What is a politically relevant or salient identity? Why is political relevance important?

    Cederman, Wimmer and Min’s “Why do ethnic groups rebel?” looks into and analyzes hypotheses and factors for ethnic

groups that will increase mobilization and conflict. They look at and disprove past literature relating towards

ethnonationalist conflict with the government leading to civil war. They also test their own hypotheses for relevance to

see what type of power dynamics lead to the most conflict. Using this data they can conclude that having past conflicts,

exclusion from national issues or having a lower GDP per capita increases this conflict significantly. 

    When trying to answer this question of what is politically relevant or important identity I think it is first helpful to look at

Tilly’s model that was shown in the reading. This shows not only the importance of political relevance but also how

different groups are challenging each other to be closer to the government and ultimately closer to power. Now to me

this model is then categorized by looking at the leaders of these ethnic groups and seeing how much those individuals

have power and a say in central government. This relates to the absolute power, power sharing regimes, and possible

exclusion factors that they analyzed for relevance to conflicts later in the reading. Without a leader or individual to hold

your ethnic group’s interests at heart and to make changes in the government at any level (local, state, nationally) your

identity as a group becomes less politically salient. Part of having a politically relevant or salient identity is having the

ability and power to change legislation for the betterment of your ethnic group. 

    Another part of political importance for ethnic groups is the amount of previous conflicts with the government. This

creates a more relevant and logical connection between a group and what they are fighting for. The authors mention that

no state is ethically neutral, which means exclusion, downgrade of power, and conflict will always arise. This is

understandable, yet the constant recurrence of similar disagreements requires a solution or change to be made and is a

reason why political relevance is important. Without ethnic groups fighting for this relevance a monopoly or domination of

power, decisions, and outcomes in a nation would be guaranteed. The combination of a group having enough power to

properly voice their opinions and the numerous past conflicts on one issue will increase the importance and awareness

of an identity or group. 

    I personally found the authors' focus on state actors not only generating these conflicts, but their focus on gaining the

support of their co-ethnics for policies, public goods, or more power and jobs in the government was interesting. This

point relates to my research question on representatives ability to give proper care and goods for certain ethnic

identities or socioeconomic classes after a natural disaster or pandemic. The sad reality is that people with less

politically salient identities may get less attention and have to fight for their wellbeing or health. This is why a

representative that has the same ethnicity and interests for you can be so powerful. When first thinking about

my research question I was more focused on the ethnicity behind the lack of unified and similar treatment for

everyone. However, political relevance, or lack thereof, is another large factor in why even the hardest hit locations for

a natural disaster are not getting the proper treatment to survive. Coethnic representation in today’s government means

that ethnic group has more relevance in current issues.