If you want people to act as though their identity is what matters, and attack people because of *their* identity, focus on communalism.
My definition of communalism is pretty much what you find online: "strong allegiance to one's own ethnic group rather than to society as a whole". Think of it as a way of abusing the commons: If your allegiance is to your group but you consume society-level resources, it means you're using what others contribute for the common good but reserve your contribution for your own group. The commons will break down if the abuse is significant enough as the rest of society breaks into groups, each interested primarily in its own good.
It's the word often used in the English-language South Asian press, and presumably the Commonwealth press, for things like Pakistani Deobandi-based violence against Shi'ites, Ahmedis, Christians, and Sufis; or violence between Indian Muslims and Hindus. In each case, what matters is that a member of one group, advancing or defending his group's interests, treats other primarily as members of a group and not individuals. A Sunni'll kill a Shi'ite not for what that Shi'ite did to him, but because another Shi'ite did something bad to another Sunni. We become agents of our identity and view others in strictly stereotypical terms.
The result is never good, however members of the groups involved seldom see how they could be anything but good. We like to think that humans are fairly smart, but I figure we just have a particularly bad reference group for comparison.
= new reply since forum marked as read
