It is interesting that you have marked a philosophy that moves people to lead lives of monastic asceticism as a philosophy that encourages a small identity.
I wouldn't read too much into that. Many philosophies so move some people. I marked a philosophy which rejects the reality of a "self" that is separable from the rest of the universe.
Buddhist practitioners are human too, of course, but a central practice in Buddhism is to dissolve and refute concrete belief in a persistent self and consciousness.
I know. Anatman. I had disagreements between Buddhists in the Mahayana and Theravada schools in mind, though: I don't know of any escalating to violence(!), but the former calling the latter "Hinayana" (which is kind of like "The Inferior Way (to enlightenment)") is pretty petty. Nobody is immune to "my school of thought is better than yours" identity squabbling, unfortunately.
I think that some Buddhist practices are a pretty direct attempt to keep this sort of behavior in check, but still the old habits take a long time to simmer down. I think the central problem is when something in the animal brain mistakes criticism of identity for a physical threat. Meditation helps to see this for what it is and let it go, most of the time.
Try breaking up an inner city gang fight by telling them to let their concrete beliefs dissolve in persistent self and consciousness.
My point is that this zen buddhism stuff is mainly the luxury of the elite few. Others have to grapple with the practicalities of daily survival, group membership, and hope for the future. Out of such things come the hard forged religious and political systems.
No one lives in a persistent fight. But for those that do experience conflict, I don't see how those who needn't sustain their identity in the face of adversity fare much worse than others.
in very simple words selfish thoughts are the cause of a suffering (the third of the Four Noble Truths), so, all the benefits of a small identity is just an effect.
