{"title":"NPS volume 51 issue 1 Cover and Back matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/nps.2023.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2023.2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46973,"journal":{"name":"Nationalities Papers-The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46532675","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This introduction to the special issue looks back at 30 years of nation-building in the post-Soviet states. Initial hopes that national self-determination would reinforce democratization proved misplaced. While that synergy worked well in the Baltic states, elsewhere authoritarian leaders embraced nationalism, while democracies like Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine lost control of parts of their territory to secessionist movements backed by Russia. Each of the post-Soviet states promoted a national language (except for Belarus) and forged a new historical narrative for their “imagined community,” but in most cases they remained multi-ethnic and multi-lingual communities. In recognition of this persisting ethnic diversity, nation-building was accompanied by policies of ethnicity management. The international economic environment was rapidly changing due to globalization, posing new challenges for nation-builders. The gender dimension is important to the new national identities being forged in the post-Soviet space: the categories of race and class, less so. The article concludes with a review of the salient features of each of the newly-independent states.
{"title":"Thirty Years of Nation-Building in the Post-Soviet States","authors":"P. Rutland","doi":"10.1017/nps.2021.94","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2021.94","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This introduction to the special issue looks back at 30 years of nation-building in the post-Soviet states. Initial hopes that national self-determination would reinforce democratization proved misplaced. While that synergy worked well in the Baltic states, elsewhere authoritarian leaders embraced nationalism, while democracies like Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine lost control of parts of their territory to secessionist movements backed by Russia. Each of the post-Soviet states promoted a national language (except for Belarus) and forged a new historical narrative for their “imagined community,” but in most cases they remained multi-ethnic and multi-lingual communities. In recognition of this persisting ethnic diversity, nation-building was accompanied by policies of ethnicity management. The international economic environment was rapidly changing due to globalization, posing new challenges for nation-builders. The gender dimension is important to the new national identities being forged in the post-Soviet space: the categories of race and class, less so. The article concludes with a review of the salient features of each of the newly-independent states.","PeriodicalId":46973,"journal":{"name":"Nationalities Papers-The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48137714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Editor’s Note","authors":"Harris Mylonas","doi":"10.1017/nps.2023.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2023.3","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46973,"journal":{"name":"Nationalities Papers-The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49382945","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article uses the French Rassemblement National (RN) as a case study to examine how the populist radical right (PRR) prepares for a world after COVID-19 dominated by climate change concerns. Research suggests that certain measures introduced to contain the virus – such as the establishment of strict border and travel restrictions – may legitimize the PRR’s protectionist and anti-immigration agendas, yet few have examined whether or how PRR parties have used COVID-19 to promote their environmental agenda. If anything, the expectation has been that the pandemic would hurt the PRR precisely because its effects, unlike climate change, cannot be dismissed as a “hoax.” This view overlooks not only the “environmental turn” recently taken by several PRR parties but also the possibility that public awareness of the causal link between climate change and COVID-19 may work to their advantage. The analysis presented in this article highlights this possibility, showing that the RN used COVID-19 not only to capitalize on anti-immigrant sentiment but also to bolster its self-image as a champion of environmental protection.
