How do ethnic types differ from each other? What is the difference between nationality and nation and ethnicity?
Sometimes these terms are used as synonyms.
But it is important to see that there are ethnic groups, communities that have a common language, customs, live or have lived nearby, but do not form a state. And a nation is when a certain community creates a state.
Russians and Soviets are a nation because they are obviously connected with the state.
But other Russians find themselves outside of Russia, but feel a community with those Russians who live in Russia. And modern Russia-RF does not coincide with either the USSR or pre-revolutionary Russia, and this is significant, since a component of both an ethnic group, and especially a nation, is culture and history.
Perhaps nationalists who think of themselves exclusively as an ethnic group (Westerners, Estonian fascist-nationalists) and do not recognize themselves within the framework of a super-ethnic group, or rather, do not want to recognize themselves even in the past. Obviously, there is some kind of psychopathology here. And not even because nationalism is “bad.” Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Estonians, etc. are already outside the Russian state, but they are still not satisfied, they are angry, they ban hammers and sickles, they persecute the Russian language. On the one hand, America-West is simply teasing, but there is also psychosis. Ethnic nationalism, despite all the desires of Estonians, Georgians or Western Ukrainians, for their nationalism to be specifically a nation, is not being realized, because it is simply impossible. A nation does not arise from the legends of dear old times, the traditions of ancestors. A nation is precisely a state and a state capable of solving economic and military problems independently. This is not the desire of a people-nation, it is a property, a specific characteristic.
Georgians and Estonians, trying to feel like European nations, are striving for pacts with European countries and the United States, but whether they see it or not, they turn out to be only objects-subjects used by the West for their own purposes. Belonging to an ethnic group is an amorphous, spontaneous, very uncomplicated thing. Involvement in the political body of the state is stronger, the stronger the state. Naturally, involvement in such political entities like Latvia or Ukraine, consciously or subconsciously cannot satisfy the individual and society in such self-identification. Identity relative to the nation-state is a political, ideologically active and vitally principled identity. Satisfying a person even at the subconscious level can only be large state, with his political traditions. There is a reason for the reorientation of especially young people in the former republics of the USSR, including Russia, towards non-Soviet “values” mental disorders masses of people especially in the former republics, since their “republics” most often were never or were “states” for a very long time. The state of such states as Poland is intermediate. Poland was a fairly influential state, but in 1772, 1793 and 1795 there were partitions of Poland, after which Poland was not an independent state. During the Second World War, Poland was ultimately occupied by Hitler, and its statehood was restored within the framework of the socialist camp, which Poland again decided to renounce, which devalues the value of the socialist period of its history. The peak of development of Polish statehood over the last 300 years falls, of course, not in the era of Pilsudski or Sikorski, but in the socialist period. The Poles, even more often unconsciously, feel it. The “passions” of the former Soviet republics also unconsciously feel this, but the modern anti-Soviet and anti-Russian ideology of the political elites of these republics does not allow the masses, who for the most part are inevitably pliable and unable to resist ideological pressure, to be in a state of permanent psychosis-neurosis. Mental balance is restored solely on the basis of orientation towards the Soviet, Eurasian-super-ethnic orientation.
Orientation towards the EU also does not bring full value to the self-awareness of such a people, since Europe has never represented a single statehood and does not represent it now. Euroidentity is not a true national identity.
Although the past is imaginative, it is precisely it, history and the culture remaining after that past that is the basis of future strong innovations.
Alas, the situation of Poles, Georgians, Ukrainians, Estonians is tragic, since the restoration of the Greater Russian World, similar to the Soviet one, now depends 90 percent on Russia. But anti-Soviet Russia, which itself destroyed the Union, has an elite that does not think about reviving the state super-ethnic association, although the Customs Union there is some movement in this direction, but the ideology of this Union remains ambiguous, anti-Soviet leaders (with the exception, of course, Lukashenko) are trying to unite part of the Union... Although relying specifically on Russia is probably not entirely correct. Let us remember that Stalin and Ordzhonikidze were Georgians. Dzerzhinsky, Rokossovsky are Poles. The choice is, in a sense, simple: either ethnic nationalism, including word of mouth and Cossack anti-Semitism, or the ideology of a large national state, in partnership with civilizational centers whose common interests with interests Greater Russia have already emerged (BRICS, SCO, CIS, countries of the former socialist camp). After Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Syria, it is absurd to talk about “friendship” with Europe and America.
