Društvo i identitet: globalizacija i fragmentacija

Abstract

Ovaj rad prikazuje i diskutuje teorijsku zebnju koja se javila unazad četvrt veka, sa tematizacijom i problematizacijom društvenog identiteta. Ukazujući da pojmovi zapadaju u „krizu identiteta“ onda kada izrone iz svoje belodanosti, autor iskušava kako je ta sudbina zatekla i sam koncept „identiteta“ i izlaže tumačenja društvenih teoretičara takve njegove situacije. Posle izlaganja danas dominirajuće vizije istorije ideja da vlastiti i društveni „identitet“, u smislu u kojem ga danas razumevamo nije postojao u premodernim društvima, da je moderna njegov zavičaj, te da se sa „postmodernim stanjem“ zbiva ili njegov suton ili ozbiljni preobražaj, da ako i nije odbačen, jeste zamenjen multikodiranim, „fragmentiranim“ ili „pluralnim“ identitetima, sugeriše se da ipak nije reč o nekoj posebnoj epohalnoj promeni, već o još jednoj temeljnoj transformaciji društvenih struktura, koje su i u prošlosti proizvodile onu prepoznatljivu nelagodnost i nesigurnost u pogledu prepoznavanja pripadnosti i misije, investiranja uloga i preuzimanja uloga u svetu čiji se oslonci više ne podrazumevaju.

This paper aims to present and discuss theoretical apprehension that occurred nearly a quarter of a century ago, with the thematization and problematization of social identity. Pointing out that the terms fall into “identity crisis” when emerge from their self-evidences, the author testing how the same fate encountered the very concept of “identity” and presents contemporary social theorists’ interpretations of such a situation, at the same time testifying the landmarks of self-understanding of modernity. After exploring dominant current vision of the history of ideas – that self- and social-identity does not existed in Pre-Modern societies in the sense we understand it today, that Modern is its only homeland, and that with the “postmodern condition” occurs either its dusk or its serious transformation, that even if it is not completely rejected, it is replaced with multi-coded, “ fragmented” or “plural” identities – the conclusion suggests the possibility that maybe it is not about any particular epochal change and privilege or a curse to live in it, but about yet another fundamental transformation of social structures, transformation which is not unknown in the past and transformation that today, as always, produces distinct unease, uncertainty, risk, volatility, in terms of recognition of belonging and self-mission, life investment and role taking, in the world whose supports are no longer taken for granted.