Rethinking Identity Politics in America
After enduring years of harsh racial and gender debates, conservatives are starting to view identity as a potentially harmful concept. Given their long-standing battle against negative ideologies, this reaction makes sense. However, dismissing identity entirely isn’t feasible. People naturally need a sense of who they are and their place in the world. Progressives have sometimes twisted this need for their own agenda, yet the underlying impulse remains inherently human and healthy.
As mass immigration continues in the United States, the question “What does it mean to be American?” gains prominence. For the first time in many years, conservatives are compelled to engage with this critical aspect of identity. It’s now essential for them to reclaim control over it.
Defining what it means to be American may prove challenging, but it starts with acknowledging differences. There needs to be a firm stance on borders and the deportation of illegal immigrants—this is a non-negotiable point.
When identity feels threatened, things can become intense. Throughout history, people have fought—and even died—for their identities. While some aspects of identity are chosen, many elements, like family ties and birthplace, are involuntary. We don’t choose our siblings or parents, and often our religions are handed down rather than selected.
This inherent aspect of identity leads to existential dilemmas. It’s hard to walk away from something that feels essential to who we are. Someone might easily give up being a fan of a particular movie, but they can’t simply decide not to be British, for example. When push comes to shove, they have to stand their ground.
In the aftermath of World War II, there was a collective push to diminish the significance of various identities. The idea was to avoid further conflicts fueled by strong attachments to culture, religion, or nationality. I understand this reasoning; after all, no one wants another destructive war rooted in these differences.
Nevertheless, this approach comes with risks. When national or religious identities are diluted, we drift towards a form of globalism that often feels unhealthy.
A country lacking a clear identity struggles to define the common good. For example, a person whose family has been in America for generations might have different priorities than a recent immigrant who aspires to bring in relatives. Similarly, the interests of Christians and Muslims can conflict in a shared nation.
Governments can’t pretend to be neutral about these identities. Decisions must be made about which identities to emphasize and which collective goals to pursue. Remaining neutral is a misconception; identity cannot be ignored.
As the U.S. aims to address the challenges of open-borders policies, the importance of a clear identity is becoming increasingly evident. While illegal immigration poses a significant concern, legal immigration holds its own risks. If being American is about more than just having legal documentation, then we must establish uncomfortable distinctions. Identity inherently excludes some while including others.
This notion feels risky, but avoidance is no longer an option. Ignoring these complexities has led to widespread confusion, and we can’t afford to repeat past mistakes.
Though modern society favors strict categories, a core identity often has some flexibility. For instance, while a traditional family might be ideal, adopted children also belong to that family. We generally know what defines a woman, but rigid definitions can be weaponized and misused. Those who argue that a woman is simply someone who can have children might be met with counterexamples of infertility, complicating what seems to be a straightforward category.
Strict classifications can become instruments of deconstruction.
Identity should be regarded not just as a biological fact or a conscious decision but as a dynamic concept that guides us toward specific purposes. Americans are endowed with certain rights, but we also bear particular responsibilities. Our identities—as Americans, Christians, family members—impose certain limitations, as they aren’t solely about rights and freedoms.
There are limitations to what one can do, depending on their identity as a father, Christian, or American. While these categories can be flexible, they are not fluid.
The prevailing globalist mindset often opposes borders because they introduce obstacles to efficiency and profitability. Companies like McDonald’s prefer uniformity across markets. However, when accommodating diverse cultural practices or religious observances, that straightforward approach falters.
Yet, identity naturally creates some friction. People require boundaries and limits. Knowing who we are—and who we are not—enables us to pursue paths that genuinely benefit our nation.
Identifying what it means to be American might be complex, but it begins through acknowledgment. We must firmly address our borders and illegal immigration. In the midst of this crisis, we should reconsider the scale of legal immigration as well. Historically, there has been a cost associated with joining any community; this should hold true for those striving to become Americans.
The biblical story of Ruth illustrates this dynamic—she left her homeland and embraced a new identity among the Hebrews, which carried significant personal costs and sacrifices.
To be American should mean standing out. If one seeks to assume this identity, it should come with a measurable commitment. True worthiness of our nation demands that strangers prove their intentions through real sacrifice.
