A coalitional identity is an identity which includes multiple unique identity groups that are in community with one another in order to pursue greater political power and liberation.
Coalitional identity challenges the idea of essentialism, the idea that there are certain key objective features that differentiate groups of people into certain identities; instead, the idea of coalitional identity frames identity as a tool for organizing and as inherently linked to systems of power.[1]
Coalitional identities are intended to be used as a way to help different communities, such as of people of color, disabled people, LGBTQ+ people, and others, work together in coalition toward common goals, but they can be criticized as exclusionary even as they are more broadly inclusive than the unique identity groups they join.
Coalitional identities serve to grow connections between different communities and mobilize them together over shared experiences while recognizing and allowing inter-group differences. The construct seeks to respond to common critiques of intersectionality that it highlights inter-group differences and divisions. Instead, coalitional identities are seen as an opportunity to embrace intersectionality and utilize it to create meaningful political alliances.[2]
Coalitional identities have been used and theorized in a variety of manners, with some focusing on their practical uses while others focus on their ideological basis of challenging exclusionary practices of all kinds. However, a very common usage of these identities has been focused upon allowing small groups to make meaningful political change by gaining numbers in support from other groups within a shared coalitional identity.[3]
In addition, coalitional identities are dynamic in nature and they evolve in response to societal shifts and emerging issues in the world. They can not be perceived as static, but rather as something fluid that adapts with the ever changing political, social, and cultural landscape.
Coalitional identities are critiqued for a variety of reasons, many of which overlap with critiques of identity politics in general.
One of the biggest critiques is that coalitional identities, as well as identity politics overall, fail to accurately address the inter-group differences and lend themselves to the idea of a need for a shared group experience which involves having to define those who fall outside of the identity, contributing to exclusionary practices.[4] While coalitional identities are rooted in attempting to go against this very critique, post-structuralists may argue that any form of identity is inherently fluid which produces an unsure sense of self and reinforces "dividing practices".[5]
There are many different types of coalitional identities. The below is a non-exhaustive list of some of the most active:
One common example of coalitional identity is being a person of color (POC).[6] The term "people of color" includes all non-white racial identities, each of which themselves are also heterogeneous, however the identity of POC helps unify these groups for the purpose of collective action against racism.
Disability is another common example of coalition identity. "Disability" as a term covers a wide range of different physical conditions and mental health conditions. Representation of disabled people encompasses a broad spectrum in social and pop culture, but movements such as those that brought about anti-discrimination laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act in the United States are a result of the work of a variety of activists across disabled groups working together.[7] The Americans with Disabilities Act not only signifies a victory for the disabled community, but also underscores the effectiveness of coalitional identities in effecting substantial change in society. The efforts of individuals with various disabilities displays the strength inherent in unity, highlighting the shared goal of eradicating barriers and advocating for inclusivity.
Another example of coalitional identity that may fall under disability as well is neurodivergence.[8] Neurodiversity is the idea that people have varying experiences and ways of interacting with the world around them. While neurodiversity, as defined by Judy Singer who originally coined the term, references the diversity of all people, it is commonly used to refer to people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), or other learning disabilities.[9] There is immense stigma, lack of awareness, and infrastructure around these disabilities which leads to the exclusion of people who fit under this coalitional identity.
Gender is also often considered a coalitional identity. Notable feminist scholars such as Audre Lorde suggest that for women to fight against the systems of oppression under which they struggle, they must work together and not allow their differences in characteristics such as race and sexuality to come between them.[10]
Many major achievements in the fight for LGBTQ+ liberation have been as a result of people with varied identities within the umbrella of LGBTQ+ working together as a coalition. Leaders in the fight for marriage equality in the United States have had many "sub"-identities; some attribute the more recent successes to earlier activists such as Sylvia Rivera, who influenced the establishment of Lambda Legal, a legal group that later engaged in the legal battles.[11] Even organizations holding broad or tangentially-related missions got involved in the fight for marriage equality: the NAACP, the leading African-American civil rights organization, released a resolution in 2012 in support of same-sex marriage.[12]
Other earlier revolutionary events and changes (for example, those coming as a result of the Stonewall Riot and the Second National March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights) were led by people such as Marsha P. Johnson, Sylvia Rivera, and Miss Major Griffin-Gracy to name a few, trans women who pioneered equal rights for all LGBTQ+ people, even those who may not have shared their identities exactly.[13]
Since coalitional identities serve as an umbrella for people with related but varied subidentities, liberation pursued by coalitional identities is often most effective in intersectional spaces. Intersectionality, a term originally coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw, refers to biases that affect people who hold multiple marginalized identities.[14]
For example, Black women face biases that neither solely Black individuals nor solely women face. In her speech "The Uses of Anger", Audre Lorde argues that successful dialogue and liberation for women must take into account all women, from all socioeconomic backgrounds and of all races, and must create spaces that are accessible to all kinds of women who fall under the umbrella coalitional identity of womanhood:
"If women in the academy truly want a dialogue about racism, it will require recognizing the needs and living contexts of other women."