Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle Cloud Reader.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment Hardcover – September 11, 2018
| Francis Fukuyama (Author) Find all the books, read about the author, and more. See search results for this author |
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| Free with your Audible trial | |
|
MP3 CD, Audiobook, MP3 Audio, Unabridged
"Please retry" | $14.11 | $22.37 |
Explore your book, then jump right back to where you left off with Page Flip.
View high quality images that let you zoom in to take a closer look.
Enjoy features only possible in digital – start reading right away, carry your library with you, adjust the font, create shareable notes and highlights, and more.
Discover additional details about the events, people, and places in your book, with Wikipedia integration.
The New York Times bestselling author of The Origins of Political Order offers a provocative examination of modern identity politics: its origins, its effects, and what it means for domestic and international affairs of state
In 2014, Francis Fukuyama wrote that American institutions were in decay, as the state was progressively captured by powerful interest groups. Two years later, his predictions were borne out by the rise to power of a series of political outsiders whose economic nationalism and authoritarian tendencies threatened to destabilize the entire international order. These populist nationalists seek direct charismatic connection to “the people,” who are usually defined in narrow identity terms that offer an irresistible call to an in-group and exclude large parts of the population as a whole.
Demand for recognition of one’s identity is a master concept that unifies much of what is going on in world politics today. The universal recognition on which liberal democracy is based has been increasingly challenged by narrower forms of recognition based on nation, religion, sect, race, ethnicity, or gender, which have resulted in anti-immigrant populism, the upsurge of politicized Islam, the fractious “identity liberalism” of college campuses, and the emergence of white nationalism. Populist nationalism, said to be rooted in economic motivation, actually springs from the demand for recognition and therefore cannot simply be satisfied by economic means. The demand for identity cannot be transcended; we must begin to shape identity in a way that supports rather than undermines democracy.
Identity is an urgent and necessary book―a sharp warning that unless we forge a universal understanding of human dignity, we will doom ourselves to continuing conflict.
- Print length240 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherFarrar, Straus and Giroux
- Publication dateSeptember 11, 2018
- Dimensions5.7 x 0.89 x 8.57 inches
- ISBN-100374129290
- ISBN-13978-0374129293
![]() |
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Editorial Reviews
Review
The Times (UK) Best Books of 2018, Politics • Financial Times Best Books of 2018
"Smart, crisp . . . We need more thinkers as wise as [Fukuyama]." ―Anand Giridharadas, The New York Times Book Review (Editor's Choice)
"Intelligent and provocative." ―SF Chronicle
"[Identity] is in itself an indictment of the perilous times we live in today." ―Arjun Neil Alim, The Standard (London)
"[Identity] is as wise as it is compact, traveling at great speed through difficult terrain to a sensible conclusion." ―Daniel Finkelstein, The Times (London)
"The renowned political scientist argues persuasively, and urgently, that a desire for recognition of one's dignity is inherent in every human being―and is necessary for a thriving democracy . . . A cogent analysis of dire threats to democracy." ―Kirkus
"Ambitious and provocative . . . This erudite work is likely to spark debate." ―Publishers Weekly
"Keenly thought-provoking and timely." ―Brendan Driscoll, Booklist
About the Author
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
Product details
- Publisher : Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 1st Edition (September 11, 2018)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 240 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0374129290
- ISBN-13 : 978-0374129293
- Item Weight : 11.2 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.7 x 0.89 x 8.57 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #514,354 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #855 in Democracy (Books)
- #1,496 in Political Philosophy (Books)
- #3,096 in History & Theory of Politics
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Francis Fukuyama is Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) at Stanford University, and Mosbacher DIrector of FSI's Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law.
Dr. Fukuyama has writtenon questions concerning governance, democratization, and international political economy. His book, The End of History and the Last Man, was published by Free Press in 1992 and has appeared in over twenty foreign editions. His most recent books are The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution, and Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy. His book Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment will be published in Septmer 2018.
Francis Fukuyama received his B.A. from Cornell University in classics, and his Ph.D. from Harvard in Political Science. He was a member of the Political Science Department of the RAND Corporation from 1979-1980, then again from 1983-89, and from 1995-96. In 1981-82 and in 1989 he was a member of the Policy Planning Staff of the US Department of State, and was a member of the US delegation to the Egyptian-Israeli talks on Palestinian autonomy. From 1996-2000 he was Omer L. and Nancy Hirst Professor of Public Policy at the School of Public Policy at George Mason University, and from 2001-2010 he was Bernard L. Schwartz Professor of International Political Economy at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. He served as a member of the President’s Council on Bioethics from 2001-2004.
Francis Fukuyama is married to Laura Holmgren and lives in Palo Alto, California.
March 2018
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonTop reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
On a positive note Dr. Fukuyama's ability to set context once again is a strong foundation. He starts with the Greeks and works his way to the present. His description of the evolution of thought is an education by itself. (Not to mention that anyone who has read "Snow Crash " gets a special place in my heart.) Rather than, as most reviewers do, give you a synopsis (I will leave that to others) I will focus on my misgivings.