{"title":"Climate Change: Bad News for Populism? How the Rassemblement National Used COVID-19 to Promote Its Environmental Agenda","authors":"Lluis de Nadal","doi":"10.1017/nps.2022.104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2022.104","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article uses the French Rassemblement National (RN) as a case study to examine how the populist radical right (PRR) prepares for a world after COVID-19 dominated by climate change concerns. Research suggests that certain measures introduced to contain the virus – such as the establishment of strict border and travel restrictions – may legitimize the PRR’s protectionist and anti-immigration agendas, yet few have examined whether or how PRR parties have used COVID-19 to promote their environmental agenda. If anything, the expectation has been that the pandemic would hurt the PRR precisely because its effects, unlike climate change, cannot be dismissed as a “hoax.” This view overlooks not only the “environmental turn” recently taken by several PRR parties but also the possibility that public awareness of the causal link between climate change and COVID-19 may work to their advantage. The analysis presented in this article highlights this possibility, showing that the RN used COVID-19 not only to capitalize on anti-immigrant sentiment but also to bolster its self-image as a champion of environmental protection.","PeriodicalId":46973,"journal":{"name":"Nationalities Papers-The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41637923","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The nationwide prominence of Russian oppositional artists has inspired a fair number of studies analyzing the political aspects of their creative output. We argue that the new generation of Russian musicians, whose art became popular in the end of 2010s, brings political engagement to a qualitatively new level. Following Jacques Rancière, we reject the assumption that critical art can bring about political mobilization by exposing social evils. Instead, we juxtapose politics and police, distinguishing between transformative moments of discursive confrontation and the mundane activity centered on distributing places and roles. In this article, we look at three popular Russian musical collectives – IC3PEAK, Shortparis, and Monetochka – whose art disrupts the police order in a novel and subversive manner. Some of their works became even more timely with the outbreak of Russia’s large-scale aggression against Ukraine. We have performed multimodal discourse analysis of their audio and video clips, aimed at identifying the ways in which these artworks create the conditions of possibility for new politics by re-articulating the connection between the political and the universal.
{"title":"“F*** tha police!” à la Russe: Rancière and the Metamodernist Turn in Contemporary Russian Music","authors":"V. Morozov, A. Reshetnikov, Elizaveta Gaufman","doi":"10.1017/nps.2022.112","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2022.112","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The nationwide prominence of Russian oppositional artists has inspired a fair number of studies analyzing the political aspects of their creative output. We argue that the new generation of Russian musicians, whose art became popular in the end of 2010s, brings political engagement to a qualitatively new level. Following Jacques Rancière, we reject the assumption that critical art can bring about political mobilization by exposing social evils. Instead, we juxtapose politics and police, distinguishing between transformative moments of discursive confrontation and the mundane activity centered on distributing places and roles. In this article, we look at three popular Russian musical collectives – IC3PEAK, Shortparis, and Monetochka – whose art disrupts the police order in a novel and subversive manner. Some of their works became even more timely with the outbreak of Russia’s large-scale aggression against Ukraine. We have performed multimodal discourse analysis of their audio and video clips, aimed at identifying the ways in which these artworks create the conditions of possibility for new politics by re-articulating the connection between the political and the universal.","PeriodicalId":46973,"journal":{"name":"Nationalities Papers-The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41985157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This is an ambitious book. It develops a theory of why the same ethnic minority is treated better in some countries than others. It analyzes 11 cases of countries that seceded while especially going in depth in five of them: Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, and Kazakhstan. The book utilizes information from over 100 interviews with government officials, editors of newspapers, academics, and party officials of Russian ethnic parties conducted by the author from 2013–19. The main contribution that this book brings to the literature is its key conceptual finding – that discrimination against the minority group is more likely if it is perceived that the given minority represents a moderate threat to the state. The first two chapters introduce the authors’ framework for this book. Bata opens it with a puzzle focusing on the surprising Russian reaction regarding the treatment of Russophones inUkraine and Kazakhstan: even though the Russian-speakers were relatively more integrated in Ukraine, Russia intervened. Meanwhile, even though discrimination against the Russian-speakers has increased in Kazakhstan over time, there has been no Russian intervention. This timely and vivid example helps Bata to set the scene for her main argument later on – that the effect of threat on ethnic discrimination andmarginalization is not linear – and that discrimination against ethnicminorities is the greatest when they pose a moderate threat to the state and when the kin state is moderately threatening (7). The author argues that in extreme situations when different domestic and international threats are at their highest, governments are likely to be more accommodating to their minorities. More broadly, this book seeks to assess how states treat minority populations after secession and why we see significant differences in how suchminorities are treated across countries and time periods (7). In the second chapter, the book develops an interesting conceptual framework that can be used to analyze treatment of minorities by the government after a secession. It is grounded in social science literature and should be applicable to contexts outside of the post-Soviet sphere as well: for example, when analyzing developments in areas with secessionist movements such as Kashmir or Kurdistan (17). The author identifies several domestic and international variables that aim to explain how a state would treat its minorities. Essential in this framework is the perception of the level of threat that the government sees the given minority (as well as its external kin state) as representing. The perception of threat is measured throughmany different factors including several different variables linked to the perceived threat of secessionism and the kin state’s (in this case, Russia’s) willingness to intervene (57–58). These factors include perceived level of domestic threat that the minority represents, threat of further succession, and international threats. Hypotheses are stated under
