Identità e appartenenza nella società globale

Within a psychosocial perspective, the chapter examines social identification processes in a global society. First, the issue of social identity under conditions of uncertainty is taken into account, focussing on how uncertainty may increase rigidity of social categorisation processes and lead to enhanced ethnocentrism and xenophobia. Results of empirical research carried out in the socio-political and work contexts are reported, and differences between people in a low-status versus a high-status condition are highlighted. Second, the issue of multiple social identities is dealt with, examining the conditions under which different social identities may coexist in the same person. Research results showing how multiple social identities may positively influence intergroup relations are reported. Possible implications as regards multiculturalism and work policies are presented.

The rapid processes of globalisation tend to redesign the outlines of contemporary societies, making them less homogenous and closed than in the past. Initially, the chapter takes into consideration the modern age as the period in which the concept of identity has started to gain relevance, especially since the birth of the state-nation and its corresponding social space. Reference to such an historical experience allows a better understanding of the explosion of the quest for identity in our contemporary age. Attention is then focused on some problematical questions, which have provoked different answers, concerning individual freedom and the wish of community. In the first case, it is explained how individualisation and subjectivity, coming together with the changed social frame, could generate deep anti-social impulses. In the second case, analysis is focused on the emergence of a number of particular solidarities, connected with given cultural visions of identity. Such visions have regained position through the retrieval of the ethnical resource, a container to which needs, questions, and expectations are oriented.

Considering the diverse family structures which have existed in the past and which exist in the present in different cultural contexts, a central issue in family research is to clarify what is variant and what is invariant about family identity. How can we define the family? Of what does the identity of a family consist? Many scholars consider the family as a primary group, which shares a particular history of bonds and, in turn, generates future bonds. The aim of this chapter is to clarify the processes through which families construct identities, both within the family group and in relation to the external world. We propose that intergenerational connectedness and separateness play a vital role in the construction of the identities of individual family members, of the family as a group, and of the family in relation to society. We focus especially on the development of adult identity, analysing the role of the previous generation in this process.

This chapter explores the relationship between occupational and organizational identities/cultures, as well as the reasons why this issue has been so far generally neglected by both sociology of work and organizational studies. The tensions arising from the convergence of two processes – the bureaucratization of professions and the professionalization of organizations –, and the models proposed in the literature in order to interpret the conflicting relations between professionals and employing organizations are analyzed. Different cultures coexisting in the workplace are seen as competing sources of social and personal identities. The supremacy of organizational over professional cultures in institutionalized organizational forms is argued on the basis of theoretical reasoning and available empirical data. Finally, the reasons why this supremacy is likely to be undermined in newly emerging organizational forms are discussed.

The chapter deals with the macro-categories of political identity, especially the nation. Historical and political events leading to a very different development of national identity and conscience in various countries are outlined. Differences between countries regard the strength of national identity, the values connected to it, as well as the conditions of coexistence of inclusive socio-political identities such as regional, national, and supranational identities.

The process of European integration is undermined by two large problems: the democratic gap of its institutions, which means that the institutions having legislative powers lack a democratic legitimacy and are not subject to an effective democratic control, coupled with the slowness of its decision making powers, often paralysed by the rule of unanimity. Without solving these issues, the European Union cannot effectively face the challenges ahead of it, namely a unified foreign, defence and economic policy. Incidentally, without the latter, even the monetary union is at risk. Yet, only an evolution towards a federal structure can solve such problems. The so called European Constitution is simply another revision of the basic Treaties and does not offer any solution to the above issues. In addition, the unfortunate use of the term ‘Constitution’ may make the ratification process of the new Treaty more difficult, especially in those countries where its text will be subject to a referendum.

European identity is rooted on shared values: peace, rule of law and protection of human rights. With this perspective, the European Court of Human Rights has considerably contributed to establish a common law of human rights. It applies to all European States, concerns all the fields of law, and constitutes a general framework for all the European legal systems. To achieve the political project of a European building, the international organizations present on the Old Continent – Council of Europe, European Union, OSCE – are called to develop aimed and coherent actions and to transmit a clear message, understandable by the citizens of all the European States.

To understand the past history and the future years of the European economic development the author focuses on three paradigms: democracy, economy, and innovation. From the standpoint of democracy, the author recalls that EU is based on subsidiarity, solidarity and development. These principles bring together history, culture, and economy. People and States ‘identify’ with these principles. From the standpoint of economy, the author knows that the European growth has been very weak in the past years and at the same time it has lost ground in comparison with USA. Therefore, the author takes into account the Report «An agenda for a growing Europe» containing advices and proposals to boost growth. From the standpoint of innovation, the author considers merits and weaknesses of the Lisbon’s strategy, which main objective is to make EU as the most competitive and dynamic economy in the world before 2010. This essay has an approach which is both institutional and economic, under the setting of constantly referring to the European roots and identity as well as to the new Constitutional Treaty. The author recognizes that these facts have brought an extraordinary combination between humanism and institutions, society and science, ideal values and real facts to promote human rights and the value of human beings.

This article explores the emergence of collective psychology at the turn of the twentieth century. It reviews the divergent responses of turn-of-the century scholars to the quest of the rise and fall of societies. The paper presents an overview of the analyses of the existing society, proposed by authors as Gabriel Tarde, Cesare Lombroso, Scipio Sighele, Gustave Le Bon, and George Sorel, particularly around the notion of ‘innovation’ and ‘misoneism’. The conclusion reached is that this complex, resourceful, and fascinating group of authors posed the crucial question of temporal horizons in the foundation of the political obligation. The same question from which, in the eighties of the twentieth century, Gianfranco Miglio’s hypothesis of a ‘psychology of politics’ and Assunto Quadrio’s researches about the connection of politics and psychology, moved.

Over the last century, doctrinal debate on identity was especially focused on the analysis on social, political and economic changes in the local community, single states and continents. Personal identity was rich in certainties based on well-established persuasions shaped by a way of life limited to patriarchal family, parish and home town, to a visible and physically controllable localism. Individuals were not used to entertain themselves about their own identity inasmuch theirs was a membership destiny. The membership crisis brought about an identity crisis. Doctrinal debate centers in two main disciplines: psychology and sociology. So far, historical research has focused mainly on the issue of community membership and identity thus not providing with a useful reconstruction going beyond research hypotheses. Research on material history about mentality is necessary. The latter is particularly abundant in France especially on history of community mentality. Doctrinal debate on personal identity has involved especially philosophy, psychology, sociology, whereas doctrinal debate on national identity has involved political and historical science. The analysis starts with the study of doctrinal debate on identity and moves on to national identity between state and civic society. It ends up with the analysis on the relationship between civic culture and civic identity.

Social sciences aim to give a rational explanation of the regularities which characterise the interactions observed. Most of these interactions can be described as games and in game theory rationality comes down to substantive rationality. The paper stresses that in some cases substantive rationality is not enough to explain the particular regularity one is interested in. In others, it requires a behaviour which is apparently at odds with individual rationality. One has to distinguish the rationality of having a rule from the rationality of the rule itself. Moreover, in judging the rationality of a rule, one must take into account the constraints deriving from the fact that the rule must be supported by social sanctions.