Divergent and Punish

From surnames to street addresses, the modern state has increasingly streamlined the processes of governance. Scott argues that systemic state interventions in issues of public health, taxation, or safety can be anywhere from fatal to lifesaving for citizens (78). However, at what point does a state’s attempts at simplifying these interventions deteriorate one’s identity rather than bolster it?

The popular young adult Divergent Series touches on this issue with a dystopian society that physically organizes citizens by their strongest personality trait (intelligence, bravery, selflessness, honesty, or kindness) into factions. The central conflict of the series arises when select characters are unable to unequivocally “fit” into one of the factions–being labeled “divergents.” Having personality traits or inclinations that rest outside of the state’s controlled system threatens the state’s legitimacy and turns the divergent characters into targets of state-sponsored violence. Will our modern state also become too streamlined at the expense individual identity? State documentation and government organization provide identities in a sense with birth certificates and mandatory schooling, yet when are we becoming just a number, just a color, or even just a single personality trait to be used as a tool of the state? Currently, individuals without proper documentation are seen as threats in the way the fictional divergents are. We see undocumented immigrants, the homeless, and refugees being treated with social and political hostility from those who possess “proper” birth certificates, language, and addresses. We are increasingly forced into the proper processes that suit a state-sanctioned collective identity–all for the means of efficiency.