INTRODUCTION

Through the centuries, one of humanity’s major

preoccupations has been to understand the extent of freedom

and also to know the self. Philosophers of antiquity, majorly

Socrates, already posited the problems concerning the self in

a famous dictum attributed to him, “man know thyself”. This clearly

shows that the problem of identity of the self was paramount

to any further speculation towards nature. For Socrates, man

has to know himself before he ventures into the philosophical

speculation of the cosmos. Man, being a political animal,

according to Aristotle, lives within the Polis. Individuals

gathered together for the purpose of achieving a common goal

make up the Polis. The identity of the individual within the Polis

is often subdued, and sometimes neglected to the benefit of

the communal good. In the Republic, Plato shows how individuals

are to be grouped to have an ordered Polis. There was no

consideration of the individual with regard to their liberty

and choice of where to belong. Hence the individual is robbed

of the liberty to belong to a particular group of his choice.

Liberty can be traced down to the Politics of Aristotle. For

Aristotle, the underlying principle of all democracy is

1

liberty. He maintains a somewhat dual concept of liberty. The

first concept is that liberty means an even interchange

between ruling and being ruled by all freeborn citizens. That

implies the sovereignty of the majority and the equality of

all before the law. In the second concept, liberty is the

freedom to do whatever one wants. 1 This concept shows that no

one would be ruled at all. If necessity calls for government,

an even interchange between the ruling and being ruled would

arise. It connotes a fundamental principle of equality of all,

regardless of wealth and merit.

Having said this, it seems obvious that politics is

inherent in the nature of man. Man is consciously or

unconsciously influenced by his society. This influence goes

further to shaping people’s political ideologies and concepts.

It is with this view that the identity politics came up in the

late 20th century as political arguments that focus upon the

interest and perspectives of groups with which people

identify. It also can be the ways in which people’s politics

1 Cf. Aristoltle, Politics Bk VI trans. by Benjamin Jowett (New York: Dover Publications, Inc.)

2

may be shaped by aspects of their identity through loosely

correlated organization.2

Therefore, for this paper to accomplish its aim, we shall

explore the concept ‘liberty’ as understood by various

philosophers. Also we shall take a critical view of the

problems and debates in the issues of liberty. Meanwhile our

main focus shall be on political liberty. We shall also try to

find a connection between liberty and identity politics. This

connection shall thus lead us into the consideration of

contemporary issues in identity politics. Afterwards we shall

do an evaluation of the entire work with a brief critique of

identity politics as viewed by three major schools of thought.

THE CONCEPTS OF LIBERTY

Man is assumed to be a free being and over the centuries,

his concern has been how to use his liberty without affecting

the interest of others. The limitation of liberty is seen in

the institution of government, which helps to preside over the

general good of the individuals, because, according to Jean-

Jacque Rousseau, man is naturally selfish.3 2 “Identity Politics,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics. 16-03-2015. 3 Cf. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract and Discourses Bk. 1 Ch. II (London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1913), p. 4.

3

The word ‘liberty’ can be used in variety of ways. It can

be economic liberty, cultural liberty, religious liberty and

so on. The philosophical concept of liberty can be used

interchangeably with freedom. In this sense, we can say that

liberty is freedom to live according to one’s choice without

restrictions.4

Isaiah Berlin gives us a good concept of liberty in his

work Two Concepts of Liberty. He posited his famous two Concepts of

Liberty; the negative and the positive. Basically, the doctrine

of positive liberty has to do with that understanding of

freedom, which is the exercise of control over oneself.

Positive liberty relies on the idea that being free is about

what we can do. Negative liberty, on the other hand, is

concerned with the area in which the individual should be left

without interference. In negative liberty, man is allowed

freedom to act diversely and positive liberty limits freedom

so as to achieve a higher goal.

