culture and power. Far from being grounded in a mere 'recovery' of the past, which is waiting to be found, and which, when found, will secure our sense of ourselves into eternity, identities are the names we give to the different ways we are positioned by, and position ourselves within, the narratives of the past."[C.10/P.225]
Hall's stance is that a multiplicity of self allows for a greater cultural understanding in contemporary society. This multiplicity is not to be confused with fragmentation. Multiplicity represents a harmonious sense of self, one that while multi-faceted, is nonetheless congruent. Fragmentation implies a sense of self that is incoherent and jagged - a reality for some, but by no means the ultimate goal.
In expanding upon Hall's initial stances, it is important to turn to feminist theorists of global issues as they are unsurprisingly apt at understanding the postmodern crisis of identity and the overbearing nature of hegemonic conceptions of self. Continuously marginalized feminist thinkers have long understood the failures and shortcomings of traditional IR identity theory - written primarily by white males, such theories could be nothing but blind to the social constructions that inform our social sensibilities. Ann Tickner argues that this understanding of the social constructions behind identity has been central to nearly all contemporary feminists, with dichotomies that marginalize women in relation to the masculine - "strong/weak, rational/emotional, independent/dependent, public/private" - resulting from "the legacy of Western political and economic thought."[
C.27/P.150] To feminists, "all knowledge is socially constructed and depends on the social, temporal, and spatial location of the knower", and so it follows that whatever identity is constructed from this knowledge is inherently informed by a fluctuating and variable set of sources.[
C.27/P.151] Tickner elaborates on the notions of national identity in stating that nationalism provides a "unique sense of shared historical memories" that allows for a semblance of "secure personal identity."[
C.27/P.153] This point is argued in relation to the concept that there is a "psychological need for individuals to identify with a group" through the familial aspects of nationalism.[
C.27/P.153] While this familial notion of identity provides solidity, it also is inherently in transition. Often times, the state is to be protected and defended, gendering it feminine. At other times, it acts as a protector providing for its populous, gendering it masculine. Ultimatley, Tickner argues, "national identities have been created through [a] mythical claim to homogeneity [...] reinforced by the attribution of difference to those outside state boundaries."[
C.27/P.156] Through universalism and social construction, we are taught to ignore the postmodern self in lieu of a forced singularity from the hegemonic, and masculine, source of Realist thinking.