Restoring the political health ("stability") of our superethnos and anti-Sovietism are exactly opposite things.
The concept of a “titular nation” is therefore a virus, absurdity and insanity. A nation is a society that makes up a state. The desire to single out a certain ethnic group from the state as its titular organizer means not to understand at all that the ethnic group is just our good-natured people, the village tchotchkes. Archpriest Avvakum and Patriarch Nikon were both Mordvins, what does this mean that the Mordovians fought religious wars in Russia in the 17th century?
Ethnicity is an inevitable property of people, but when ethnicity becomes the center of our self-identification, it is at least comical, which is why, for example, in Soviet times people made jokes about Russians, Tatars and Jews.
A Russian, a German, a Jew, a Chuvash and a Chukchi argued over what Lenin’s nationality was. The Russian says: Russian, Russian surname, Russian first name, wrote and spoke in Russian, the German says: No, he is German, because his mother was German Blank, a Jew: No, he is a Jew, because Marietta Shaginyan said that Lenin’s mother was Jewish, like Marx, a Chuvash: no, Lenin is a Chuvash, because the Chuvash live around Simbirsk, the Tatars (Lenin studied in Kazan), the Kalmyks are also included in the dispute, and finally, the Chukchi says: No, Lenin was a Chukchi. How, why is this Chukchi?!! - Very smart...
As Søren Kierkjegaard said: Either... or. Either the Power or “very smart”...
**
About Ukrainian.
A little
about nations, ethnic groups and scientific approaches.
About some concepts.
Ethnology from the Greek words - ethnos - people and logos - word, judgment - the science of the peoples of the world (ethnic groups, more precisely,
Its dissemination is due to the famous French physicist and thinker M. Ampere, who determined the place of ethnology in the system of the humanities along with history, archeology and other disciplines. At the same time, ethnology included, according to
Ampere's thoughts, as a subdiscipline of physical anthropology (the science of the physical properties of individual ethnic
groups: hair and eye color, structure of the skull and skeleton, blood, etc.). In the 19th century in Western European countries
ethnological research developed successfully. Along with the term “ethnology”, another name for this science has become widespread - ethnography.
– from the Greek words – ethnos – people and grapho – I write, i.e. description of peoples, their history and cultural characteristics. However, in
second half of the 19th century the prevailing point of view was that ethnography was viewed as
predominantly a descriptive science based on field materials, and ethnology as a theoretical discipline,
based on ethnographic data. Finally, the French ethnologist K. Lévi-Strauss believed that ethnography, ethnology and anthropology - three successive stages in the development of human science: ethnography represents the descriptive stage of the study of ethnic groups, field
research and classification; ethnology – synthesis of this knowledge and its systematization; anthropology seeks to study
man in all his manifestations. As a result, in different times and in different countries gave preference to any of these terms, depending on
developed tradition. Thus, in France the term “ethnology” (l’ethnologie) still prevails, in England along with it
The concept of “social anthropology” (ethnology, social anthropology) is widely used; in the USA the designation
This science is “cultural anthropology”. In the Russian tradition
the terms “ethnology” and “ethnography” were initially considered synonymous. However, since the late 1920s. in the USSR ethnology, along with sociology, began to be considered
"bourgeois" science. Therefore, in the Soviet era, the term “ethnology” was almost completely replaced by the term “ethnography”. In recent years, however,
the prevailing tendency is to call this science, following Western and American models, ethnology or sociocultural
anthropology.
What is an ethnos, or ethnic group (more precisely, an ethnic community or ethnic
group)? This understanding varies greatly in different disciplines - ethnology,
psychology, sociology and representatives of different scientific schools and directions. Here
briefly about some of them.
Thus, many Russian ethnologists continue to consider ethnicity as a real
existing concept - a social group that emerged during the historical
development of society (V. Pimenov). According to Yu. Bromley, ethnicity is historically
a stable population of people that has developed in a certain territory and has
common relatively stable features of language, culture and psyche, and
also by awareness of one’s unity (self-awareness), fixed in self-name.
