The Remaking and Unmaking of Multi-Ethnic Spaces. Diyarbakir and Southeast Anatolia in the 21st Century

Poligrafi ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 65-92
Author(s):  
William Gourlay

Focusing on 21st century developments in southeast Anatolia, this article examines the circumstances of minority communities within the contexts of the shifting dynamics of Turkey’s national project. Until the early 20th century southeast Anatolia was an ethnic patchwork. The early republican era saw efforts to “Turkify” through the promulgation of a national identity project asserting ethnic unity. From the 1980s, conflict with the PKK gave urgency to the notion that uniformity was paramount for national cohesion. In this milieu, ethnic diversity was suspect. Circumstances changed with the AKP government’s 2002 ascendance and the earlier emergence of Kurdish municipal politicians. This article documents how thereafter the re-imagining of the national project away from an exclusive ethnic categorisation allowed acknowledgement and accommodation of ethnic and religious diversity across southeast Anatolia. The chapter analyses these events in light of a backlash by nationalist politicians, the 2015 re-ignition of the PKK conflict and the subsequent resurgence of nationalist rhetoric in the political arena. It appears a narrow, exclusive national identity is re-asserting itself. The article thus examines the extent to which the experience of south-eastern Anatolia represents the re-imagining of Turkey’s national project and the embrace of a previously denied multi-ethnic socio-political fabric.

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-49
Author(s):  
Francis Kok Wah Loh

Abstract The cause of conflict in multi-ethnic and multi-religious societies is not diversity in and of itself. Instead, it is one’s attitude towards diversity. Do we share political power and economic development with the regions and minority communities? Do we respect and recognise the cultural identities of minorities? This requires that the nation-state building process be imagined in more inclusive civic territorial lines rather than exclusive ethnic-genealogical lines. With the above as a backdrop, the article explores the status of the Christian minority in Malay-Islamic majority Malaysia and the plight of the Rohingyas in Bamar-Buddhist majority Myanmar.


Author(s):  
Maren Klein

At a time when multiculturalism as an approach to managing diversity in society has been declared a failed policy in many western countries, Australia still seems committed to the approach as evidenced in public discourse and government declarations. The concept of interculturalism— promoted as a more appropriate approach to dealing with diversity in other parts of the world such as Europe and Canada—seemingly has no place in the Australian context. However, changes in the understanding of the concept, its application and degrees of commitment to it can also be observed in Australia. Not only has the meaning and execution of multiculturalism changed considerably over the years, there has also been vigorous debate and backlash, embodied in the political arena, by the (re) emergence of parties, and more recently, a variety of groupings with a nationalistic and/or nativist focus. More generally, a hardened attitude in public discourses concerning migration, social cohesion and national identity has developed over the last two decades. In the context of these developments, this article will trace the evolution of the Australian concept of multiculturalism and its concrete application focussing on the changes of the last two decades. A comparison of Australia’s purportedly unique type of multiculturalism and concept(s) of interculturalism to explore whether Australia’s nation-building project is indeed distinct from other countries’ diversity experience, or whether there is a place for interculturalism in Australia in an era of increasing mobility will conclude the article.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Roman Vladimirovich Penkovtsev ◽  
Timur Vasilevich Gafurov ◽  
Natalia Aleksandrovna Shibanova

This paper considers the issue of interaction between two states, which are largely political antagonists: Israel and Saudi Arabia. The nature of the interaction between these states on the world political arena is of serious scientific and practical interest. Contrary to popular stereotypes, Israel maintains relations with many countries of the Arab world, and Saudi Arabia is no exception. It should be noted that a certain rapprochement of positions between these states occurred due to the activation on the geopolitical map of the Middle East of such an actor as Iran, which in the 21st century energetically implements its nuclear program, accelerates economic development programs, and is generally focused on strengthening its role and places in the international arena. The US position represented by the administrations of B. Obama and D. Trump influenced to a large extent the process of intensifying interaction between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which stimulated the rapprochement of the positions of these two states on the “Syrian” and “Iranian” problems. In addition, it is worth paying attention to the establishment of similar positions between Israel and Saudi Arabia on the "Palestinian issue. "


