Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are obviously many levels of identity or pride that people can feel towards where they are born, raised, or lived, that include being patriotic (of country/nation), state/province/sub-national region pride (eg. being a Texan, being a Sicilian), being proud of hometown or city (eg. being a New Yorker etc.). Conversely, you have people (often those who've traveled widely, or self-designated nomads living place-to-place across the world) who even denounce national identity and claim to be a global citizen.
There has been discussion of sorts in this forum about some of these various kinds of pride (including separatism for sub-national entities, pride in hometowns and regions etc.)
One thing I'm curious though is how many people identify at the level of groups of nations (for example regions). It seems that this kind of identity is much weaker sometimes. The EU is an example of an supranational identity or group of nations but I wonder how many people strongly actually identify as "European" in that way in personal life (except say on a forum like this when confronted with Americans , sometimes on topics like socialized health care, social issues, urban planning etc. where suddenly they become aware of certain fault lines in worldview). It seems an identity like "European" or say the EU is more an economic/geopolitical unit (putting aside how well you think that works) that few personally identify with at a cultural level (though things like the Eurovision contest etc. does hold some currency). In fact, it seems like most blocs or units of countries are things identified with for economic/political alliances but not "self-identifications" too much.
Another example is Commonwealth countries (eg. Australians identifying with British culture) or Latin American countries identifying themselves with Spain based on language or shared culture. They exist as concepts but again it seems "abstract" that it isn't really an identity that people really internalize or are consciously "proud" of in the way that is akin to nation, province, state or even hometown pride. Sometimes, I find myself using "North American culture" to refer to US and Canadian culture (but not Mexico) and many use it in that way, which might imply that they form a natural duo despite rivalries, as does Australia and New Zealand (with a vaguely sort of Australasia concept). There are also (were often in the 20th century and still are, movements to get nations to form large-scale identities or blocs, such as pan-Arabism, where Syrians and Egyptians both feel proud to be Arabs). Then, there are also categories like west African, eastern European etc. that are geographical clusters. But I wonder how strongly those are as identities. For example, does a Nigerian identify as "west African" alongside others often, as opposed to proud to be Nigerian or say as a member of the Igbo group of the southeast of their country? I doubt an Indian, Burmese and Pakistani on average feel very strongly in general to take on a "south Asian" identity in their home countries, though maybe if citizens of any of them immigrate to London or Vancouver, they may suddenly become "proud to be s. Asian" -- the same might go for a Chinese or Japanese person).
Religious identities may also lead to identifications larger than nations (such as (western) Christendom, though most Christians aren't Europeans by now, or the Muslim concept of Ummah, the Islamic world, as spread across nations). Diasporic communities also provide a supranational identity, like Jews. Lastly, even identifying as a "westerner" in a globalized society where non-western countries are industrializing and coming on to the world stage in influence is a type of awareness of supra-national identity.
I am also thinking about Samuel Huntington's "Class of Civilizations" concept where he proposed fault lines were often draw by civilizations (eg. the West vs. the Muslim world or vs. the Chinese sphere or Indian sphere of influence, or African or Orthodox Christian, such as eastern Europe and Russian, spheres) and conflicts often arise between them.
All in all, do you think identities (as in self-identifications folks feel proud of) above the level of the nation-state tend to be strong or pretty weak?
I see identities as a series of concentric circles, stretching out from the individual and family, all the way across geographic and cultural factors to the human group we all share.
As far as I am concerned, here are my "belongings":
Me
Family and Friends
City
Province (Quebec)
French-speaking Canadians
Canadians
North Americans
Residents of "western" countries
Humanity
My strongest large affinity (outside of the obvious personal, family and friends ones) is with other French-speaking Canadians.
As a Caribbean person who lives in the Caribbean I do identify somewhat on a global level with other English speaking Caribbean islands only. I would see them as my "cousins" of sort and wouldn't be too thrilled to hear them being spoken of negatively by outsiders. I also identify as a person from the Western Hemishpere on a weaker level due to our shared recent immigrant history that you find in most countries in the Western hemisphere.
