Straighthening the politics of identity in Indonesia after the 1997 political reformation has increased the formation of new architecture which are scattered in various regions in Indonesia. The cultural identity on indigeneity and become part of identity politics. It was exploited by elites and rulers for the sake of power politics. Ironically, in the field of architecture, the definition of this identity is even more unclear. These definitions spin on the debate about the search for identity that was never finished and is often associated with the process to bring a cultural identity as a response to the challenges of modern architecture such as universality, globalization and technological progress. This paper tried to look at architecture (space) in the intersection with time (history) and socio-political aspects. The issue that arises is how the politics of identity is slowly continuing influence in the formation of architecture in Indonesia after the 1997 political reform, under misconceptions about the definition of 'identity' in debates of architecture in Indonesia. This happens because many architects or architectural theorists in Indonesia restricts itself only in the sphere of architecture, and failed to interact more broadly with social and political issues. Consequently, on the one hand, the term 'identity' loss of the socio-political influences and are reduced to a visual aesthetic problems alone, which obscure the identity of architecture as a socio-cultural concept. Meanwhile, on the other hand the use of identity as part of a political commodity also continue the dynamics that occur in the area (regional) is the color of power (power) in the formation of architecture in Indonesia as the impact of decentralization. The paper criticized the behavior of identity politics that tends to turn into a 'regime' in the current architectural identity formation, and less lifting of architecture with issues of identity and everyday social and political dynamics ( 'everyday-life') of community.