Spotlight

New Delhi, 4 November 2023

The Identity Trap

By Rajiv Gupta 

Most people who have gone through a job interview will be familiar with the question, “Tell me about yourself” where the interviewee is expected to summarise why she/he is the perfect match for the position. When we meet people socially, we are trying to understand what kind of a person the other individual is so that we can decide whether we should socialize with him/her. 

We have multiple ways in which we can identify ourselves; by religion, by caste, by nationality, by gender, by age, by profession, by education, by our political leanings; you get the idea. Some of these we inherit, like gender, religion, caste, etc., while we acquire or develop others. Which of these identities do we feel strongest about? The effect these identities have on our choices of friends, careers, where we live, etc. is something that has assumed very different dimensions today as compared to a few decades ago. Let me explain. 

I was born and grew up in what was Bombay (now Mumbai), living in Delhi, male, Hindu by birth, engineer by training, educator by profession, amateur baker, cheesemaker, avid reader, etc. How should I describe myself? It depends on the situation. If I am in a job interview, I would likely present my education and experience credentials. If I am at a party, I would be more inclined to let my interests define me. In what context should I let my religion or caste define me? 

Strange as that question sounds, ethnicity, religion, nationality have become defining attributes of some people in today’s world. We all belong to some ethnic and religious group, including atheists. This is a given. The difficulty arises when we let such group membership define our total persona. Political parties have tended to use the ethnic/religious/national identities to polarise the population with the sole purpose of winning elections. People find themselves in an identity trap that is not of their making, and which is not easy to escape. This is a global phenomenon and has been seen to assume greater currency in the last decade or so. 

In my opinion, when we state our identity using one or more defining attributes, we are expressing membership in a group, whether social, professional, or political. This membership can be fluid as in the case of groups representing a specific interest, such as a book club, or photography club. We may belong to such groups as long as our interest lasts, and typically we are not emotionally invested in such groups. We do not go on a warpath against members of other book clubs. 

On the other hand, belonging to certain groups based on religion, caste or region can, and sometimes does, evoke strong emotions including hatred for people who are not part the group. It is the intensity of this emotion that is exploited by politicians for their own benefit. We see examples of this in conflicts throughout the world such as the Israeli-Hamas conflict in the middle east. 

I believe majority of the people do not feel strongly about their ethnic/religious identity that it should lead to hatred and violence. However, if they are manipulated into believing that their group is under attack from people from other groups, i.e., people from other religions, castes, nationalities, regions, etc. it can cause some people to react violently. Such people forget their multi-dimensional identity which includes their education, profession, interests, and focus on the identity that they have been led to believe is under attack. 

Once a person starts to believe that the core dimension of his/her identity is under attack, then other things become unimportant. Even if people in the “outgroup” may have a lot in common with us in terms of education, profession, interests, etc., all these factors pale in comparison to the dominant identity identifier. This is the identity trap that I refer to in the title of this article. It occurs when we let others define ourselves. 

The dangers of such a trap are a polarised population, lack of meaningful political and civic discussion, and a general mistrust and animosity among otherwise peaceful people. I am not suggesting that people will not have differences with others in a democracy. In fact, a healthy democracy should encourage debates among people. When these debates are issue-based, they are good for society, but when there is no discussion but only acrimony, and sometimes, violence, the result can be a fractured society. 

The solution for such polarisation will come from a realisation that we cannot, and should not, be defined by a limited set of identity attributes, least of all those that tend to evoke high emotions and prevent us from being able to reason through a situation. Religion, ethnicity, nationalism are some of the hot button issues that have been exploited by those who seek to manipulate us. 

It is somewhat ironic that not many people are as actively involved with local issues, either at the level of the town, or city or community. The local issues have a much greater direct impact on most citizens and residents of an area as this may include civic services such as water, education, roads, electricity, transportation, etc. 

However, these issues do not attract the same level of emotional investment as do broader, national level issues such as the ones I have mentioned in this article. That does not mean that there will be total agreement on the local issues. What we tend to have is more apathy on the local issues. Logically there should be more active participation of more people and discussion on the issues since the impact on our lives is more direct and visible. 

Getting people involved in the local issues could also lead to a little better understanding of differences between people. These differences are not necessarily inherited differences, but differences that are the result of their life experiences, which include choices they have made. Perhaps this will promote a healthier appreciation of diversity among our fellow earth inhabitants. 

I am not naïve enough to think that this will be easy. Citizens may not be ready to take interest in local politics with the same interest that they have shown in national politics. However, we will not know unless we try. And what we should ask is whether we are better off with people lacking a voice in their own governance or are we ready to try something different. I know where I stand in this matter. I would like to define my identity. What about you?---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)