This goes in line with Thomas Hobbes’ concept of freedom

where he simply sees freedom as the absence of obstacle. Any

law that restrains our actions and choices make us less free.4 Cf. Alex Tuckness, Locke and the Legislative point of View: Toleration, Contested Principles (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2002), p. 105.

4

Locke holds a conception of freedom that is somehow

contrary. He has a conception of freedom that focuses on the

positive aspect of what the law can accomplish. Just law does

not restrict freedom but rather increases the freedom of

individuals. He denied that freedom is not a liberty for every

man to do what he wishes. Restriction on the freedom to do

evil is not, in the Lockean ground, restrictions we should

worry about. From Locke’s negative assumption of natural law,

which is, “do not deprive one of life, liberty or property,”5

we can assume that his idea of freedom is so long as one is

not deprived of these three things. Also Jean-Jacques Rousseau

posits that liberty could only be achieved when there is

equality. This equality would enable the emergence of general

will and with it justice can be enforced.

Taking a contemporary view on liberty, Judge Learned Hand

opines that liberty is a thing that has to do with people;

they decide the way forward for it, and they determine it in

any sense. He defines what he calls the spirit of liberty as one

which seeks to understand the mind of other men, it weighs the

interest of others alongside with its own without bias. For

5 See John Locke Two Treatises of Government (London: Whitemore and Penn, 1821).

5

him, liberty rests in the heart of men and women, if it dies,

nothing can save it, not even constitution, court or law.6

Consequently, people’s idea of fraternity in support of

liberty makes it the case today that a threat to this liberty

anywhere would remain a threat to it everywhere. Thus a famous

activist, Martin Luther King Jr, vivifies this when he says

that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.7

THE CONCEPT OF IDENTITY

The world today is gradually becoming more aware of identity,

which is why we observe identity being acknowledged in various

field of life even in the constitutions of countries. Many

activists have ‘Identity’ as the core of their various

campaigns and propaganda for right. This is why Paul Gilroy

writes, “We live in a world where identity matters”.8 People

have risen in variety of forms and groups to fight for a

common goal which seemingly might be a denial of their right

to freedom. This has an underpinning reference to identity. We

shall explain this later. 6 Cf. Judge Learned Hand, “the Spirit of Liberty”, (Speech presented in 1944 during “I AM an American Day”). http://www.providenceforum.org/spiritoflibertyspeech 7 See Martin Luther King Jr’s writings compiled in A Testament of Hope, page 209.8 Paul Gilroy, “Diaspora and the Detours of Identity,” in; Kathryn Woodward(Ed.), Identity and difference, (London: Sage), pp. 299- 343.

6

In defining identity, Rogers Brubaker opines that the

conceptual meaning of identity is determined by the context

and theoretical tradition to which one belongs. As a

collective phenomenon, identity means sameness among members

of a group. The essentialist’s perception will understand

identity as a core aspect of individual or collective

selfhood. In the conception of the new social movements, it is

understood as a product of social and political action. It

develops unity and groupness which often results in group

action.9 These varied meanings are associated to the different

approaches to identity. It connotes dissimilarity in the

understanding of identity and approach towards it.

From the observation of the different groups and movements in

the society, it is evidence that difference results to

identity. The identity of particular group is their distinct

difference from the rest of the society in which they belong.

It is difference that brought about the queer politics. We may

have an idea of the Nazis movement of Adolf Hitler in German,

the feminist movement or even the movement scarcely started by

Martin Luther Jr. over the right of the Negroes; all these are

9 Cf. M. J. Vinod and Meena Deshpande, Contemporary Political theory (Delhi: PHI Learning Private Ltd, 2013), p.376.

7

as a result of their difference in the society. The Americans

talk about racism because among them there are people that do

not share the same colour of skin as every ‘normal’ American

should. Hitler wanted to annihilate the Jews because he

thought that they are not worthy of sharing the same humanity

with those he considered ‘pure race’. Even in Nigeria, we have

our various identities, an Ijaw man differs from a Yoruba man

culturewise but even among those people that have different

cultural identity they still can share the same identity,

maybe in their religious orientation or societal stance or

beliefs. Having explicated this concept of identity we shall

now turn our gaze to the politics of identity proper.