As a Caribbean person who lives in the Caribbean I do identify somewhat on a global level with other English speaking Caribbean islands only. I would see them as my "cousins" of sort and wouldn't be too thrilled to hear them being spoken of negatively by outsiders. I also identify as a person from the Western Hemishpere on a weaker level due to our shared recent immigrant history that you find in most countries in the Western hemisphere.
I agree with you as a person also from the English-speaking Caribbean. Due to our shared histories and ancestral backgrounds, similarities in cultures and traditions, and regional organisations etc. I do identify strongly as a person from the Caribbean, second only to my national identity. I see other people across the Caribbean as my brothers and sisters and root fiercely when a Caribbean islander is competing on a global scale in sports and athletics.
....All in all, do you think identities (as in self-identifications folks feel proud of) above the level of the nation-state tend to be strong or pretty weak?
My inclination is to feel that on the whole they are probably pretty weak for most people.
My own self-identifications over the period of seventy-four years have undergone several readjustments, but in a more opposite direction it seems to me.
1. Until I was in my very early twenties my strongest identies were with my extended family, and that automatically included our shared religion and ethnicity. After that my second strongest sense of identity came from my local area and with the part of the state it was located in. My feelings about being the citizen of the entire state, or of the United States overall were something on the order of ritual/automatic/formal. I had no really strong identity with either, they were labels pasted on my from outside.
2. I moved to NYC after college, and embraced the city with the zeal of a convert. My sense of integration and identity with my family began to wan in large measure. And though my religious beliefs altered considerably in the mosaic that was Manhattan of the late Fifties and early Sixties they (and ethnicity) continued to supply a major identifier for me. More secondarily I felt like the NY metro area was my home country. And had a diluted sense of belonging to the Northeast. For a number of years in the Sixties I travelled to many parts of the U.S., and lived there for weeks and months at a time as part of my work. It was a great experience, but it really did not incline me to feel that being an American loomed bigger than being a New Yorker. (Despite the fact that I followed politics and voted in all elections at all levels, I did this out of self-interest and not from any strong motives of identification.)
3. By middle age so many of my personal friends and even more of my workmates were foreign-born that my sense of identity was with my own idea of NYC as a wonderful microcosm of the world, and as much a threshhold of the world as a doorway to the U.S. Religious and ethnic identity were largely vestigal and nostalgic. My sense of being an American was only a legalistic one, and I had really begun to develop strong gut attachments to non-American, and even non-Western ideas and cultural "markers."
4. In old age I can certainly see that in additon to having an American passport, being raised and living in the U.S. has been of major significance in who I am now; but, being "American" feels like a label acquired by circumstance. My attachment to America is essentially to an America that has ceased to exist...so it is nostalgia about a past that occured in America, rather than a living identity. Those things I identify most strongly with, and characteristics by which others identify me, tend to come from Europe and Asia just as often. Thus, I find I am American because my passport says so, whereas to myself I am my ideas, ideals and feelings which have come together from so many sources that I don't feel I have a national identity.
All in all, do you think identities (as in self-identifications folks feel proud of) above the level of the nation-state tend to be strong or pretty weak?
It is beyond me why anyone would have a stronger identity than himself as a human being with a direct relationship with God. Second, if anything, is family, what one does for a living, etc.
After that, maybe some religious organization, nation-state, grouping of nation-states, civilization, or, you forgot to mention, people can even strongly identify with past examples or variants of all the above, including kingdoms, religious/philosophical communities, and empires.
To answer your question - the nation-state and above -, however, I think that the nation-state is still pretty strong, still the single strongest identifying socio-political entity for at least a plurality of people, and is still some ways from being replaced by supra-national entities or other dominating form of socio-political organization that may evolve.
Somesuch change will occur eventually, as a law of nature, but not yet.
It is beyond me why anyone would have a stronger identity than himself as a human being with a direct relationship with God. Second, if anything, is family, what one does for a living, etc.
After that, maybe some religious organization, nation-state, grouping of nation-states, civilization, or, you forgot to mention, people can even strongly identify with past examples or variants of all the above, including kingdoms, religious/philosophical communities, and empires.