The main thing here is self-awareness and a common self-name. L. Gumilyov understands ethnicity
first of all how a natural phenomenon; this is one or another group of people (dynamic
system), opposing itself to other similar groups (we are not
we), having its own special internal
structure and a given stereotype of behavior. Such an ethnic stereotype, according to
Gumilyov, is not inherited, but is acquired by the child in the process
cultural socialization and is quite strong and unchanged throughout
human life. S. Arutyunov and N. Cheboksarov considered ethnicity as spatially
limited clusters of specific cultural information, and interethnic
contacts – as an exchange of such information. There is also a point of view according to
which ethnicity is, like race, an initially, eternally existing community
people, and belonging to it determines their behavior and national character.
According to the extreme point of view, belonging to an ethnic group is determined by birth -
at present, practically no one shares it among serious scientists.
In foreign anthropology, there has recently been a widespread belief that ethnos
(or rather an ethnic group, since foreign anthropologists avoid using
the word "ethnicity") is an artificial construct that arose as a result of purposeful
efforts of politicians and intellectuals. However, most researchers agree that ethnos (ethnic group)
represents one of the most stable groups, or communities, of Lyuli.
This is an intergenerational community, stable over time, with a stable composition, with
In this case, each person has a stable ethnic status, it is impossible to “exclude” him
from the ethnic group.
In general, it is necessary to pay attention that the theory of ethnos is the favorite brainchild of domestic
scientists; in the West, problems of ethnicity are discussed in a completely different way.
Western scientists have priority in developing the theory of the nation.
Back in 1877, E. Renan gave a statist definition of the concept of “nation”: a nation unites
all residents of a given state, regardless of their race or ethnicity. Religious
accessories, etc. Since the 19th century.
Two models of the nation took shape: French and German. French model following
Renan, corresponds to the understanding of the nation as a civil community
(state) based on political choice and civil kinship.
The reaction to this French model was the model of the German romantics, appealing
to the “voice of blood”, according to her, a nation is an organic community connected
general culture. Currently, they talk about “Western” and “Eastern” models of society,
or about the civil (territorial) and ethnic (genetic) models of the nation, Quite a lot
scientists believe that the idea of a nation is often used for political purposes - by the ruling
or those wishing to gain power by groupings. What
concerns ethnic groups, or ethnic groups (ethnic groups), then in foreign, and in recent times
years and in national science It is customary to distinguish three main approaches to this
range of problems – primordialist, constructivist and instrumentalist
(or situationist).
A few words about each of them:
One of the “pioneers” in the study of ethnicity, whose research had a huge impact on social science,
there was a Norwegian scientist F. Barth, who argued that ethnicity is one of the forms
social organization, culture (ethnic – socially organized
variety of culture). He also introduced the important concept of “ethnic border” - el
that critical feature of an ethnic group beyond which attribution to it ends
members of this group itself, as well as assignment to it by members of other groups.
In the 1960s, like other theories of ethnicity, the theory of primordialism (from the English primordial - original) was put forward.
The direction itself arose much earlier, it goes back to the already mentioned
ideas of the German romantics, his followers considered ethnos to be the original and
an unchanging association of people according to the principle of “blood”, i.e. possessing unchanging
signs. This approach was developed not only in German, but also in Russian
ethnology. But more on that later. In the 1960s. did not become widespread in the West
biological-racial, but a “cultural” form of primordialism. Yes, one of her
founders, K. Geertz argued that ethnic self-awareness (identity) refers
to “primordial” feelings and that these primordial feelings largely determine
people's behavior. These feelings, however, wrote K. Geertz, are not innate,
but arise in people as part of the socialization process and subsequently exist
as fundamental, sometimes – as unchangeable and determining people’s behavior –
members of the same ethnic group. The theory of primordialism has repeatedly been subjected to serious criticism, especially
from supporters of F. Barth. So D. Baker noted that feelings are changeable and
situationally determined and cannot generate the same behavior.
As a reaction to primordialism, ethnicity began to be understood as an element of ideology (attributing oneself to
this group or attributing someone to it by members of other groups). Ethnicity and ethnic groups became
also be considered in the context of the struggle for resources, power and privileges. .