POLITICS OF IDENTITY

In social sciences and humanities, the term ‘Identity

Politics’ is widely used to describe events as diverse as

multiculturalism, the women movements, civil rights, gay and

lesbian movements, the nationalist conflict in postcolonial

Africa and Asia as well as the separatist movements in Spain

and Canada.10 Anspach was the first to use the term ‘Identity

Politics’. He used it to refer to activism by people with10 Cf. Mary Bernstein, “Identity Politics” in “Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 31, (2005), pp. 47-74.

8

disabilities to transform both self and societal conceptions

of people with disabilities.11 It can loosely be said that it

is a social and political movements that is marked by the

desire for justice, equality, special attention, accommodation

and legal status. It is mostly manifest and extensively

witnessed in the 20th century. It is an identity-based

struggle, which may be motivated by modernisation, political

ideologies, democratisation and the emergence of mass

societies that threatened the personal and collective

identity.12 Bernstein slightly defines identity politics as any

mobilization related to politics, culture and identity.13

The term has two words ‘politics’ and ‘identity’ which when

combined together obtains a different meaning. It is thus

related to the formation of collectives to achieve a common

goal; the struggle of the collectives come from the fear of

being intimated or maligned in the mainstream of their

disadvantages.14 For instance, the minority culture might not

11 Cf. M. J. Vinod and Meena Deshpande, Contemporary Political theory (Delhi: PHI Learning Private Ltd, 2013), p.376.12 Cf. M. J. Vinod and Meena Deshpande, Contemporary Political theory (Delhi: PHI Learning Private Ltd, 2013), p.374.13 Cf. Mary Bernstein, “Identity Politics” in “Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 31, (2005), pp. 47-74.14 Cf. M. J. Vinod and Meena Deshpande, Contemporary Political theory (Delhi: PHI Learning Private Ltd, 2013), p.379.

9

want to be trampled upon due to their limitedness, likewise

women (feminism) and even the recent same-sex movement.

Notably, there is difficulty having a consensus in the

definition of politics of identity thus, there is no

universally accepted definition of ‘Politics of Identity’.

This is so because politics of identity is a discourse where

sociologists, anthropologists and political scientists are

engaged. No doubt there will always be disparity in their

opinions. It is not a coherent area of study because it has

developed as a critique of certain practises. 15 Due to this

difficulty in reaching a unanimity in the definition of

politics of identity, Bernstein has identified, in her

research on identity politics, three perspectives to defining

identity politics; viz-a-viz., the neo-marxist approach, the

new social movement approach, the social constructionist,

postmodernist and poststructuralist.16 We shall proceed with

the explanation of these three basic approaches according to

Bernstein’s understanding.

Neo-Marxist Approach to Identity Politics

15 Cf. M. J. Vinod and Meena Deshpande, Contemporary Political theory (Delhi: PHI Learning Private Ltd, 2013), p.379.16 Mary Bernstein, “Identity Politics” in “Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 31, (2005), pp. 47-74.

10

Here Bernstein groups together all the approaches that are

concerned with the macro-level issues regarding what

constitutes power and the forces of oppression. First, these

views rest on an idea of power that view inequality as the

only real source of exploitation and oppression. Second,

activists who want to alleviate economic inequality and to

challenge the class structure are considered as the primary

agents of social change.17 Because of this theoretical

assumption, identity politics is understood in symbolic,

cultural or psychological terms and not a political practise

that challenges important relations of power. These analyses

spate culture from institutions, politics and economy.

Structure is thought to be material and therefore as primary

and determining, whereas culture is regarded as mental and

therefore as secondary or derived. As a result of this,

identity politics is viewed as a distinct political practise

in contradistinction to class politics.

