The paper focuses on problems of individual and social identity-construction in the context of globalization. The author analyses the concept of identity from modernity and post-modernity perspectives. As a conclusion the author claims that a new approach strategy of defining and interpreting the epoch of globalization is necessary in order to explain and understand the social changes at local, regional and world levels

Silviu Coposescu

SERIES VII - SOCIAL SCIENCES AND LAW

Directory of Open Access Journals

Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov • Vol. 2 (51) - 2009  Series VII: Social Sciences and Law  DEFINING IDENTITY IN THE CONTEXT  OF GLOBALIZATION  Silviu COPOSESCU 1  Abstract: The paper focuses on problems of individual and social identity-construction in the context of globalization. The author analyses the concept of identity from modernity and post-modernity perspectives. As a conclusion the author claims that a new approach strategy of defining and interpreting the epoch of globalization is necessary in order to explain and understand the social changes at local, regional and world levels.  Key words: identity, crisis identity, globalization, social changes..                                                    1 Faculty of Law and Sociology, Transilvania University of Brasov. 1. Identity and Change    In  a  changing  world,  the  English  poet and essayist T.S. Eliot remarked, there is one  thing  that  remains  unchanged,  the continuous  struggle  between  Good  and Evil. But, as David Massey (1) observes, there  are  still  other  things  that  do  not change.  For  example,  the  never-ending longing  for  identity  that  grows  as  times change. And the 21-st century seems to be the epoch of globalization and of changing times.  In  this  context  of  profound  and accelerated  changes,  individuals,  groups and (small as well as large) communities are  fearfully  and  hopefully  searching  for their identity. Identity is present – whether explicitly or not – on the lips of ordinary people,  in  the  halls  of  governmental offices, in the seminar rooms, in the social science  research  laboratories,  and  among the topics of international conferences.  These  common  sense  observations suggest  that  identity  is  perceived,  at different levels and in various manners, as an issue of our times. “Identity has become one  of  the  unifying  frameworks  of intellectual  debate  in  the  1990s”,  states Richard  Jenkins  (2).  He  notices  that everybody  has  a  saying  on  identity: sociologists,  anthropologists,  political theorists,  psychologists,  historians, philosophers, etc. Moreover, identity is not only a topic of intellectual debates, but a practical  issue  as  well.  Business  people have understood that in order to sell goods and  services  it  is  necessary  to  sell  an “identity”  as  well.  Purchasing  a  new product means a new brand. Thus, identity is  constructed  and  purchased  in  corner shops, in school, at the workplace, during business  trips  or  holidays,  in  families  or groups  of  friends.  A  new  brand  (new dressing  style,  new  diet,  new  hair  style, new  interior  design,  new  job,  new organisation,  new  group  of  friends,  etc.) means a change, with regard to the epoch and  the  others.  Consequently,  identities change:  new  identities  occur,  the traditional ones are revived, or the existing ones  are  transformed  (de-constructed and re-constructed).  However,  identity  is  not the only issue of our times, perhaps more importantly, social change is another. The fact  that  identity  is  searched  for  and disputed at all levels of human existence and practice, suggests an identity crisis and Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov • Vol. 2 (51) - 2009 • Series VII  10 uncertainty  concerning  the  direction  of change.    2.  ”Crisis  of  Identity”  or  “Identity Crisis”? From a somehow nostalgic perspective, we  could  suggest  that  identity  might  be “the illness of the century”. If “crisis” is the brand of our times (see for instance the present-day financial crisis, the economic crisis,  the  political  crisis,  and  the  social crisis), then “identity” could be the brand of future research.   In fact, what is identity? Of course, identity as experience and as a concept constructed from various elements suggests  various  perspectives  in formulating an answer to the question. For example,  from  a  disciplinary, multidisciplinary  and  interdisciplinary perspective,  each  author  aims  at  specific theoretical,  methodological,  and ideological  advantages,  and  specific practical  applications.  