The book Identity/Difference, authored by William E. Connolly, explores the prominence of individual identity in the understanding of democracy and politics. In Connolly’s analysis, both the construction of identity and the conflicts that arise from it play an important role in reinforcing political structures by embedding individuals into political processes. Individuals solidify and develop their identity through societal norms and the process of differentiating their positionality from others. This process of distinction and othering inevitably causes conflicts, which act as boundaries that harm inclusivity and reinforce inequalities. Connolly’s analysis focuses on this nature, where individuals further have a “proclivity to marginalize or demonize difference to sanctify the identity they profess.”

One of Connolly’s key concepts is “biocultural ideology.” In his book, Connolly explores the prominence of corporeal sensibilities that contribute to the formation of individual identity. Connolly connects biological markers like race, gender, and physical traits with cultural norms and narratives to explain how society constructs contrasting identity groups that delineate “us” from “them.” In other words, identity formation involves a crucial interaction between biology and culture, each influencing the other in a mutually dependent way. Cultural norms impact how society perceives and values biological differences like gender or race. Simultaneously, biological tendencies, such as emotional responses or brain functions, can influence how people participate in cultural traditions. This concept of biocultural ideology plays an important role in naturalizing differences between social groups, integrating individuals into the political system of division and exclusion. The corporeal experiences of biocultural divisions normalize social exclusions and justify the prevalent social hierarchies, thereby influencing political rhetoric and policies.

Through these arguments, Connolly criticizes the normalization of exclusion and marginalization reinforced through identity politics. Connolly mentions several significant cases, including the nature of democratic regimes, which are conceptually founded on equality and inclusion. Despite fundamental principles of democracy, the prevalence of biocultural ideologies may foster more exclusionary and discriminatory policies and practices. As a matter of fact, Connolly contends that democratic politics are characterized by authority and recognition, which frequently result in the marginalization of ethnic minorities and other marginalized identities. These conflicts result from democratic societies' propensity to marginalize some identities while elevating others, typically those that conform to prevailing biocultural ideologies. Connolly's theoretical approach is largely influenced by poststructuralist ideas, especially those of Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault. He places an emphasis on how language, discourse, and power shape political relationships and identities, and the meanings ascribed to diversity and the way we discuss identity have an impact on the organization of society.

Connolly’s analysis of biocultural identity construction provides insight into understanding the contentions and exclusionary practices in identity politics, as well as its contradictions with democratic values. His arguments also play a crucial role in the explanation of the various forms of individual interaction and ideology that are closely tied to politics. Nonetheless, some of his arguments can be criticized for having a pessimistic and overstated view of identity formation, which he sees as rooted in rejection and conflicts. Also, the points mainly focus on the US context, which leaves room for further exploration of how heterogeneity exists in the understanding of biocultural ideologies and the need for what Connolly calls "agonistic respect."

신시준 강남포스트 학생기자  webmaster@ignnews.kr

<저작권자 © 강남포스트, 무단 전재 및 재배포 금지>