Before characterizing other approaches to ethnicity (ethnic groups), it would be appropriate to recall the definition
given to an ethnic group by the German sociologist M. Weber. According to him, this
a group of people whose members have a subjective belief in a common
descent due to similarity in physical appearance or customs, or both
another together, or because of shared memory. What is emphasized here is
BELIEF in common origin. And in our time, many anthropologists believe that the main thing
the IDEA of community can be a differentiating feature for an ethnic group
origin and/or history.
In general, in the West, in contrast to primordialism and under the influence of Barth’s ideas, they received the greatest
dissemination of the constructivist approach to ethnicity. His supporters believed
ethnicity is a construct created by individuals or elites (powerful, intellectual,
cultural) with certain goals (struggle for power, resources, etc.). Many
also especially emphasize the role of ideology (primarily nationalisms) in the construction
ethnic communities. Followers of constructivism include English
scientist B. Anderson (his book bears the “talking” and expressive title “Imaginary
community" - fragments of it were posted on this site), E. Gellner (about him too
discussed on this site) and many others whose works are considered classics.
At the same time, some scientists are not satisfied with the extremes of both approaches. There are attempts to “reconcile” them:
attempts to present ethnic groups as “symbolic” communities based on
sets of symbols - again, belief in a common origin, a common past, a common
fate, etc. Many anthropologists especially emphasize that ethnic groups arose
relatively recently: they are not immemorial and unchangeable, but change under
the impact of specific situations, circumstances - economic, political and
etc.
In domestic science, the theory of ethnos has become especially popular, and, initially
in its extreme primordialist (biological) interpretation. It was developed by S.M. Shirokogorov, who
considered an ethnos as a biosocial organism, highlighting its main
characteristics of origin, as well as language, customs, way of life and tradition
[Shirokogorov, 1923. P. 13]. In many ways, his follower was L.N. Gumilev,
partly continuing this tradition, he considered ethnicity as a biological system,
especially highlighting passionarity as the highest stage of its development [Gumilyov, 1993]. About
Quite a lot has been written about this approach, but now few serious researchers
completely shares the views of L.N. Gumilyov, which can be considered an extreme expression
primordialist approach. This theory has its roots in the views of German
romantics on a nation or ethnic group from the position of “common blood and soil”, i.e.
some kind of consanguineous group. Hence L.N.’s intolerance. Gumilyov to
mixed marriages, the descendants of which he considered “chimerical formations”,
connecting the incompatible.
P.I. Kushner believed that ethnic groups differ from each other in a number of specific characteristics,
among which the scientist especially highlighted language, material culture (food, housing,
clothes, etc.), as well as ethnic identity [Kushner, 1951, pp. 8-9].
The studies of S.A. stand apart from the range of domestic studies. Arutyunov and N.N.
Cheboksarova. According to them, “...ethnic groups are spatially limited
“clumps” of specific cultural information, and interethnic contacts are an exchange
such information”, and information connections were considered as the basis for the existence
ethnicity [Arutyunov, Cheboksarov, 1972. P.23-26]. In a later work by S.A. Arutyunova
an entire chapter devoted to this problem bears a telling title: “Network
communications as the basis of ethnic existence" [Arutyunov, 2000]. Introduction to
ethnic groups as specific “clumps” of cultural information and
internal information relations very close to modern understanding any
systems as a kind of information field, or information structure. IN
further S.A. Arutyunov directly writes about this [Arutyunov, 2000. P. 31, 33].
A characteristic feature of the theory of ethnos is that its followers consider
ethnic groups as a universal category, i.e. people, according to it, belonged to
to some ethnic group/ethnic group, much less often to several ethnic groups. Supporters
this theory believed that ethnic groups were formed in one or another historical
period and transformed in accordance with changes in society. Influence of Marxist
theory was also expressed in attempts to correlate the development of ethnic groups with the five-member division
development of humanity - the conclusion that each socio-economic formation
corresponds to its type of ethnic group (tribe, slave-owning nation, capitalist
nationality, capitalist nation, socialist nation).
Subsequently, the theory of ethnos was developed by many Soviet researchers, including
features of Yu.V. Bromley, which
believed that ethnicity is “...a historically established
in a certain area
a stable collection of people who have relatively stable common
peculiarities of language, culture and psyche, as well as the consciousness of its unity and
differences from other similar formations (self-awareness), fixed in
self-designation" [Bromley, 1983. pp. 57-58]. Here we see the impact of ideas
primordialism - S. Shprokogorov, and M. Weber.