{"title":"The Russian Minorities in the Former Soviet Republics: Secession, Integration, and the Homeland, by Anna Bata, Routledge, 2022, 234 pp., $128 (hardback), ISBN 9781032070957.","authors":"Juris Pupcenoks","doi":"10.1017/nps.2022.107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2022.107","url":null,"abstract":"This is an ambitious book. It develops a theory of why the same ethnic minority is treated better in some countries than others. It analyzes 11 cases of countries that seceded while especially going in depth in five of them: Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, and Kazakhstan. The book utilizes information from over 100 interviews with government officials, editors of newspapers, academics, and party officials of Russian ethnic parties conducted by the author from 2013–19. The main contribution that this book brings to the literature is its key conceptual finding – that discrimination against the minority group is more likely if it is perceived that the given minority represents a moderate threat to the state. The first two chapters introduce the authors’ framework for this book. Bata opens it with a puzzle focusing on the surprising Russian reaction regarding the treatment of Russophones inUkraine and Kazakhstan: even though the Russian-speakers were relatively more integrated in Ukraine, Russia intervened. Meanwhile, even though discrimination against the Russian-speakers has increased in Kazakhstan over time, there has been no Russian intervention. This timely and vivid example helps Bata to set the scene for her main argument later on – that the effect of threat on ethnic discrimination andmarginalization is not linear – and that discrimination against ethnicminorities is the greatest when they pose a moderate threat to the state and when the kin state is moderately threatening (7). The author argues that in extreme situations when different domestic and international threats are at their highest, governments are likely to be more accommodating to their minorities. More broadly, this book seeks to assess how states treat minority populations after secession and why we see significant differences in how suchminorities are treated across countries and time periods (7). In the second chapter, the book develops an interesting conceptual framework that can be used to analyze treatment of minorities by the government after a secession. It is grounded in social science literature and should be applicable to contexts outside of the post-Soviet sphere as well: for example, when analyzing developments in areas with secessionist movements such as Kashmir or Kurdistan (17). The author identifies several domestic and international variables that aim to explain how a state would treat its minorities. Essential in this framework is the perception of the level of threat that the government sees the given minority (as well as its external kin state) as representing. The perception of threat is measured throughmany different factors including several different variables linked to the perceived threat of secessionism and the kin state’s (in this case, Russia’s) willingness to intervene (57–58). These factors include perceived level of domestic threat that the minority represents, threat of further succession, and international threats. Hypotheses are stated under","PeriodicalId":46973,"journal":{"name":"Nationalities Papers-The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49461932","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
scholarly works for years to come. The five in-depth case studies are thorough and interesting. At the same time, this book also raises some questions.Why is the role of external actors brought up in the theoretical chapter yet no hypotheses derived about it? Later in the case studies of Estonia and Latvia, the role of external actors such as the European Union is an important factor that has influenced the countries’ decision-making towards their Russian minorities. Furthermore, could it be that the key variable influencing governmental decision-making towards their Russian minorities is not so much the perceived threat that such minorities may represent but more so the perceived likelihood that harsher measures towards the Russophones could lead to a Russian intervention? The way it is conceptualized and operationalized, the very concept of “threat perception” includes numerous variables – and it is not clear how much weight each of them holds. As a result, in the qualitative empirical part of the study it can sometimes be questioned whether the perceived threat level could be assigned differently. For example, after assessing the numerous variables that fall under threat perception, the author states that Russian minorities have historically represented only a moderate threat to Latvia and Estonia. However, as in both of these countries there has been a significant concentration of Russian speakers in the Eastern regions, why is this threat assessed just as moderate? The threat perception section as a whole could benefit from engaging more with additional literatures on threat perception in international relations. Finally, while it is impressive to learn that this book draws on interviews with more than 100 individuals, it would be helpful to see more information about these interviews – for example, are these interviews roughly equally distributed over all 11 countries? Overall, this book is a welcome addition to the scholarship on minority integration, ethnic politics and the politics of the Former Soviet Republics. Those with interest in Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia and Kazakhstan will likely be interested in reading the detailed the cases studies on these countries. The theoretical and conceptual insights regarding the dynamics of minority integration and exclusion will be of interest to keen observers of conflict situations and secessionist movements in other regions.
