By contrast, the second change, the development of the
modern notion of identity, has given rise to a politics of difference.
There is, of course, a universalist basis to this as
well, making for the overlap and confusion between the two.
Everyone should be recognized for his or her unique identity.
But recognition here means something else. With the politics
of equal dignity, what is established is meant to be universally
the same, an identical basket of rights and immunities;
with the politics of difference, what we are asked to recognize
is the unique identity of this individual or group, their
distinctness from everyone else. The idea is that it is precisely
this distinctness that has been ignored, glossed over,
assimilated to a dominant or majority identity. And this assimilation
is the cardinal sin against the ideal of authenticity.
By contrast, the second change, the development of themodern notion of identity, has given rise to a politics of difference.There is, of course, a universalist basis to this aswell, making for the overlap and confusion between the two.Everyone should be recognized for his or her unique identity.But recognition here means something else. With the politicsof equal dignity, what is established is meant to be universallythe same, an identical basket of rights and immunities;with the politics of difference, what we are asked to recognizeis the unique identity of this individual or group, theirdistinctness from everyone else. The idea is that it is preciselythis distinctness that has been ignored, glossed over,assimilated to a dominant or majority identity. And this assimilationis the cardinal sin against the ideal of authenticity.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/98aba/98abadb1435b0cfbe63f2dabdddc22693678da81" alt=""