This gives all of us a moral obligation to listen to each other with full attention and an open mind. But the point of this hard work is communication, not deference<\/p>\n
-Yascha Mounk-<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n I will commence this article by emphasizing two significant aspects that, from my point of view, should not be casually disregarded. Firstly, regarding the birth of an individual. Empirical facts attest that no one can choose to be born with a certain identity, particularly in terms of race or ethnicity. One merely accepts this reality as it unfolds. From my perspective, this is a gift and a profound trust from God when He decides that we are born and have a certain racial or ethnic identity, whatever it is. Secondly, racial and ethnic diversity is a necessity and at the same time a beautiful blessing from God that needs to be cared for and preserved. The narrative of the tower of Babel incident in the book of Genesis 11 shows that diversity of identities aligns with God’s will. To reject this, or to become superior or inferior due to the reality of the diversity of human identities, does it not imply positioning ourselves in opposition to God?<\/p>\n However, in human history, many people ignore the two significant things above. As a result, humans elevate themselves and demean others with different identities. Such desires always seem to exist from time to time. In Francis Fukuyama’s terms, this desire, megalothymia, is a term to refer to the desire when a person or group of people is dominated by the desire to be superior.[1]<\/a> This desire to be superior then gives rise to exclusion, oppression, exploitation, and even genocide.<\/p>\n Yascha Mounk in his book explains that humans tend to be \u2018groupish.\u2019 Mounk explains this tendency, \u201cthey are primed to form strong bonds with their own group, even when its criterion for membership is trivial; On behalf of members of their own groups, they often prove capable of staggering feats of ingenuity and awe-inspiring acts of altruism.\u201d[2]<\/a> Furthermore, in his scholarly investigation, Mounk unveiled a historical pattern indicating the latent propensity for humans to inflict cruelty upon individuals possessing divergent identities. He writes, \u201cin dealing with people whom they think of as members of an outside group, they are capable of frightening cruelty and callousness. This tendency to favor the in-group over the out-group helps to explain much of what is noble and most of what is vile in human history.\u201d[3]<\/a><\/p>\n Mounk proposed a term to describe an attitude regarding identity politics, which he called ‘identity synthesis.’ He explains, \u201cThe identity synthesis is concerned with many different kinds of groups, including (but not limited to) those based on race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and disability.\u201d[4]<\/a> He also emphasized the dangers of identity synthesis. He says, \u201cThe identity synthesis is a political trap, making it harder to sustain diverse societies whose citizens trust and respect each other. It is also a personal trap, one that makes misleading promises about how to gain the sense of belonging and social recognition that most humans naturally seek.\u201d[5]<\/a><\/p>\n Mounk further explains why we need to avoid identity synthesis. According to Mounk, identity synthesis still leads to pessimistic thinking due to the notion of maintaining racial groups. He asserts, \u201cThe identity synthesis presents itself as a progressive ideology that tries to remake the world in a radical fashion. But this radical paint job fails to obscure its deep pessimism or the poverty of its ambitions. At the heart of its vision stands an acceptance of the enduring importance of dubious categories like race.\u201d[6]<\/a> The identity synthesis, according to Mounk, seeks to convince society of a vision of the future where the fate of individuals will always be determined by the identity group to which they belong. This situation will lead various communities to be trapped in unprofitable competition. At the same time, it will increasingly reinforce that the way we interact with each other will always depend on each other’s skin color and sexual orientation.[7]<\/a><\/p>\n From Mounk’s abundance of ideas about avoiding identity traps, I found a scintillating notion that I think is the most enlightening for us to move beyond identity synthesis. He proposes a bright constructive demeanor that we can implement in relationships to the other amidst diversity. Mounk calls it ‘true solidarity.’ True solidarity has two elements, listen to the other, and strive for genuine justice. Mounk insists, \u201cEach of us would listen to members of other identity groups with an open mind, empathizing with the forms of oppression to which they may be subject.\u201d[8]<\/a> Simultaneously, Mounk further emphasizes, \u201cEach of us would strive to remedy genuine injustices, not out of a misguided sense of deference, but because they violate our own aspirations for the kind of society in which we want to live.\u201d[9]<\/a><\/p>\n Mounk\u2019s framework of thinking serves as a guiding principle for us as Christian leaders navigating the challenges of a global and digital context, urging us to uphold the truths delineated in the Bible. Regardless of individual identities, the divine image is inherent within each person. Mounk encourages our awareness that, as individuals transformed through Christ, we now possess a new perspective and conduct congruent with the summons of Christ. This value stimulates us to regard, embrace, and interact with our fellow human beings, demonstrating profound regard for their inherent dignity as creations and images of God, as the Bible says, \u201cBeloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who\u00a0loves is born of God and knows God.\u201d[10]<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Francis Fukuyama,\u00a0Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment<\/em>, (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2018), xiii.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Yascha Mounk,\u00a0The Identity Trap: A Story of Ideas and Power in Our Time<\/em>\u00a0(New York: Penguin Press, 2023), 191.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Mounk,\u00a0The Identity Trap.<\/em><\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Ibid, 9.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Ibid.<\/p>\n [6]<\/a> Ibid, 264.<\/p>\n [7]<\/a> Ibid.<\/p>\n