Reflections on Stefan Berger’s “History and Identity” and Francis Fukuyama

Interpretations of Collective Identity and Cohesion

I am currently fascinated by Stefan Berger’s 2022 book, History and Identity: How Historical Theory Shapes Historical Practice.

The book does a wonderful job detailing contemporary trends in the field of history for the most part, though I had an issue with a point in chapter one. I find myself constantly questioning the implications of certain historiographical techniques discussed.

In Chapter 1, Berger mentions a book I read a while ago to enhance my understanding of collective identity and its functions: Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment by the frequently strawmanned Francis Fukuyama. I believe our interpretations of Fukuyama’s work diverges quite substantially. Berger makes it seem like Fukuyama is an identity abolitionist and/or someone who thinks that people should just conform to the identity of the state and neglect other identities. After citation 135, Berger writes that Fukuyama’s

…conclusion to do away with such identity politics and instead return to an alleged overriding concern for national cohesion and unity would simply return us to the regimes of discrimination and silencing of marginal groups that gave rise to identity politics in the first place.

Shortly afterward, in reference to Stuart Hall’s understanding of collective identity, Berger writes:

It opens the path towards a self-reflective and playful, open and dialogic construct of collective identities that thinks of the other as an adversary to be engaged with rather than an enemy to be eliminated. It also would allow the writing of histories that supported self-reflective constructions of collective identities in the pursuit of specific emancipatory agendas

Interestingly enough, I believe what Fukuyama wrote in Identity matches the second quotation far more than the first.

Fukuyama encourages everyone to accept and embrace multiple collective identities. According to him, we should embrace intersectionality to its fullest extent. Everyone has to acknowledge how they are socially molded via ethnicity, gender, country, sexuality, region, language, etc. He agrees that identity politics is needed for disparate groups to reach social and legal equality.

If we are to live in a multicultural society though, we both need to learn to truly respect each other’s identities while also finding a unified force that stops us from fragmenting.

The unifying force, to Fukuyama, is a country’s commitment to liberal democracy. Fukuyama’s position on identity is a balancing act. We need to address legitimate grievances that identity groups have while avoiding polarization that leads to further resentment.

As you can see from the following quote from page 166 of Fukuyama’s Identity, he certainly did not see collective identity as an “enemy to be defeated”:

The condition of modernity is to have multiple identities, ones that are shaped by our social interactions on any number of levels… If the logic of identity politics is to divide societies into ever smaller, self-regarding groups identities that are broader and more integrative. One does not have to deny the potentialities and lived experiences of individuals to recognize that they can also share values and aspirations with much broader circles of citizens.

Thinking of each collective identity as an “adversary to be engaged with rather than an enemy to be eliminated” would come after Fukuyama’s prescription of “isothymia”. According to Plato and other ancient Greeks, “thumos” is the third part of the soul that craves recognition, visibility, and dignity. Fukuyama warns against “megalothymia”: the desire for an individual or collective group to be recognized as superior to others. Isothymia is the desire to be a dignified and recognized individual or collective group among many.

For each collective group to continuously respect each other and avoid resentment and avoid prejudice, we must engage in the “self-reflective and playful, open and dialogic” scholarship that Berger references.

Thank you for reading. If you enjoyed this article please consider following me on Medium, YouTube, and Twitter.

Patreon — https://www.patreon.com/BradleyGearhart