My  perspective  in this  paper  is  interdisciplinary (anthropological,  sociological  and philosophical). From such a perspective, identity is first and foremost an ideological strategy which “symbolises” the  antinomic  specificity  of human condition. Identity symbolises my, your,  our,  their  need  for  fulfilment  as autonomous human beings/entities. On the one hand, there is the need for continuity and belonging, by relating to others, on the basis of some real or imaginary common characteristics  (of  the  species,  of  the group). On the other hand, there is the need for  differentiation,  discontinuity,  and individuality, on the basis of some real or imaginary  unique,  individual characteristics.  However,  difference  is something  else  than  identity.  It  is something more or less, a plus or a minus. Identity is a pattern. In order to be fulfilled, it  needs  to  follow  the  pattern  that  is constructed or inherited, and to become the master of the pattern. To be master of the pattern  means  to  be  in  the  centre. Centrality is constitutive for the concept of identity. Understood in this way, identity is an  emergent  socio-cultural  concept, relatively  and  relationally  opposite  to static,  or,  for  that  matter,  dynamic substantialism.  The  emergent  identity bears  the  label  of  context.  But,  like  any other  construct,  it  is  never  definitely finalized.  Given,  declared  identity  is permanently re-constructed, innovated, and ascertained  through  a  set  of  expressions and conventionally symbolic forms that are negotiated and shared by the members of the group or community.   Claude  Levi-Strauss  considers  that “identity  is  a  kind  of  virtual  foyer, indispensable  in  explaining  a  number  of things, but without having a real existence” (3). This number  of things  could  be:  the family,  the  lineage,  the  place,  the  home, the  name,  the  profession,  the  belief,  the language, etc. So, when we feel that these benchmark-things,  such  as  the  place,  the home,  the  parents,  the  life  styles  and customs that we inherited are disappearing, when  we  loose  our  origins,  when  group solidarities are breaking, we can certainly say that there is an identity crisis.  The crisis refers to the existential as well as  the  conceptual  aspect  of  identity.  The solution to the crisis could be similar to the “puzzle”  strategy  (re-formulation,  re-construction), or the “revolution” strategy (radical  change).  In  both  strategies,  a critique  is  indispensable.  There  is  a “traditional” critical strategy, the way the majority  of  us  perform,  which  aims  at clarifying  inadequate  concepts  by  adding or adjusting them in order to get to some positive  knowledge.  But  there  is  also  a kind of critique which places the concepts “under  eraser”  (Foucault,  Derrida, Deleuze),  the  radical  post-modernist critique,  which  aims  at  “de-constructing” the  key  concepts  that cannot  be  replaced Coposescu, S.: Defining Identity in the Context of Globalization  11 with  others  (and  identity  is  such  a  key-concept) in order to construct, explain and interpret  socio-cultural  phenomena. According  to  Stuart  Hall(4),  Derrida  has described such an approach as thinking to the  limits,  in  intervals,  a  kind  of  double writing,  which  hides  and  reverses  the intervals. By reversing the intervals a new concept emerges which can no longer be included  in  the  old  paradigm.  Thus, present-day identity operates, in our post-modern  society,  undercover/under  eraser, in  the  interval  between revival/replacement/elimination  and emergence/complete  change.  Such  an approach is radically new and is a strategy of approaching the issue comprehensively, as a whole. Then  the  question  arises: In  relation to which  set  of  problems  does  identity become  an  irreducible  dimension,  an invariant  of  human  existence,  and  what factors determine the emergence of a new type of identity? The answer seems to be related  to  the  issues  of  centrality  and localisation  that  are  present  in  the processes and forms of individual identity as well as in the processes and forms of collective  (community  or  societal) identities, such as family dynamics or the identity of political movements, present or past.  But  the  notions  of  centrality  and localisation  are  also  the  focus  of  critical analysis  and  interpretation,  due  to  the phenomenon  of  globalization.  We  can notice,  at  present,  that  the  roller  of globalization profoundly affects processes and forms of organization, as well as the content  of  individual  and  social  lives everywhere. Consequently, globalization is one  of  the  factors  that  determine  the reconstruction/replacement and emergence of new types of identity.     3. Globalization and Identity The process of globalization is generally characterised  by  two  main,  opposing forces.  