The New Social Movement Approach to Identity Politics

The New Social Movement theory tries to understand the

different social movements that arose in the 1960s and 1970s17 Cf. Mary Bernstein, “Identity Politics” in “Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 31, (2005), pp. 47-74.

11

that were not apparently organized around social class. It

represents the first concerted theoretical effort to

understand the role of identity in social movements, although

it does not employ the language of identity politics.18 It

tries to explain mobilization, in this sense, why people act

and what motivate their actions; it is in fact one of the

preoccupations of every social movement theory. This theory

both challenges and affirms the idea that identity politics is

a distinct political practice. NSM theory, as it is called,

distinguishes class-based movements, especially social

movements from contemporary movements organised on the basis

of ideology and values, such as peace and youth movements.19

The NSM theory views these movements as historically new forms

of collective actions resulting from the macrostructural

changes of modernization and a shift to a post-industrial

society.20 Thus Jürgen Herbemas viewed these new social

movements as efforts to regain control over decisions and

areas of life increasingly subject to state control, to resist

18Cf. Mary Bernstein, “Identity Politics”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 31, (2005), pp. 47-74. 19 Cf. A. Melucci. The symbolic challenge of contemporary movements (1985), p. 20 Cf. A. Touraine, The Voice and the Eye: An Analysis of Social Movements. Cambridge, (UK:Cambridge Univ. Press Touraine 1981), p.

12

colonization of the lifeworld, and to transform civil

society.21 In the perspective of NSM theory, these movements

struggle to expand freedom and not to achieve it, they

mobilize for choice rather than emancipation, and focus mainly

on expressing identity.22

Social Constructionist, Postmodernist, and Poststructuralist23

Approach to Identity Politics

This approach is characterized by the negation of meta-

narratives and acceptance of micro-narratives. For them,

identity cannot be essentialised, and a single identity is

impossible. With this position, they thus adopt the notion

that identity is contextual, fluid and multiple.24 The

implication of this position is that one person will have

multiple identity and the content and form of identity keep on

changing.

21 Cf. Jugen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 1: Reason andthe Rationalization of Society (Boston, MA: Beacon1985)22 Cf. KA. Cerulo, Identity construction: new issues, new directions. Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 23: 385-409. 1997, p. 393. 23 Poststructuralism is a term associated with the writings of French theorists Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida. It refers to a manner of interpreting selves and the social which breaks with traditional epistemologies.24 Cf. M. J. Vinod and Meena Deshpande, Contemporary Political theory (Delhi: PHI Learning Private Ltd, 2013), p.381.

13

Viewing Liberty in Identity Politics

One of the driving forces in the politics of identity is the

fact that there is liberty. Liberty provides a fertile ground

for the growth of various movements in search or protection of

identity. This is why it seems that identity politics

flourishes and succeeds most in the countries where there is

liberal democracy and political tolerance. The consequences of

creating an upsurge in political stability of any nature, be

it a fight for right or any other reason, always results to

the strict intervention of the government. But identity

politics has proved to be a movement that is crime-free and

violence-free; at least not until they are provoked beyond

every tolerable extent which might warrant them to move for

self-defence. There are many individuals whom we acclaim today

as freedom fighters. They fought for the common goal of the

identity they belong. A familiar example is Nelson Mandela of

South Africa. He fought for the liberation of the black South

Africans from the terrible dominance and inhumanity of the

white-dominated citizens. He took up a movement that will

ensure equal treatment of all South Africans, whether white or

Negro.

14

However, identity politics often come up as a result of the

political structure in a particular society. It is generally

understood that the democratic political structure brings

about the majority rule. Therefore in this system, the

implication of identification as minority is that, the

individuals in the minority are bound to be ignored or

victimized by the majority. This is why there movement is a

struggle for recognition and social acceptance. If liberty is

lacking in any particular society where opinions and laws are

made with respect to only the opinions of the majority, the

minority group will be subjected to comply with the opinions

of the majority.

