This second notion of identity is not so much a specification of kind as it is a specification of a relationship, and indeed a morally freighted relationship of a particular sort. Identity does have a second meaning, however, which is quite different from kind, and is at the heart of what has come to be known as 'identity politics.' Without this other meaning, the term probably never would have taken hold in the 1990s in the first place. This response is understandable - but only when identity is synonymous with kind and has no further meaning. With this meaning in mind, when critics suggest that the term is unnecessary or pernicious, the usual response is that people have had identities for all of human history, so it is impossible to eliminate the term and silly to complain about it. In its more innocent and innocuous usage, the term 'identity' is simply the upgraded and fashionable equivalent of what we once recognized as 'kind.' To be American today is to have an American identity. Instead of being an 'American,' we might say, 'my identity is American,' or 'my gender identity is male,' or 'my religious identity is Protestant,' or 'my ethnic identity is Greek.' What is going on here? Why add the term 'identity' when, a generation before, it seemed unnecessary? 'He is Protestant.' 'She is Roman Catholic.' Even ethnic and racial distinctions were often handled similarly.īy the time we entered the 1990s, however, a new term had entered our everyday vocabulary: 'identity.' That term is now used nearly everywhere - sometimes consciously, sometimes simply because it is around and available. 'He is American.' 'She is Italian.' This was not limited to political distinctions alone we also treated religion this way. As recently as the 1960s, we identified ourselves in this way. Throughout history, the human race has divided into nations - into different kinds of peoples, having different inheritances.

Hearts of iron 4 dismantle faction