On  the  one  hand,  there  are  the economical  and  technological  forces  that support  expansion  and  a  growth  in  the efficient functioning of organisations (for example,  the  trans-national  organisations) beyond traditional national borders. On the other hand, there are the social and cultural forces which resist the expansion of trans-national  structures  and  organisations. According  to  a  research  done  by  Galit Ailon-Souday and Gideon Kunda (5), the offensive  of  trans-national  organisations, based on their economic and technological power  needed  to  achieve  their  objectives (for  example  the  profit),  ignoring  the national borders and identities, is counter-balanced by the opposition of the national, regional, local social and cultural forces. In order to understand the significance of the opposition between the two tendencies and its  implications  for  the  construction  and affirmation of national or local identities, it is  useful  to  briefly  put  forward  some theoretical aspects concerning the concept of  “globalization”,  which  seem  to  be similar  to  and  linked  with  those  of  the concept of “identity”. According  to  R.  Roberston  (6),  the present-day  situation  concerning globalization  is  a  major  contemporary example of the way in which concepts and theories,  previously  developed  by  social scientists, are then used in the “real world” in a manner that threatens their analytical and interpretative validity. Anthony Giddens considers that it would be a mistake to conceive globalization just in its quantitative and substantialist sense, as  a  medium  which  is  expanding  and homogenizing,  and  within  which  certain societies are developing and changing. The general term  of  globalization  denotes the social,  economical  and  political interdependences  that  cross  boundaries Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov • Vol. 2 (51) - 2009 • Series VII  12 between countries and condition decisively the  lives  of the  people  that  live  in  those countries  In a deeper sense, globalization “should be understood primarily as the reordering of time and distance in our lives” (7). So, the  process  approach  suggests  the  pre-eminence  of  the  structural,  qualitative sense of the concept of globalization.   Globalization  does  not  mean  just  a process  of  increase  of  interdependences between  nations  and  the  formation  of  a single,  structurally  homogenous,  world system, but a process of intensification and deepening of differences and a process of construction/re-construction,  hence negotiation, of identities. Such a tendency suggests  that  globalization  implies complex,  on-going,  ontological  relations between  the  universal  and  the  particular.  From  the  perspective  of  the  relation between the universal and the particular, it is  more  appropriate  to  consider  that  it  is not  only  globalization  that  influences  the identity  features  of  national  systems,  but national systems, in their turns, also affect the evolution and features of globalization.   The  confusing  usage  of  the  notion  of globalization in different contexts and with different  meanings  can  be  considered,  in my  opinion,  not just  negatively,  but  also positively,  stimulatingly,  innovatively. Namely,  as  a  challenging  signal  of  the diffuse  and  still  vague  character  of  the profound/hidden changes that take place in the world system as a whole. The fact that the factors which determine the on-going changes  are  difficult  to  identify  as analytical  units  has  led  to  the  common-sense  perception  of  globalization, primarily in its economic sense, as one of the  explanatory  factors  of  present-day social changes. The probable cause of the focus  on  the  economic  dimension  is  the universal character of satisfying the human subsistence  needs.  Perhaps  this  aspect  of globalization  brought  organizations  in general  and  economic  organizations  in particular  to  the  attention  of  researchers and to the common-sense perception as the main  factors  of  change  and  of  the emergence of new types of identities.   4. Social Change and the Globalization of Identity  It  is  natural  to  emphasize  the  fact  that social change nowadays is dramatic in its amplitude,  rhythm,  and  complexity.  I understand  by  social  change  the continuous  process  of  transition  of  a society  from  one  type  of  structural organisation  to  another,  with  phases  of slowing  down  and  acceleration.  Human history,  in  continuous  change,  represents an  entirety  of  human  acts  of  knowledge, creations,  and  actions.  These  human  acts involve  individuals  associated  in  groups, families,  households,  organisations,  state communities. Historical and social reality has shown us that, on the one hand, these human  associations  generate  the emergence  of  political,  economical, religious institutions/organisations. On the other hand, there is a close link between institutions and social changes. Institutions are  structural,  functional  components  of real  societies.  They  are  made  of  “a complex  of  values,  norms,  and  customs shared  by  a  number  of  individuals”  (4, p.137).  