Passage Three

Identity as Cultural Power

Our world and our lives are being shaped by the conflicting trends of globalization and identity．The primary opposition to the power of globalization lies in“the widespread surge of powerful expressions ofcollective identity that challenge globalization．．．on behalf of cultural singularity and people's control over their lives and environment”．Far from being the fragile flower that globalization tramples，identity is seen here as the upsurging power of local culture that offers(albeit multiform，disorganized and sometimes politically reactionary)resistance to the centrifugal force of capitalist globalization．

This more robust view of the“power of identity”is one to which anyone surveying the dramatic rise of social movements based around identity positions(gender，sexuality，religion，ethnicity，nationality) might easily subscribe．So，recognizing the significant cultural sources of resistance to the power of globalization goes a long way towards getting this power in perspective．The impact of globalization thus becomes，more plausibly，a matter of the interplay of an institutional-technological impetus towards globality with counterpoised“localizing”forces．The drive towards“globality”combines a logic of capitalist expansion with the rapid development of deterritorializing media and communications technologies．But this drive is opposed by various processes and practices expressing different orders of“locality”．Amongst these we can count the cultural identity movements，but also less formally organized expressions of identity，for example，those involved in local consumption preferences．And，on quite another level，we have to add the considerable cultural effort exercised by nation-states in binding their populations into another cultural-political order of local identification．

This more complex formulation clearly implies that cultural identity is not likely to be the easy prey of globalization．This is because identity is not in fact merely some fragile communal-psychic attachment，but a considerable dimension of institutionalized social life in modernity．Particularly in the dominant form of national identity，it is the product of deliberate cultural construction and maintenance via both the regulatory and the socializing institutions of the state:in particular，the law，theeducation system and the media．The deterritorializing force of globalization thus meets a structured opposition in the form of what Michael Billig^[17]has called“banal nationalism”—the everyday minute reinforcement;thecontinuousroutinized“flagging”ofnational belonging，particularlythroughmediadiscourse—sponsoredby developed nation-states．

Of course this is not to deny that nation-states are，to varying degrees，compromised by globalization in their capacity to maintain exclusivity of identity attachments，just as they are in their capacity independently to regulate national economies within a global market．For example，the complexities and tensions introduced by the multiethnic constitution of societies arising from global population movements—a chronic feature of all modern nation-states—pose obvious problems for the continued cultural“binding”of twenty-first-century nations into coherent identity positions．This problem is，moreover，more dramatic in its consequences for some nations of the developing world，where multiethnic composition arising from the crude territorial divisions of colonial occupation combines with comparatively weak state structures to produce a legacy of often bloody political instability and interethnic violence．

But notice that none of these problems conforms to the scenario of the general destruction of identities by globalization．Rather，they attest to an amplification of the significance of identity positions in general produced by globalization．It is this proliferation of identity that causes problems for the nation-state's hegemony over its population's sense of cultural attachment．For instance，in China state efforts to preserve an“official”national culture have always complied with the nationaldevelopment strategy．As the state has made economic development its top priority in the past decade，“national culture”has inevitably been wrapped in the rhetoric of“development，progress and globalization”．Destruction of many traditional buildings，cultural heritage sites and ancient artefacts are often explained as a necessary move towards advancement．On the other hand，for millions of Chinese，this tremendouschangeinthenaturalenvironment，landscape，neighbourhoods，dwellings，lifestyles，etc．is uprooting the basis on which they have nurtured a sense of belonging for generations．Striving to maintain their own meanings of existence，they are engaged in their own initiatives，outside of the state sponsoring system，to preserve and protect the cultures they have identified with and cherished dearly．

True or False Statements

1．To identify who you are is in a way to resist being assimilated by capitalism in globalization．

2．On the whole the author employs a postcolonial approach in dealing with the matter of identity．

3．Globalization is exercising power and the best way not to be globalized is to abruptly refuse globalization．

4．Globalization incurs more instability and clashes in a nation state．

5．The governments of a nation state intend to maintain its absolute power over its citizens but find it more difficult to do so because in the age of globalization people simply have more alternatives and autonomy in dealing with matters of identity．