The theory of Yu.V. Bromley, like his supporters, was rightly criticized back in the Soviet period.
So, M.V. Kryukov has repeatedly and, in my opinion, quite rightly noted
the artificiality of this entire system of nationalities and nations [Kryukov, 1986. P.58-69].
EAT. Kolpakov, for example, points out that under Bromley’s definition of ethnos
many groups are suitable, not only ethnic ones [Kolpakov, 1995. P. 15].
Since the mid-1990s,
views close to constructivist. According to them, ethnic groups are not real
existing communities, but constructs created by the political elite or
scientists in practical purposes(for more details see: [Tishkov, 1989. P. 84; Tishkov,
2003. P. 114; Cheshko, 1994. P. 37]). So, according to V.A. Tishkova (one of the works
which bears the expressive title “Requiem for an Ethnicity”), Soviet scientists themselves
created a myth about the unconditionally objective reality of ethnic communities, as
certain archetypes [Tishkov, 1989. P.5], but the researcher himself considers ethnic groups artificial
constructions that exist only in the heads of ethnographers [Tishkov, 1992], or
the result of elite efforts to construct ethnicity [Tishkov, 2003. P.
118]. V.A. Tishkov defines an ethnic group as a group of people whose members have
common name and elements of culture, a myth (version) about a common origin and
common historical memory, associate themselves with a special territory and have a sense of
solidarity [Tishkov, 2003. P.60]. Again - the influence of the ideas of Max Weber expressed
almost a century ago...
Not all researchers share this point of view, which was formed not without the influence of ideas
M. Weber, for example, S.A. Arutyunov, who has repeatedly criticized it [Arutyunov,
1995. P.7]. Some researchers working in line with Soviet theory
ethnic group, consider ethnic groups to be an objective reality that exists independently of our
consciousness.
I would like to note that, despite the sharp criticism addressed to supporters of the theory of ethnos,
the views of constructivist researchers are not so radically different from
first glances. In the definitions of ethnic groups or ethnic groups given
listed by the scientists, we see a lot in common, although the attitude towards the defined
objects diverge. Moreover, wittingly or unwittingly, many researchers
repeat the definition of an ethnic group given by M. Weber. I'll repeat it again
times: an ethnic group is a group of people whose members have subjective
belief in a common origin due to similar physical appearance or customs,
or both together, or due to shared memory. Thus, the main provisions
M. Weber had a noticeable impact on different approaches to the study of ethnicity.
Moreover, his definition of an ethnic group was sometimes used almost verbatim
supporters of different paradigms.
In everyday speech, with the word populated we characterize a place or territory in which many people live, for example, a densely populated country, and with the word “population” we characterize the people living in a given place, on a given territory. In demography, the term “population” is close to the interpretation of this word in everyday language. The concept of “population” has long been associated with the concept of “territory”: population is understood, first of all, as a set of people living simultaneously in any territory. Thus, population can be considered the population of the entire Earth or part of the world, of any state or geographical area. From the point of view of demographic studies highest value has the population of a particular country.
The concept of the population of a state coincides in form with the concept of the people of the state, but in content it is different categories. One of the criteria for being classified as a particular people is residence in the corresponding area (or at least origin from that area), but a people is historically linked together not only by territory, but also by a common history, language, material and spiritual culture.
The globe is inhabited by many peoples ( ethnic groups), located at various stages of socio-economic and cultural development. Ethnic groups are historically established stable groups of people in certain territories who have a common language and common relatively stable cultural characteristics.
Historically, the earliest type of ethnic group is the tribe. In the process of the decomposition of the primitive communal system, a new form of ethnos was born - nationality. The first nations were formed during the slave era. The process of formation of nationalities developed especially widely during the period of feudalism. With the development of capitalist relations and the strengthening of economic and cultural ties, the disunity characteristic of nationalities is eliminated, and they cease to exist in the nation.
Nations are distinguished by a stable commonality of territory, economy and culture, common language, general features national character, clear ethnic identity.
