The idea of Cultural Identity is both a subject and tool for analysis... which we should consider as holding potential for conflict.
Identity is complex... and dynamic... and in many regards, situational and also performative. It is a subject that resists simple measures. Further, Identity cannot be flattened-out to the singular expression of any one aspect of its cultural categorization(s)—nor should it be analyzed outside of the consideration of the social/opportunity networks in which it interacts and is subsequently (continuously) shaped and re-shaped.
We are all multicultural beings; our identities informed by the cultural fluencies we've acquired through our participation in various socially-indoctrinating spaces. Depending on the environment, we emphasize different aspects of our-selves in order to discern and convey meaning. Our authenticity in these spaces is measured not by any particular word(s) spoken or deed(s) performed but by a kind of internal truth—the integrity of expression. The words and deeds are mere containers.
The "integrity of expression" is a function of Identity as a tool for analysis... as in, the effort to interpret truth on the subject of Cultural Identity relies on the very Cultural Identity-lens brought to the subject. The lens, in an anthropological sense, is the tool. We make sense of Cultural Identity by employing some tool/lens of Cultural Identity. This, methodologically speaking, holds potential for conflict.
21 July 2020