1. A central theme is the human need to be valued. This need to be valued is intrinsic. But there is a difference between being valued and narcissism. Dr. Fukuyama does not help me understand where valuing you when you are deluded about your self worth plays into a creedal society.
2. Dr. Fukuyama speaks about diversity in traditional liberal (as in leftist) terms - race, creed, gender, etc. What was missing for me was the value of "diversity." Will I somehow be a better person and citizen if I have to read 100 illiterate and meaningless authors to tick the diversity box before I can read a second Fukuyama? I wholeheartedly disagree that meaningless prattle becomes inherently meaningful because of the race, religion, gender, national origin or sexual preference of the author. I would have expected Dr. Fukuyama to rail against such identities but he does not.
3. Dr. Fukuyama speaks to inequality of economic success and appears to favor redistribution. This flies in the face of, and stomps heavily on, the concept of property rights - a fundamental attribute of the U.S. Constitution. It does not matter to me if it is a King, a dictator, or a "liberal democracy" when they appropriate my private property for some egalitarian "public good" I am going to resent those who benefit from the fruits of my labor. The governmentization of private charity has turned a positive social good into a negative evil. This area is not addressed as part of the fracture of society into interest groups.
4. Dr. Fukuyama does not discuss merit other than in the context of the earliest warrior class except to note that the general population seems to have substituted vacuous celebrity for the prior principles of honor, service and sacrifice. If everyone is self-actualizing their self aggrandizement why is this surprising? We have a old fashioned word for this: selfish.
4. Finally a note about President Trump. Given Dr. Fukuyama's public dislike for the President I expected him to go off the deep end as has Stephen Pinker ("Enlightenment Now".) He does not. But where I hoped for more insight was in "the road not taken." Most of us (projecting the Universe (Multiverse) from a sample of one) are not engaged on a daily basis with the arc of history. My favorite analogy for political action is a pendulum. As an issue swings to an extreme more and more people are driven from their lethargy and become active participants. But the pendulum has to swing. Both Dr. Fukuyama and Michael Porter ("Competitive Advantage") point to the negative impact of the continuation of policies and institutions that have long outlived their usefulness. President Trump is a disruptor of the status quo. Both Dr. Fukuyama and I agree that the status quo seems to be in the direction of a retreat of liberal democracy. Maybe a little disruption is a good thing. Which is not to suggest that I approve of the President's antics.
On a personal note: I am retired and live alone on a sailboat. I have spent the last 9 years traveling all over the world. I have immense personal time and usually spend 3 to 4 hours a day reading and taking online courses during which time I am required to pet my very demanding cat XO. I find that the descriptions of the "right" are totally foreign to my personal experience of people in the United States. I don't identify with the "right" as described nor do I identify with the "left." I honestly don't know who these people are. In a multidimensional space we need more than a linear description.
*(new) According to Gallup in 2017 42% of Americans identified as "Independent", 29% as Democrats, 27% as Republicans. So what are "Independents?" Left, Right, Up, Down, Charmed, Strange? (Inside joke for quantum theory proponents.) Their viewpoint appears to be ignored by Dr. Fukuyama. Yet they are the plurality of Americans.
***********************************
Update September 30, 2018 (with minor updates to the above for clarity)
Having read "Identity" for a second time and other's reviews I have finally realized what has been really bothering me. The "story" falls flat. The final chapter is a bromide of "what should be." There is no "getting to Denmark." It is clear to me (but apparently not Dr. Fukuyama) that the 4th Estate is both a significant cause of identity politics and a possible positive force for creating a more creedal society. Their daily broadside of identity politics validates those who would see the society fractured into smaller and smaller interest groups. This may get "clicks" but is detrimental to society as a whole. How does one convince them to change their behavior?
Dr. Fukuyama speaks to a number of potential policy changes that in his opinion could move us in the right direction. But policy change requires elucidation of the rationale and persuasion of the need for change. The "Federalist Papers" weren't written because the Founders had a lot of spare time. (Equal time - nor were the Anti-Federalist Papers.)
My three star rating should not imply that reading this book is an unworthy use of time. (I have, for example, read it twice so far.) I had just hoped for more.
January 8, 2019. I just discovered that my android view has no button to link to comments. I happened to view this review on my desktop and have responded to some questions. My apologies.
Identity is definitely the best non-fiction book I have read in a very long time. It is disturbing, enlightening, and convincing; to me it also appeared very objective if approached with an open mind, although I suspect it will offend hardliners in both the liberal and conservative camps. His thesis is sophisticated, but the book is very readable, and his ultimate conclusion is positive: “Identity can be used to divide, but it can and has also been used to integrate. That in the end will be the remedy for the populist politics of the present.”
My thanks to Netgalley and the publishers for an advance review copy of this book.
Top reviews from other countries
Apart from its wide perspective and very-readable writing, what sets this book apart for me is the author's ability to provide perspectives from across the political spectrum on the core issues discussed, resulting in this rare phenomenon at our current times: a balanced discussion, rather than a one-sided 'left' or 'right' polemic.
