In the third meeting, we discussed the text “Collective identity as shared ethical self-understanding: the case of the emerging European identity”, by Cathleen Kantner (2006). 

The text criticizes the existing concept of collective identity and points out its flaws, with a focus on the vagueness of the existing theory. Then, it proposes a new paradigm for the understanding of collective identity, based on qualitative identity. From this, raises the ideas of Commercium, a weak collective identity, in which certain interests and goals are shared, without sharing ethical convictions; and Communio, a strong collective identity, in which values are shared, and that emerges in critical political moments. 

Some questions were raised and discussed with the group: Does the proposed classification resolve some of the conceptual issues, discussed in the previous session (e.g., “primary identities” in multilayered belongings, the concept of “roots”)? “Ethical”/ normative approach towards identity – is it valid? Can identity be discussed not in the normative terms? What is the place of the “collective identity” concept in the general paradigm of identity research?