{"title":"Language and Nationality: Social Inferences, Cultural Differences, and Linguistic Misconceptions, by Pietro Bortone, London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2022, 272 pp., $130 (hardback), ISBN 9781350071636, $40 (paperback), ISBN 9781350071643.","authors":"V. Kulyk","doi":"10.1017/nps.2022.108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2022.108","url":null,"abstract":"scholarly works for years to come. The five in-depth case studies are thorough and interesting. At the same time, this book also raises some questions.Why is the role of external actors brought up in the theoretical chapter yet no hypotheses derived about it? Later in the case studies of Estonia and Latvia, the role of external actors such as the European Union is an important factor that has influenced the countries’ decision-making towards their Russian minorities. Furthermore, could it be that the key variable influencing governmental decision-making towards their Russian minorities is not so much the perceived threat that such minorities may represent but more so the perceived likelihood that harsher measures towards the Russophones could lead to a Russian intervention? The way it is conceptualized and operationalized, the very concept of “threat perception” includes numerous variables – and it is not clear how much weight each of them holds. As a result, in the qualitative empirical part of the study it can sometimes be questioned whether the perceived threat level could be assigned differently. For example, after assessing the numerous variables that fall under threat perception, the author states that Russian minorities have historically represented only a moderate threat to Latvia and Estonia. However, as in both of these countries there has been a significant concentration of Russian speakers in the Eastern regions, why is this threat assessed just as moderate? The threat perception section as a whole could benefit from engaging more with additional literatures on threat perception in international relations. Finally, while it is impressive to learn that this book draws on interviews with more than 100 individuals, it would be helpful to see more information about these interviews – for example, are these interviews roughly equally distributed over all 11 countries? Overall, this book is a welcome addition to the scholarship on minority integration, ethnic politics and the politics of the Former Soviet Republics. Those with interest in Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia and Kazakhstan will likely be interested in reading the detailed the cases studies on these countries. The theoretical and conceptual insights regarding the dynamics of minority integration and exclusion will be of interest to keen observers of conflict situations and secessionist movements in other regions.","PeriodicalId":46973,"journal":{"name":"Nationalities Papers-The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46248738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What factors influence the formation of threat perception among the masses? Can the public perceive that external threats exist yet also feel safe? This article investigates both how threat perceptions form, as well as what factors influence security perceptions, in ethnically diverse countries and societies. While drawing on data from two nationally representative surveys, this article inquires to what extent the views of the government and society align regarding whether Russia represents a security threat to Latvia. We find that the determinants of threat and security perceptions differ. Above all else, the views of our respondents are shaped by their ethnic identities and regional effects. Consumption of different forms of media also influence threat perception. Perceived asymmetry of power is an additional important variable shaping security perception. Importantly, there is a correlation between seeing Russia as a security threat and Russophobia or fear of Russians living in Latvia. Overall, this article demonstrates that threat perceptions differ between Russian-speakers and Latvians, shows that it is important to differentiate between perceptions of threat and security, and identifies key explanatory variables influencing development of these perceptions in ethnically diverse societies.
