|
|
Book Reviews
Amartya Sen
Identity and Violence:
The Illusion of Destiny
by Aruni Mukherjee
 The
most attractive feature of this latest work by Sen – as with his other
writings – is its extremely accessibility and lucidity. Written
concisely, Sen illustrates his thesis remarkably well in this book which
seeks to argue that sectarian violence often occurs with both sides
being led by an illusion of what constitutes the ‘other’s’ identity. In
other words, the “dreadful conflicts” that have taken place in our
world, be it in Rwanda or Sudan or the Indian subcontinent, are often
successors to “periods of terrible confusion” in the minds of the
perpetrators of the brutalities against humanity.
Sen offers a primary explanation of such confusions. He argues that the
essence of our existence as human beings is essentially shared by
various aspects of humanity itself. To put it simply, we may have
several identities which compete for our attention. However, the very
nature of the ‘othering’ process involves the construction of “a
singular and overarching system” of classifying groups of individuals in
order to effectively present a target for the wrath that erupts as
violence.
Sen offers two methods which are adopted- deliberately or unconsciously-
to achieve this “miniaturisation” of human beings. The first he terms
“identity disregard”. This has been used classically in theories
concerning the economic man, and more recently in various game theories
where an assumed motivation (e.g., rational self-interest) overshadows
all other identities that an individual may adhere to.
Following on from this, his second classification is called “singular
affiliation”, whereby only one facet of an individual’s overall identity
is privileged to caricaturize his entire self. Such reductionism is most
commonly found in instances of communal violence, whereby a person may
just be a Hindu or a Muslim, but not an Indian, a middle class
professional, or a father.
A recent example of a blatantly reductionist theory is espoused in
Samuel Huntington’s now-famous The Clash of Civilizations, a work
that is subjected to seething criticism by Sen in his book. In this, he
carries on from where he left of in his The Argumentative Indian. The
biggest problem with Huntington’s thesis is the complete ignoring of the
often-marked diversities in these various civilisational blocs.
In the “Hindu civilization” ala India, there exist minorities who are
either numerically substantial or culturally influential in shaping the
history of the subcontinent, such as the Muslims, Sikhs, Jains,
Buddhists, among others. There has been a lot of intercultural
influences between these communities which deny Hinduism any singular
identity which can be associated with today’s India. Added to that are
the striking diversities within Hinduism itself. Such intra-cultural
diversities can also be found in the Middle East, where the Shia-Sunni
divide comes instantaneously to mind. Indeed, given the mutual suspicion
that existed between the Arab world and Iran as recently as the 1980s,
along with the various intra-Arab disputes, it is doubtful how far a
monolithic Islamic civilization is a reality.
Sen also notes the tendency to create an arbitrary-often historically
inaccurate- identity of the ‘self’ in order to differentiate it from the
‘other’. Here he criticizes the notion of the “Western mind” whereby
certain ideas (e.g., democracy) are claimed to be the sole property of
the Occident. Citing examples of Buddhist councils during the reign of
Emperor Ashoka (3rd Century BC) and tracts on religious freedom during
that of the Mughal Emperor Akbar (16th Century AD), Sen attempts to
illustrate how such an identity can be readily disputed.
Neither does Western multiculturalism escape Sen’s criticism. While
attempting to accommodate various interests in increasingly diverse
societies, these theories invariably associate the interests of the
minority individuals and/or communities based on their religion,
castigating all other forms of identities to the background. Even
scholars who attempt reconciliation between the West and Islam
(supposing that such homogenized monoliths do in fact exist) often
search for a ‘moderate Muslim’, thus giving disproportionate importance
to religion in determining the ‘other’s’ identity.
Sen points out that one’s perception of their own identity may change
over time. He points out that East Pakistan was formed in 1947 primarily
because of a religious motivation. Yet, in 1971 this motivation was
grossly inadequate in keeping it together with West Pakistan, as
Bengalis asserted their language and culture as their primary form of
identity vis-à-vis their religion, which they still shared with the West
Pakistanis. However, Sen also notes that the primary cause for violence
despite changing identities is the incapability of the victims to
convince the aggressors of this shift. Perceived identity, therefore,
proves stronger than actual identity.
Here post-modernism can pose a perplexing question for Sen. From the
works of Michel Foucault in philosophy to some recent work in
psychology, we know that perceptions can often be formed subconsciously
or even unconsciously, determined by the various pressures of societal
environment and the dominating discourse. How does Sen then assert that
the ‘actual identity’ of an individual is any more real than the
‘perceived identity’, when the choice made by individuals itself may be
automated by other, often-invisible forces? If Edward Said were alive,
he would surely have a word or two to say about the ways in which
Orientalism often forces ‘other’ people to assume certain identities.
On one occasion Sen himself has failed to remain neutral towards
identities. On page 171 of the book he narrates the harrowing tale of a
certain Kader Mia being stabbed to death by “vicious Hindu thugs” during
the 1947 partition riots. Subsequently he also criticizes Muslim gangs
for similar deeds. But if Kader Mia was incorrectly taken to be just a
Muslim, should his murderers be represented as just Hindus, and not as
criminals, revenge-seeking individuals, or misguided youth? Sen could
have escaped with his description, had he clarified that the description
“Hindu gangs” would probably have been used during the time to narrate
the incident.
Sen spends a lot of time emphasizing the role of “choice and reasoning”
behind an individual giving primacy to one among the various competing
identities within him. While stating that individuals often stumble upon
their identities- or “discover” them- Sen readily concedes that often
individuals make conscious decisions about their identities- “Life is
not mere destiny”. However, individuals can only choose from the
available options in the social decision making function, which may not
be optimal under practical circumstances.
To be fair to Sen, perhaps he is merely arguing for chosen identity to
be given preference over given identity. But there may be less
difference between the two than he has accounted for.
August 6, 2006
Amartya Sen, Identity and
Violence: The Illusion of Destiny (London: Allen Lane, 2006)
Top
|
Book Reviews
The Week of August 6, 2006
Bofors and Volcker: Will it be the same old story?
by Rajinder Puri
US-India Nuclear Deal Reviewed by Dr.
Subhash Kapila
Of Wolves, Lambs, Foxes and Monkeys by Gaurang
Bhatt, MD
Global (Dis)Order by Col. Rahul K. Bhonsle
Four Fold Menace: A Nexus of Enveloping Evil
by V. Sundaram
The British Never Quit India by Nancy
Freeman Patchen
Populist Governance by Dr. Prasenjit
Maiti
Education for Development by TA Ramesh
Play Safe while Catching Raindrops by VK
Joshi
Emerging Technologies for Parents by Ruchi
Gupta
Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny
by Aruni Mukherjee
Traversing the Indian Mindscape by Rajesh
Talwar
Bengali Riddles by Jennifer Marie Bayer,
Ph.D.
The Witty Side by Melvin Durai
How Many Indians? by Naghma Masroor
Danger Zone for Kids by Deepti Priya Mehrotra
Assault on Rights by Linda Light
Being Raped Again - In Court by Rorie R Fajardo
We Need Leaders Not Revolutionaries by Mehru
Jaffer
Future Shocks by Swapna Majumdar
Driving Her Train by Neeta Lal
|
|
