Identity recognition precedes standing claims which precede program claims

Evidence

The three sorts of claims build in rough order: without a recognized identity, it is hard to demand political standing; without standing, it is hard to voice support for a program. Hard, but not impossible. — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 223

Categorization

• QUESTION: If program claims presuppose standing, then a subordinate group blocked from standing under an institutional absorption regime may never reach program claims — directly relevant to whether absorption defuses politicization.
• XREF: Ties to theorizing about ethnic group recognition as a prerequisite for political voice (e.g., recognition-then-redistribution sequencing in Fraser/Honneth debates), and to the reader’s asymmetry concern. — connects to: Identity, standing, and program claims move independently and can decouple — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 1162; Identity claims to territory arrive as retrospective legitimation — Édouard Glissant, Poetics of Relation, 122; Identity is constituted within representation rather than pre-existing it (+3 more)
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 223

Broader Connections

• Identity claims to territory arrive as retrospective legitimation #exemplifies (0.82) — Édouard Glissant, Poetics of Relation, 122
• Identity recognition without political economy analysis masks material causes of marginalization #qualifies (0.80)
• Identity is constituted within representation rather than pre-existing it #complicates (0.78)
• Racial self-identification can conflict with claiming discrimination status #exemplifies (0.76) — Neda Maghbouleh, The Limits of Whiteness, 105
• Institutional power structures both bestow and strip recognition of identities. #qualifies (0.74) — Mary Bucholtz and Kira Hall, Identity and Interaction, 100