Abstract

ExcerptWe are currently witness to a new rise of identity politics, only the content of which is prone to partisanship. On the one side of the political aisle, we are supposed to care about our particular place in a social hierarchy based on race, gender, or sexual orientation, while on the other side we are supposed to identify with our original geographical lineage. This approach to politics, which we commonly refer to as identity politics, has drawn the ire of liberal critics that see it as a vehicle for division and conflicts that tears Western societies apart. Instead, rather than emphasize what divides us, these liberals wish to unite us by emphasizing that we are all cosmopolitan members of humanity. This essay shares the concerns that the liberals have with the rise of identity politics, but will argue that in one way, the liberal critics are no better then the identitarians they criticize. In both cases, there is a demand for a sacrifice of the individual for some greater good. When viewed in this way, it is irrelevant whether the sacrifice is made for the betterment of a particular identitarian group or humanity as a whole.