But the three-member division of ethnic groups (tribe - nationality - nation) with the division of nations does not reflect the entire diversity of forms of ethnic communities existing on Earth. The picture is complicated by the transitional ethnic groups that exist in many countries (especially in countries of immigration) - immigrants, as well as their descendants, who have partially been assimilated by the main nation. They have not yet completely broken away from their people home country and did not fully integrate into the ethnic group of the country that adopted them (such groups include, for example, Germans, Swedes, Italians, etc. in the USA and Canada). Peculiar “border” groups are also formed in the zone of ethnic borders, where two or more peoples come into contact. A characteristic feature of all these groups is the presence of a double ethnic identity.
Among the processes of ethnic unification, consolidation, assimilation, interethnic integration and ethnogenetic mixing are distinguished. Sometimes ethnic development is complex, and these processes occur simultaneously.
Consolidation is the merging of several related ethnic groups (tribes, nationalities) into a larger nation or the further unification of an established nation as it develops socio-economically and culturally. In the first case we're talking about about interethnic consolidation, in the second - intraethnic. Interethnic consolidation accelerates in the case of close kinship between peoples and the similarity of their languages and culture. This process has happened or is happening in many countries around the world.
Within any people there are groups that retain some differences from the main ethnic group. Such groups, called ethnographic(nowadays they are often called subethnic groups), are isolated parts of a nationality or nation, the culture and way of life of which retain some characteristics (they have their own dialects or dialects, have specific material and spiritual culture, may differ religiously, etc.). Ethnographic groups are often formed when a nationality or nation assimilates a foreign group.
Groups that differ from the main part of the ethnic group in religious terms are identified. For example, within many of the consolidating nations of Asia and Africa.
There are also communities that embrace an entire group of peoples, the so-called meta-ethnic, or supra-ethnic, communities. They unite several peoples who have acquired elements of a common identity based on ethno-genetic proximity or long-term cultural interaction, and in a class society, on political ties. Such communities include, for example, Slavic, Roman, Mongolian and other peoples, close not only in languages, but also to a certain extent in culture and way of life.
Ethno-confessional meta-ethnic communities developed mainly in feudal era. For example, Hinduism had a huge influence on the entire social and cultural life of the multilingual peoples of South Asia.
Determining the national composition of the population in various countries of the world, as noted by S.I. Brook, the matter is complex: because in connection with the development of the processes of assimilation and consolidation in many countries there are quite large groups of the population with transitional forms of culture and national identity. In addition, it is necessary to establish what this or that population group represents: is it a people (ethnic group), part of a people (sub-ethnic group, ethnographic group), a group of peoples (meta-ethnic community) or some other community (political, racial, religious) etc.).
Population registration, as we have already noted, is carried out in most countries of the world. However, in many censuses (which in some countries have been carried out regularly since the end of the 18th - early XIX c.) the national composition of the population is either not determined at all, or is not determined reliably enough.
At first, when the concept of “nationality” had not yet been formulated, the tasks of censuses were reduced to recording the languages of the population. Before the First World War, the question of language was included in the census programs of a number of multinational countries in Europe (Belgium, Switzerland, Austria-Hungary), the USA, India, and Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). The question about the native language was also raised in the first Russian census in 1897. A direct question about ethnicity (“nationality”) was included only in 1920 in the program of the first Soviet population census.
How many peoples are there on Earth? Researchers usually count modern world three to four thousand different peoples - from the smallest tribes, the number of which is measured in hundreds, or even tens of people (Todas in India, Botocudas in Brazil, Alakalufs and Yamanas in Argentina, etc.), to the largest nations, numbering hundreds of millions Human.
According to the UN, by the end of the 20th century. the number of peoples, each of which exceeds 1 million people, amounted to over 350 (in 1961 there were 226 such peoples, in 1987 -310). These peoples account for more than 97% of the total population of the Earth.
As a result of uneven natural population growth in different states the world and among different peoples, their numbers vary significantly. For example, the number of such large peoples as Colombian, Mexican, Algerian, Peruvian, Moroccan, Azerbaijani and others doubled during the period from 1960 to 1990, and the Hindustani, Bengali, Brazilian increased by half. At the same time, the number of Germans, British, Russians and representatives of a number of other nations decreased.
