ABSTRACT
The term ‘identity politics’ is also used to describe the actions of social actors for whom the distinction between political engagement and identity has been attenuated to the extent that the prioritised identity stakes become the political. This inevitably brings with it the criticism that the privileging of a specific identity invokes an essentialism that is neither ontologically nor empirically justifiable given the complexity of theorising particularistic identities (Appiah 1992; Butler 1990; Haraway 1989; hooks 1981). The social movement theorist Alberto Melucci (1996: 187-188) suggests that this occurs partially because political institutions require a reduction of the multi-dimensionality of the issue at stake. Consequently, what might begin as a complex problem of land rights, environmental protection, access to food or shelter quickly becomes an ‘indigenous’ issue when translated into political discourse. In this context, differing marginalised and oppressed groups are forced to compete with each other for political mediation and representation by seeking the extension of mechanisms for their integration within institutional politics, in order that their claims can be heard. This degree of competition can undermine attempts at wider movement building and undermine the tactical use of scarce resources across movements. However, it is also worth noting that these
identities are seldom constrained by traditional political frameworks and they often find other means of expression through social or cultural activities (Stephens 1998). These forms of action can also be coexistent with and constitutive of social movements.
