The Contradiction of Cultural Identity

This is one of those little rants that's been wedged in the back of my mind for about a year. A few years back I was told that (I'm not quoting exactly here) "I am a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP), and the way I think and operate as such is guided by my culture." Or, "My drive for rational and logical thought is because I'm white." Now, all racial implications aside, I started analyzing this argument.

Before I dive in however, I feel I should explain Cultural Identity. What was said, is based on a theory that much of a person's identity is made up of a multitude of cultural identifiers, such as place, race, history, nationality, language, religious beliefs, etc. These identifiers guide how you're raised and as such, how you think and what you see as right and wrong.

So, to bring the points together, because I was raised with a northwestern European background both religiously and historically, I try to be rational and logical in my thinking. (There was another few elements that this debate was derived from, that would start a long tangent. Perhaps another post.)

To halt any beating of bushes, I have two simple statements I hope will demonstrate my point.

Cultural Identity is Bullshit.
First. Let's presume that Cultural Identity is correct, and see if the dots connect.
If my mode of thought and persona are guided by my culture, and I have obviously recognized that such is driving my thought processes and identity, and so we have then said - You cannot change it. If my identity is driven by my culture then I have no capacity to alter my mode of thought, because it's learned from a set of circumstances beyond my control well before I was even born. (Also indirectly saying that people are not born Tabula Rasa.)

Second. Let's presume as we did before, that Cultural Identity is correct, but in recognizing it I can change it (The free will thing.) It no longer becomes a necessary condition, and is no longer "Identity" - The ability to alter your mode of thought and persona invalidate it as an aspect of Identity, because you have the capacity to recognize what you're doing, and change. You have the ability to change, which means the essence of your character isn't cultural, it's just... what you want it to be.

In the first scenario, the notion of Cultural Identity is like looking at a man and saying "You are a man." - Thank you Captain Obvious, now what are we DOING about it? Hating a group for being who they are amounts to cultural bigotry while trying to change the circumstances yields a whole new question. The second scenario supposes we CAN do something about it, which turns the whole idea of Cultural Identity into a glaring contradiction.

Now, perhaps there's some concept that I'm not recognizing, or am just ignorant of, and I would ask - Please, comment. If I've overlooked something, I'd like to know what it is.

Identity deals with "Is" and "Are." The content of a person's mind and WHO they ARE, is guided by their conscious choices about what to believe and accept, and what not to. Many are not conscious of who they are, or what compels them to action, or simply can't handle the notion that each person is an individual capable of acting and behaving of their OWN accord. The capacity to recognize what drives us to certain actions gives us the ability to change our behavior. We can be driven biologically or emotionally to a specific action, but in recognizing what those drives are, we have the ability (unlike most of the animal kingdom) to follow or deny those drives based on the outcome we want to achieve. That ability is what defines our Identity - The values that guide our choices, in the face of whatever would drive us to act, and the capacity to define those values independently, in the face of all other influences.