To answer your question - the nation-state and above -, however, I think that the nation-state is still pretty strong, still the single strongest identifying socio-political entity for at least a plurality of people, and is still some ways from being replaced by supra-national entities or other dominating form of socio-political organization that may evolve.
Somesuch change will occur eventually, as a law of nature, but not yet.
Finally, why are you ?
Good Luck!
I wonder if the OP hasn't observed, as I and others have, that a decent number of Europeans of late seem to have a fairly strong ''continental'' identity or sense of belonging. It varies from country to country of course, but it is interesting to meet Belgians, Germans or Spaniards who say they feel more European than Belgian, German or Spanish. This is not something you really hear elsewhere in the world.
I wonder if the OP hasn't observed, as I and others have, that a decent number of Europeans of late seem to have a fairly strong ''continental'' identity or sense of belonging. It varies from country to country of course, but it is interesting to meet Belgians, Germans or Spaniards who say they feel more European than Belgian, German or Spanish. This is not something you really hear elsewhere in the world.
As an American who emigrated to Europe a dozen years ago, I have noticed this among a fair amount of the people I have met who have come here from other European countries. Brits seem to be the exception, the great majority or ghettoized expats.
Just this past week a British physician told me that he become the focus of animosity in a recent discussion because he had casually made the statement that he felt more European as much, if not more than British.
Location: Near Tours, France about 47°10'N 0°25'E
2,825 posts, read 5,261,618 times
Reputation: 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack
I see identities as a series of concentric circles, stretching out from the individual and family, all the way across geographic and cultural factors to the human group we all share.
As far as I am concerned, here are my "belongings":
Me
Family and Friends
City
Province (Quebec)
French-speaking Canadians
Canadians
North Americans
Residents of "western" countries
Humanity
My strongest large affinity (outside of the obvious personal, family and friends ones) is with other French-speaking Canadians.
My weakest affinity is as a North American.
I agree with your conception of "concentric circles".
But sometimes it is not that much easy. Because you can feel different kind of similarities; on would be for exemple the language/culture and the other the geography. Yourself, as a north American of french-speaking culture, would you relate more with north Americans of English-speaking culture or to french speaking Europeans. I guess that on some points you might feel closer to the other north Americans; and probably on others you might feel closer to french-speaking Europeans than anyone else...
I have been living one year in Quebec, and when I was there I felt it quite strangely; to be a place at once very close and very distant. Close for the language and the things that originated from France; but in the same time quite distant to the many typically north American things (+also to the things related to Britain)
I'll try to make my own concentrical belongings
I'll don't any specific connection to a city, a region or a sud-group of France (I'm quite a mix of different regions and live in opposites parts of the country), so my first level would be the national one.
1- France
2- French-speaking Europeans
3- French-speaking Europeans+french speaking Americans (Quebec, but also Carribean french departements)
4- Romance-speaking Europe (latin Europe)
5- Romance-speaking Europe + European countries shaped by catholicism
6- Romance-speaking countries, both European and American
6- Western Europe (Catholic+Protestant Europe)
7- Western World (western Europe+the Americas+Australia/N.Zealand)
8- Europe as a whole (including the Slavic/Orthodox eastern Europe)
9- The whole french-speaking world (including the African countries where french is offical language but not always the native language)
10- The whole humanity
11- Belonging to primates
12- Belonging to mammals... etc
etc... And finally all the forms of life of the universe.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,029,399 times
Reputation: 11862
I don't think Australians still don't have a very strong sense of identity with a group of nations.
If so, I would say the Commonwealth nations and the Anglosphere. While we're in the 'Asia-Pacific region' Australians still see Asia as culturally foreign, although less so than before, especially as many Australians are now of Asian descent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, sometimes on topics like socialized health care, social issues, urban planning etc. where suddenly they become aware of certain fault lines in worldview). It seems an identity like "European" or say the EU is more an economic/geopolitical unit (putting aside how well you think that works) that few personally identify with at a cultural level (though things like the Eurovision contest etc. does hold some currency). In fact, it seems like most blocs or units of countries are things identified with for economic/political alliances but not "self-identifications" too much.
