Creating Youth and American Identity, and Presentation of Self

This reading seems to compliment Mead's notion that communication and the other provide opportunity for the individual to become an object or a 'self'. Unfortunately though as noted in this reading, it gives the opportunity for some individuals to be excluded from dialogue and conversation. I think it is important to note how not only does communication and interaction with others form self identity, but also may form group identity as well that bears pro's and con's. For instance, as mentioned in a comment, 'young people struggle to define themselves and search for an identity due to the cruelty of exclusion and segregation between minority groups and people who are different'.

Speaking of group identity, I found it intersting how Erikson pointed out that youth are cliquey and suggest that this is a result of their need to protect their identity from outside invasion. So in this way, communication and interaction with others within the group is forming a collective identity. Maybe individuals who struggle to find an identity because of segregation between minority groups have an easier time of banding together, however as mentioned above there can be pros and cons. For example, gangs may be created due to the exclusion of the individual members from society. Can anyone else think of different examples?

Nick notes the quote: "In searching for the social values which guide identity, one therefore confronts the problems of ideology and aristocracy, both in their widest possible sense which connotes that within a defined world image..." While reading this I couldn't help but to think that a lot of the times individuals do not go "searching" for social values, but due to their ubiquitous nature social values are forced upon us. This poses me with similar questions that Mills urges us to contemplate: What interactions are independent of society, where does society mediate? If we become dependent on the social values that society does impose us with, then our lack of agency creates an opportunity for us to conform into our groups. For Mead, our Me increasingly starts to gain power than our I, we are forced to become the objects in our own society. Although I agree with Erikson of this creating a collective identity, I am sceptical, as this introduces a situation in which society is creating harm for an individual by trading their personal identity for the collective identity.