I found this book excellent, educational, and thought-provoking.
In summary the book is about how liberal democracies are being supplanted by identity politics which in extreme versions encourage ethnic and cultural nationalism.
Liberal democracies espouse the equality of man/woman. Left wing politics attempts to achieve this goal through redistribution of wealth using the power of the state. Right wing politics emphasises freedom of choice and encouragement of free enterprise regulated by market forces. Both left and right concentrate on economy as the main driver of change.
In identity politics economic issues take second place to the need to recognise who I am and my intrinsic worth which is not fairly recognised by the society in which I live. Because a person’s feelings of unappreciated potential are often unique to a particular group and in the last resort to the individual, identity politics has the potential to increasingly fragment society into ever more select and exclusive groups, often held together by joint feelings of victimhood which again often leads to demands to be seen as superior to other groups within society.
The danger of identity politics as far as the author sees it is nationalism based on ethnicity and common culture, with populist no longer bound by economics as a primary source of discontent but able to stir up feelings of hatred and animosity towards others who do not share the same ethnicity and culture.
So that is I think the main summarised message of the book which is a hard read that required a degree of concentration. But I enjoyed reading and being challenged by a well constructed book.
However as with so many books that attempt to grapple with the issues of today, the final chapter “What Is To Be Done?” is a little woolly and short on specifics on how to address the problems. This may be somewhat unfair as today’s issues are complex and probably beyond the scope of one book and indeed one author. But Francis Fukuyama is to be congratulated on making an attempt as this provided a sort of springboard for others thinking through the same set of problems.
So now to some of the book’s detailed argument:
The case for the source of identity feelings is built on “thymos”, a part of the human psyche or soul, which is the seat of judgments of worth of oneself that seeks recognition. The author extends this base idea to “isothymia”, the recognition of our own equality in terms of worth with our fellow human beings. And finally through consideration of the different aptitude’s and abilities of individuals and also owing to the stratification of communities caused by agriculture, to “megalothymia” in which societies only recognised an elite few.
The author rounds off this whole argument by claiming that the rise of modern democracy is about the replacement of megalothymia by isothymia, but that recognition of everyone’s equal worth entails a failure to recognise the worth of people who are actually superior in some sense.
This all leads to the modern concept of identity which places a supreme value on authenticity of inner feelings, and that one’s innermost being is not being allowed to express itself and thus be validated by society. This produces feelings of alienation and anxiety which can only be relieved when one accepts that inner self and receives public recognition for it.
The book then waffles on through Martin Luther and Jean-Jacques Rousseau from accepting God’s grace to human happiness and the obstacles placed on people by society’s rules and customs. The main aim of the argument at this point as far as I can fathom, is to show that democracy has to balance individual freedom and political equality - a task which has strained democracy to the limit as more and more people wish to assert their individual feelings of identity before other considerations.
The fragmentation of society into separate and increasingly exclusive Identity groups has led to a society as a whole which is not as cohesive and bound by common goals, principally economic, as in the past.
In Western society populist demagogues and rabble rousers has marched into the gap vacated by the Christian religion and provided answers to the different identity groups’ demand for recognition by asserting the rightness of ethnic superiority and common cultural values based on a society immune to the influences of mass immigration. The need for feelings of belonging have been assisted by the disconnect between the familiar setting a village life and the isolation of modern day living.
The book goes on to provide a similar analysis for other parts of the world coming to similar conclusions on inner conflicts with society, and how islamists have capitalised on this in an analogous way western populists.
Globalisation has produced more wealth but that wealth has created greater inequalities within most countries. And yet in 2016, voters failed to endorse the most left-wing populist candidates in favour of nationalist politicians as economic issues give way to the need for recognition.
There follows a more obtuse argument about who the people are, whether defined by birth and ancestry or by location within the boundary of a given nation. Of the global reach of transnational organisations versus the need for limits on a nation’s sovereignty defined by nation state boundaries.
The final chapters of the book are essentially about the global challenges that can only be addressed on an international basis, but that international cooperation is extraordinarily difficult so that any solutions need to be devised and promoted at national level between nation states.
I tried to give a flavour of what I regard as a worthwhile book even if at times I may have been critical or failed to present some of the arguments to the full extent they deserve. The world is experiencing a host of seemingly intractable issues with leaders who are either inept or more interested in their own self interests. But I will end with the author’s final exhortation from the final paragraph of his book:
“We will not escape from thinking about ourselves and our society in identity terms. But we need to remember that the identities dwelling deep inside us are neither fixed nor necessarily given to us by our accidents of birth. Identity can be used to divide, but it can and has been used to integrate. That in the end will be the remedy for the populist politics of the present.”
This book is worth reading if you are sympathetic to identity politics. It made this reader reconsider his stance on one the great disasters of our time - Brexit: it is the EU itself that we should blame, and not the British people or Russian interference. The EU did not do enough to foster a sense of European togetherness, instead content to pursue a detached and cold economic agenda. Perhaps this stance is wrong. If it is, Fukuyama would do well to show us why.