It is evident in many institutions and countries that some

certain issues are considered acceptable or abhorrent based on

the opinion of the majority. An instance of this is the issue

of homosexuality, some countries adopted it as legal because

the majority in that society have seen nothing wrong with it.

Issues of morals and ethics are considered from the opinion of

the majority. Nigeria seem to be among the countries that have

refused to enact same-sex marriage into law because the

majority has not given their consent. But in the midst of all

15

these majority considerations, there are individuals who share

opinion contrary to that of the majority but they remain

isolated and ignored, sometimes abhorred because of their

seemingly strange ideology. Liberty gives these few individual

opportunity to come together, so as to define their identity

which has to come from their unified ideology, they set out to

make their voices heard and in unison, enforce their opinion

so that it will have a universal acceptance. The case of some

society adopting previously abhorred ideology today is as a

result of this process. Homosexuality was listed as a mental

illness in DSM-II25 but recently it has been erased from the

list.26 This is not as a result of any medical research but as

a result of the campaign carried out by the various movements

in favour of homosexuality. Identity politics flourishes in a

liberal society, a democratic society and a society that

values human freedom.

25 The DSM – Diagnostic and Statistical Manual – is the APA’s standard classification of their so-called mental disorders, and is used by many mental health workers in the USA and other countries26

Cf. Phil Hickey “Homosexuality: The Mental Illness That Went Away” October 8, 2011. http://www.behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/08/homosexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/ http://www.behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/08/homosexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/ 26- 03- 2015.

16

Criticisms against Identity Politics

Despite the progress identity politics has reached in

alleviating and promoting the interest of the few

marginalised, ignored, subdued and neglected, scholars have

noticed the underpinning consequences of identity politics. It

is thus our aim to present these shortcomings in this section.

Craig Colhoun challenges a widespread perception that the

identity-based politics of racial/ethnic groups and every

other self-assertion by excluded peoples represented something

new. According to him, social theory has tended to repress the

centrality of such mobilization in heterogeneous, democratic

public spheres. The public sphere calls on one to put aside

class, ethnic and gender differences in other to speak as

equals. This, therefore makes it impossible to thematize those

very differences as the objects of politics instead of as

obstacles to be overcome before rational political formation

of the collective will.27

Political analyst contend that the essentialism of identity

politics precludes the articulation of a universal vision for

27 Cf. Craig Calhoun, ed., ‘Preface’, in Social Theory and the Politics of Identity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994).

17

social change. Because identity groups tend to splinter into

ever more narrow categories, they cannot agree on or sustain

anything but opposition to a common enemy. Such politics

cannot lead to the coalition that can agitate for progressive

or revolutionary social change.28

Another scholar, Ryan argues that the crisis over identity

politics in women’s movement is overstated due to the fact

that multicultural organization efforts often recognize the

value of separate organization by groups that face racism,

sadism, homophobia and classism. He opines that research in

identity politics must consider other causal accounts for a

diversity of results and must not take the public claims of

activists without consideration.29

Some critics have contended that Identity Politics have

abandoned matters related to exploitation, class, poverty and

globalization that aggravate economic inequality. Owing to its

symbolic concerns vis-à-vis language and representation,

activists are led to advocate more open immigration policies

to increase the population of a certain ethnic/racial identity

28 See LA. Kauffman 1990. “The anti-politics of identity”, Social. Review Vol. 90, pp. 67-80. 29 Cf. B. Ryan “How much can I divide thee, let me count the ways: identity politics in the women's movement”, Humanity and Society. Vol. 21, 1997. p. 124.