2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-42
Author(s):  
Veena Kukreja

This article seeks to analyse the ineluctable dilemma of Pakistan, how to weave a viable national identity out of the regional and linguistic loyalties and their political-aspirations. Ethnic divide or ethnic militancy ranging from autonomy to political reorganisation has been a constant phenomenon haunting Pakistani politics. It also aims at highlighting failure of the Pakistani state to translate its socio-cultural diversity in political terms, something that is at the heart of the country’s persistent problem of political order and legitimacy. The state in Pakistan has taken recourse to coercive measures, irrespective of the type of government (civilian or military), from the very beginning to counter the political demands of various ethnic groups in the country. The Pakistani state’s response towards ethnic demands has been shaped by ‘law and order’ and ‘assimilation’ orientation rather than that of a dignified accommodation of the diverse ethnicities.


2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thierry Devos ◽  
Que-Lam Huynh ◽  
Debbie S. Ma

Author(s):  
James J. Coleman

At a time when the Union between Scotland and England is once again under the spotlight, Remembering the Past in Nineteenth-Century Scotland examines the way in which Scotland’s national heroes were once remembered as champions of both Scottish and British patriotism. Whereas 19th-century Scotland is popularly depicted as a mire of sentimental Jacobitism and kow-towing unionism, this book shows how Scotland’s national heroes were once the embodiment of a consistent, expressive and robust view of Scottish nationality. Whether celebrating the legacy of William Wallace and Robert Bruce, the reformer John Knox, the Covenanters, 19th-century Scots rooted their national heroes in a Presbyterian and unionist view of Scotland’s past. Examined through the prism of commemoration, this book uncovers collective memories of Scotland’s past entirely opposed to 21st-century assumptions of medieval proto-nationalism and Calvinist misery. Detailed studies of 19th-century commemoration of Scotland’s national heroes Uncovers an all but forgotten interpretation of these ‘great Scots’ Shines a new light on the mindset of nineteenth-century Scottish national identity as being comfortably Scottish and British Overturns the prevailing view of Victorian Scottishness as parochial, sentimental tartanry


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Druckman ◽  
Samara Klar ◽  
Yanna Krupnikov ◽  
Matthew Levendusky ◽  
John B. Ryan

Affective polarization is a defining feature of 21st century American politics—partisans harbor considerable dislike and distrust of those from the other party. Does this animus have consequences for citizens’ opinions? Such effects would highlight not only the consequences of polarization, but also shed new light onto how citizens form preferences more generally. Normally, this question is intractable, but the outbreak of the novel coronavirus allows us to answer it. We find that affective polarization powerfully shapes citizens’ attitudes about the pandemic, as well as the actions they have taken in response to it. However, these effects are conditional on the local severity of the outbreak, as the effects decline in areas with high caseloads—threat vitiates partisan reasoning. Our results clarify that closing the divide on important issues requires not just policy discourse but also attempts to reduce inter-partisan hostility.


Author(s):  
Harry Nedelcu

The mid and late 2000s witnessed a proliferation of political parties in European party systems. Marxist, Libertarian, Pirate, and Animal parties, as well as radical-right and populist parties, have become part of an increasingly heterogeneous political spectrum generally dominated by the mainstream centre-left and centre-right. The question this article explores is what led to the surge of these parties during the first decade of the 21st century. While it is tempting to look at structural arguments or the recent late-2000s financial crisis to explain this proliferation, the emergence of these parties predates the debt-crisis and can not be described by structural shifts alone . This paper argues that the proliferation of new radical parties came about not only as a result of changes in the political space, but rather due to the very perceived presence and even strengthening of what Katz and Mair (1995) famously dubbed the "cartelization" of mainstream political parties.   Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v7i1.210


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document