Who Am I and Who Are We? Conflicting Narratives of Collective Selfhood in Stigmatized Groups

Identity politics arises out of conditions of systematic stigmatization and structural disadvantage, but sharing a social structural position does not guarantee that people will define themselves and their collectivity in the same way. In fact, because identity politics occupies two major points of tension, it gives rise to several alternative ways of conceptualizing the "we," the collective self. Using ethnographic material gathered on American Jews' understandings of anti-Semitism and its relationship to contemporary politics, this article inductively discerns four alternative models of collective selfhood (embattled, relating, political, and redeemed) that correspond to four alternative narratives of identity politics (reified identity, humanistic dialogue, critical solidarity, and evangelism). These narratives help explain the deep emotions sparked by challenges to people's self-definitions. A comparison to studies of LGBT movements further reveals the utility of this conceptualization and elaborates a model not apparent in the first case.