18

group, which undermines the capability of the welfare state to

provide for its members.30

CONCLUSION

It is evident in society that man always needs to express his

individuality and to make people aware of his presence and

influence in the society. We live in a moderately free society

where everyone has right to be recognized but when this right

is denied, and when a particular group of people are

marginalized, dehumanized and subjugated, there is always a

revolution. It is often difficult to find a society where

there is zero inequality, it might be moderately low but not

entirely erased. Humanity is complex and so diversified, there

cannot be oneness in terms of agreement and opinions. Culture

and ideology creates diversity. But even in this diversity

there is a society where ones opinion, ideology and

orientation is suitable, if one holds a worldview contrary to

that of one’s immediate society, there is always a danger of

isolation for such person. It is like a Muslim worshipping in

the Christian church, his religious disposition will make him

stand out and so odd. 30 Cf. A, Wolfe and J. Klausen, “Identity politics and the welfare state”, Social Philosophy & Policy, Vol. 14(2) 1997, pp. 231-255.

19

Identity is very important in every human society. Plato

divided the republic into three distinct classes with their

unique identities. This is to show that one has to be

recognized in the society with one’s distinct identity. But

the problem of the politics of identity arises when a

particular identity group are regarded to be inferior or less

important than others. The human being, according to Rousseau,

is naturally self-preservative. This preservation is not only

of life but also of things that support, enhance and make life

interesting. The ego is one of these. Thus, if you deny man

the honour of recognition and acceptance, it already creates a

fertile ground for revolution. Nevertheless, it was Aristotle

who called man a political animal, by extension, a social

being. This implies that man will always be and participate in

the society he belongs. He cannot endure to remain isolated

and discarded because of his strange opinions and ideologies, he

must fight to be accepted either by persuasion or coercion.

In this essay, therefore, we have tried to explain the

concepts of liberty as conceived by various philosophers. Also

we have explicated the concepts of identity and identity

politics. We went further to expose few shortcomings of

20

identity politics. We should note that throughout the course

of this paper we have used the term ‘identity politics and

‘politics of identity’ interchangeably. These are to give us a

basic understanding of the issues in liberty and politics of

identity.

21

Bibliography

Aristoltle, Politics Bk VI trans. by Benjamin Jowett (New York: Dover

Publications, Inc.)

Bernstein, Mary. “Identity Politics” in Annual Review of Sociology,

Vol. 31, (2005).

Cerulo, KA. Identity construction: new issues, new directions.Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 23: 385-409. 1997.

Calhoun, Craig. ed., ‘Preface’, in Social Theory and the Politics of Identity. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.

Gilroy, Paul “Diaspora and the Detours of Identity,” in;

Kathryn Woodward (Ed.), Identity and difference. London: Sage.

Habermas, Jugen. The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Boston, MA: Beacon, 1985.

Kauffman, LA. “The anti-politics of identity”, Social. Review Vol.90, 1990.

Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government (London: Whitemore and Penn,

1821)

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract and Discourses Bk. 1 Ch. II. London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1913.

Ryan, B “How much can I divide thee, let me count the ways: identity politics in the women's movement”, Humanity and Society. Vol. 21, 1997.

22

Tuckness, Alex. Locke and the Legislative point of View: Toleration, Contested Principles. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2002.

Touraine, A. The Voice and the Eye: An Analysis of Social Movements. Cambridge. UK: Cambridge Univ. Press Touraine 1981.

Vinod M. J. and Deshpande, Meena. Contemporary Political theory. Delhi: PHI Learning Private Ltd, 2013.

Wolfe A and Klausen, J. “Identity politics and the welfare state”, Social Philosophy & Policy, Vol. 14(2) 1997.

Internet Materials

Hand, Judge Learned. “The Spirit of Liberty”, (Speech presented in 1944 during “I AM an American Day”). http://www.providenceforum.org/spiritoflibertyspeech . 17-03-2015.

HICKEY PHIL. “Homosexuality: The Mental Illness That Went Away” OCTOBER 8, 2011. http://www.behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/08/homosexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/ http://www.behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/08/homosexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/ 26- 03- 2015.

“Identity Politics,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics. 16-03-2015.

23