Photo: Ekurd.net/Courtesy of Gerd Altmann/Pixabay
Dr. Sorran Arasan | Exclusive to Ekurd.net
Multiple identity and chosen destiny
Modern category of citizen has been constructed in a way that, under the pretense of universality, postulated a homogeneous public, which relegated all particularity and differences that means a huge setback in democracy and pluralism.
According to Hall, the identification process continues throughout the life of the individual and is never stable, fixed or unified. Especially in the late modern times, ‘identities are fragmented and fractured, never singular but multiply constructed across different, often intersecting and antagonistic, discourses, practices, and positions.
It’s correct that identities are multiple and the process of identity is dynamic, i.e. people’s political and religious ideas can change, new identities can arise, and affiliation to new groups can replace the older once, throughout our life. But this description does not exactly apply to all identities; for instance, ethnic identity and gender identity cannot be changed, fragmented easily like religious or political ideas.
Feeling is a crucial factor in constructing identity, which in turn depends on a collective consciousness and awareness of belonging to a particular group. The ethnic identity and the gender identity are not like some other identities that can be neglected, fractured, but the feeling of belonging to an ethnicity or a gender group can be very weak or strong. You cannot change your origin or your gender easy like an idea. The feeling of belonging to an ethnic group can be as strong that one sacrifices her or his life for it.
We are neither passive recipients nor free subjects
Individuals are neither passive recipients hailed into specific roles nor free subjects who constitute themselves without constraint. The notion that an effective suturing of the subject to a subject-position requires, not only that the subject hailed but that the subject invests in the position, means that suturing has to be thought of as an articulation, rather than a one sided process, and that in turn places identification, if not identities, firmly on the theoretical agenda. Hall??
Hall is right in this point; people are neither passive recipients nor free subjects. The reality is that we as human being, particularly people of the occupied Kurdistan, are neither the creator of our destiny (subjectivism) nor passive recipients or bearer of our positions, subject-positions (objectivism). We have been partly constrained to the prevailing positions, and we have partly accepted it, by being passive observer or even to some extent hailed it. But it does not mean that we can deny or change our identity as a nation, we are known as Kurds, we cannot be others. There are always some who pretend to be others, but the majority do not pretend and, only their ethnic affiliation and feeling can be strong or weak dependent on different circumstances, particularly political atmosphere. To pretend is just fake not reality.
Halls perception is that Foucault ultimately changed from his earlier concept where the subject was simply an effect of power or discourse to a notion
where subjectivities were actively produced.
Every identity has some intrinsic and essential content
There are multiple identities and some identities are universals, women’s, worker’s and gay’s identity and the aim of the struggle to gain the groups rights is universals, but some identities, like ethnic and race are specific and struggle to achieve these group’s rights are contingence to places.
The notion that an identity is quite a product of something else cannot be wholly correct. Hall: ”it assumes that any identity has some intrinsic and essential content which is defined by either a common origin or a common structure of experience or both. Struggling against existing construction of a particular identity takes the form of contesting negative images with positive ones and of trying to discover the authentic and original content of the identity.”
In the same way; ethnic identity has been denied and attempt has been made to destroy the construction of it by dominant identity, particularly in Kurdistan. This struggle against the Kurds takes the form of contesting Kurdish identity by Turkish, Arabic and Persian identity, which can be interpreted that the occupiers of Kurdistan perceive their ethnic identity as authentic and original but the Kurdish as unauthentic and pseudo, and that is equal to racist.
Kurdish identity has to some extent been contested
Identities have both fixed and stable as well fluid boundaries. The Kurdish identity has been contested by other identities. The Kurds in the beginning were constrained to accept the new religion, Islam, and its different branches; due to geopolitical reason and the animosity of occupier nations on one side and the strong affinity to clan identity among the Kurdish clans, on other side, eventually the national identity lost its rigidity which in turn caused the Kurdish people partly hailed the new religious identity (subjectivities were actively produced). Later on, the identity politics based upon class (strengthened by our enemies ‘deliberately’ and the populist groups inside Kurdistan ‘naively’) have degraded and weakened the national political identity. There is no doubt that for the purpose of accentuating identity differences, (national -religious, class affiliation) identity politics weakened the common bond among the Kurds who are oppressed and subordinated nation.
In other words, identity politics, plied by the colonizers on one side and clan identity, religious identity plus class identity used by the endemic forces on the other side have to a great extent masked and even considerably damaged the feeling of national identity in Kurdistan and paved the way for people, at least partly, to hailed the other identities.
Despite centuries attempt to make alien identities essential in Kurdistan and displacing the Kurdish identity, the Kurdish struggle for recognition of its nation identity continues, at least with the same strength as before. Considering this fact, the question crossing mind is; why ethnic or racial bonds between groups, like Kurds, are so strong that invoke essentialist notions in their struggle for recognition? My attempt is absolutely not to defend essentialism, on contrary I strongly believe in changes in every aspect of life including traditions, ideas and skills, but it does not mean to be against the ethnic and racial identity.
Another fact is that in a national state with different ethnic and racial groups? citizenship ‘a political collection of rights and obligations’ cannot recognize the minority group’s rights. Substantial gains of citizenship’s rights elude the ethnic minorities (in Kurdistan, i.e. people are prevented from capitalizing and build companies, the aim of this policy is to halt development in Kurdistan); because the politic and thereby the citizenship is a subject to the dominant racial identity which always pretend to be authentic and essential at the expense of minority group’s identities that become marginalized and are considered as unauthentic and pseudo.
Dr. Sorran Arasan, a specialist physician in eye diseases Sweden. He is a senior contributing writer for Ekurd.net. This is a part of series titled “Citizenship and Identity”, see below.
The opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of Ekurd.net or its editors.
Copyright © 2019 Ekurd.net. All rights reserved