{"title":"Microfoundations of Threat and Security Perceptions in Ethnically Diverse States: Lessons from Russia’s “Near Abroad”","authors":"Juris Pupcenoks, Toms Rostoks, I. Mieriņa","doi":"10.1017/nps.2022.109","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2022.109","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 What factors influence the formation of threat perception among the masses? Can the public perceive that external threats exist yet also feel safe? This article investigates both how threat perceptions form, as well as what factors influence security perceptions, in ethnically diverse countries and societies. While drawing on data from two nationally representative surveys, this article inquires to what extent the views of the government and society align regarding whether Russia represents a security threat to Latvia. We find that the determinants of threat and security perceptions differ. Above all else, the views of our respondents are shaped by their ethnic identities and regional effects. Consumption of different forms of media also influence threat perception. Perceived asymmetry of power is an additional important variable shaping security perception. Importantly, there is a correlation between seeing Russia as a security threat and Russophobia or fear of Russians living in Latvia. Overall, this article demonstrates that threat perceptions differ between Russian-speakers and Latvians, shows that it is important to differentiate between perceptions of threat and security, and identifies key explanatory variables influencing development of these perceptions in ethnically diverse societies.","PeriodicalId":46973,"journal":{"name":"Nationalities Papers-The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44145016","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article looks at different strategies in which authoritarianism operated in relation to the redesign of Skopje during the rule of the conservative party VMRO-DPMNE and its leader Nikola Gruevski. It argues that the promoters of the urban project called “Skopje 2014” relied on a set of nondemocratic mechanisms and involvement and coordination of various individuals and institutions on all levels to implement and legitimize the project and expand its political dominance. These ranged from state-driven mechanisms and urban design strategies to contributions of non-state groups, thus demonstrating a systematic effort behind the makeover of Skopje. Examining the project through the concept of authoritarianism, the article goes beyond (methodological) nationalism to understand the complexity of the revamp of North Macedonia’s capital. It also demonstrates how the party used its ideological principles to leave its enduring mark on Skopje’s urban environment. Additionally, the article points out the need to study urban space politics in the context of hybrid and competitive authoritarian regimes.
{"title":"Captured City: Authoritarianism, Urban Space and Project Skopje 2014","authors":"Branimir Staletović","doi":"10.1017/nps.2022.98","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2022.98","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article looks at different strategies in which authoritarianism operated in relation to the redesign of Skopje during the rule of the conservative party VMRO-DPMNE and its leader Nikola Gruevski. It argues that the promoters of the urban project called “Skopje 2014” relied on a set of nondemocratic mechanisms and involvement and coordination of various individuals and institutions on all levels to implement and legitimize the project and expand its political dominance. These ranged from state-driven mechanisms and urban design strategies to contributions of non-state groups, thus demonstrating a systematic effort behind the makeover of Skopje. Examining the project through the concept of authoritarianism, the article goes beyond (methodological) nationalism to understand the complexity of the revamp of North Macedonia’s capital. It also demonstrates how the party used its ideological principles to leave its enduring mark on Skopje’s urban environment. Additionally, the article points out the need to study urban space politics in the context of hybrid and competitive authoritarian regimes.","PeriodicalId":46973,"journal":{"name":"Nationalities Papers-The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43026625","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article contributes to discussions on culture wars, memory politics, and the politics of dead bodies. It uses the example of the annual celebration of the liberation of the city of Pilsen by the American army in 1945 to demonstrate the use of the concept of “political necromancy.” The Pilsen celebrations are one of the events during which participating politicians use fallen (or suffering) soldiers as an argument to support current political goals. Metaphorically, the politician as a necromancer brings the fallen back to life and sends them as an army of the dead to fight in culture wars and memory wars. The article focuses on introducing the different strategies used in this process (depersonalizing the fallen or creating a ghost hero) and shows how dead bodies and the appropriate use of memory politics are used to bolster foreign policy ties to the US and to lash out against Russia and communism.
{"title":"Post-Socialist Political Necromancy: Weaponization of Dead Bodies in Czech Culture Wars","authors":"Vladimír Naxera, Petr Krčál","doi":"10.1017/nps.2022.102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2022.102","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article contributes to discussions on culture wars, memory politics, and the politics of dead bodies. It uses the example of the annual celebration of the liberation of the city of Pilsen by the American army in 1945 to demonstrate the use of the concept of “political necromancy.” The Pilsen celebrations are one of the events during which participating politicians use fallen (or suffering) soldiers as an argument to support current political goals. Metaphorically, the politician as a necromancer brings the fallen back to life and sends them as an army of the dead to fight in culture wars and memory wars. The article focuses on introducing the different strategies used in this process (depersonalizing the fallen or creating a ghost hero) and shows how dead bodies and the appropriate use of memory politics are used to bolster foreign policy ties to the US and to lash out against Russia and communism.","PeriodicalId":46973,"journal":{"name":"Nationalities Papers-The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45943233","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：