Institutions  or  organisations  are ensembles of individuals who associate in order to cooperate for the achievement of some  goals  (needs/interests).  In  order  to cooperate, individuals need to adhere to, to share  and  to  commit  themselves  to  the values,  norms  and  rules  of  the organisation.  Values,  norms  and  rules represent the nucleus of the organisational culture.  Culture  expresses  the  identity  of the  organisation.  Consequently,  it  is natural  for  the  group  if  individuals associated to  achieve  a  common  goal,  to construct,  maintain  and  promote  the identity of the organisation, as a strategy of Coposescu, S.: Defining Identity in the Context of Globalization  13 expressing  their  autonomous  identity  in relation to other groups.   Who  and  what  changes?  Does  the individual  and  its  identity  change?  Does the  community/society  and  its  identity change?  According  to  the  modern  paradigm  of identity,  what  kind  of  identity  can  an individual or group develop, who finds out overnight  that  his/her  institution/ organisation  has  gone  bankrupt,  or  has merged?  Or  what  kind  of  strategy  for  identity construction  can  a  person  develop,  who has had a great number of professions or occupations?  Is  profession  or  occupation still an identity dimension? In reality, as a group of French researchers found out, the identity crisis “is in a relation of exteriority with the occupation and is in instrumental relation with the work, and such relations turn  „reconversion  ‟to  other  roles,  in particular the family ones, into a delicate issue”   (8, p.121). Or,  what  kind  of  identity  can  a child/adolescent  construct,  who  has experienced  successive  parent  divorces, changes of paternity, of schools, of place of residence?  Also, in the process of intensification of globalization,  what  identity  can  a  trans-national  organisation  develop,  whose individuals  construct  and  negotiate  their identities  instantly,  depending  on  the context? In the context of globalization, it is clear that  the  autonomy,  and  consequently  the constructed  and  expressed  identity,  is being  continuously  attacked  through commercial, financial, communication, and migration  strategic  networks.  Through these  strategic  networks,  globalization alters,  breaks  down,  and  threatens  the identity of communities, individuals, their forms  of  organisation,  and  their  identity patterns.  In  such  a  context,  individuals search  for  strategies  for  conserving  and defending  their  actual  identities  by reviving past patterns of identity (such as family  lineage,  professional/occupational associations,  fundamentalist  religious movements, ethnic movements) on the one hand. On the other hand, individuals search for  strategies  of  reconstruction  or construction  of  new  identities,  in  an emergent virtual world, which is evolving, in  an  accelerated  rhythm,  towards  new forms of structuring identities, perceived as uncertain  and  confusing.  Perhaps  the tension between the past, the present, and the  future,  as  well  as  the  tension, subjectively experienced, between the real, the virtual, and the imaginary is similar to the  tension  between  good  and  evil, mentioned in the beginning of this paper. This dramatic tension must have a meaning which we are going to decipher some day.     References  1.  David  Massey,  1995,  Identity  and Change: Some Figurative Challenges, in vol. “Social Development between Intervention and Itegration” Edited by Jacob  Rendtorff  &  all,  Rhodos International  Science  and  Art Publishers, Copenhagen-DK, p. 127; 2.  Richard Jenkins, 1996, Social Identity, Routledge, London, p.7; 3.  Claude  Levi-Strauss,  1977, L’identite’.  Seminaire interdisciplinairedirige  par  Claude Levi-Struss  professeur  au  College  de France-1974/1975, Editions Grasset et Fasquelle, p. 332; 4.  Stuart  Hall,  1996,  Introduction:  Who Needs’Identity  ?  in  “Questions  of Cultural  Identity”,  Edited  by  S.Hall and  Paul  Du  Gay,  Sage  Publications, p.1-2; 5.  Galit Ailon-Souday & Gideon Kunda, 2003,The  Local  Selves  of  Global Workers:  The  Social  Construction  of National  Identity  in  the  Face  of Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov • Vol. 2 (51) - 2009 • Series VII  14 Organizational  Globalization,  in “Organization  Studies”,  Sage Publications, 24(7): pp.1073-1096; 6.  Roland  Roberston  &  Habib  Haque Khondker,  1998,  Discourses  of Globaization  in  “International Sociology”,  Sage  Publications,  Vol 13(1), pp.25-40; 7.  Anthony  Giddens,  1990,The Globalizing  of  Social  Life,  in “Sociology” Polity Press, p.520 8.  Claude  Dubar,  2003,  Criza identităţilor, Editura Stiinţa, Chişinău  

Defining Identity in the Context of Globalization

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Directory of Open Access Journals