The largest nations in the world, whose number exceeded 100 million people. are: Chinese (more than 1 billion people), Hindustanis (India), Bengalis (India, Bangladesh), Americans, Brazilians, Russians, Japanese, Punjabis (Pakistan, India), Biharis (India). Mexicans, Javanese (Indonesia), and Telugus (India) are also close to this threshold in numbers.
It is also important to highlight the classification of peoples by language. All languages are united into language families, which are divided into language groups. The largest of them is Indo-European, the languages of which are spoken by more than 150 peoples of Europe, Asia, America, Australia, constituting 1/3 of the total population of the Earth.
The majority of peoples inhabiting the globe live compactly. An ethnically mixed population is characteristic of areas located along ethnic boundaries. A particularly diverse national composition is observed in big cities migrant-type countries, in states with increased immigration.
Based on the diversity of their ethnic composition, the countries of the world can be divided into three groups: multinational states (USA, Russia, Nigeria, Indonesia, etc.); binational (Belgium, Cyprus, Iran, Turkey, etc.); single-national (Germany, Japan, Sweden, Norway, Austria, Greece, Iceland, Portugal, etc.).
The main principles of state national policy in the Russian Federation are:
equality of human rights and freedoms regardless of his nationality, language, religion, affiliation social groups and public associations;
equality of peoples;
preservation of the historically established state unity of the Russian Federation;
equality of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in relations among themselves and with federal government bodies;
guarantee of the rights of indigenous small and dispersed peoples in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, principles and norms international law, recognized by the Russian Federation;
the right of every citizen to determine and indicate his nationality without any external coercion;
promoting the development of national cultures and languages of the peoples of the Russian Federation;
prohibition of any forms of restriction of the rights of citizens based on national, linguistic, social and religious affiliation;
timely and peaceful resolution of contradictions and conflicts through the development and implementation of conciliation procedures;
prohibition of public associations and organizations, as well as propaganda and agitation aimed at undermining the security of the state and inciting national and religious hatred;
protection of the rights and interests of citizens of the Russian Federation outside its borders in accordance with international law;
support for compatriots living in foreign countries in preserving and developing their native language, culture and national traditions, strengthening their ties with their homeland.
2. DEMOGRAPHIC PROBLEMS OF THE NORTH CAUCASUS REGION
Among the regions of Russia, the North Caucasus stands out both in absolute size and in the proportion of population within the Russian Federation. As of 01/01/1998 The region has 17.7 million inhabitants, or slightly more than 12% of the Russian population. In terms of absolute number of inhabitants, it is second only to the Ural (20.4 million people) and Central (29.7 million people) regions (Table 1).
Table 1
Current population of the Russian Federation by section economic regions as of January 1, 199K, million people.
|
Russian Federation |
147,4 |
|
Northern region |
5.8 |
|
North-Western region |
80,0 |
|
central District |
29,7 |
|
In olgo-Vyat k i i ra i o 11 |
8,4 |
|
Central Chernozem region |
7,8 |
|
Povolzhsky district |
16,9 |
|
North Caucasus region |
17,7 |
|
Ural region |
20,4 |
|
West Siberian region |
15,1 |
|
East Siberian region |
9,1 |
|
Far Eastern region |
The North Caucasus is the only large region in the Russian Federation where the total number of inhabitants continues to grow. Among other regions, only the Volga region continued to “increase” the number of inhabitants, but only until 1995, and then natural losses began to exceed natural and mechanical growth in the Volga region.
Inside North Caucasus region population growth in the first half of the 1990s. took place in almost all subjects of the region, but with the beginning of the second half, the overall growth decreased sharply and for 1995-1998. amounted to only 0.2%.
The absolute number of residents in the region decreased especially (by almost 20%). Chechen Republic for reasons related not to the fall in the birth rate, but to the flight of residents in connection with the military operations of 1995-1996, the “squeezing out” of the Russian-speaking population as a result of the aggravation of interethnic relations, the deterioration of the crime situation and the growth of separatist tendencies.
table 2
Change in the current population of SCER for 1991-1998, thousand people.
|
Theoretical unit |
1991 |
1992 |
1993 |
1994 |
1998 |
|
North Caucasus region, total |
17030 |
17392 |
17670 |
17701 |
17707 |
|
Republic of Adygea |
437 |
447 |
451 |
450 |
450 |
|
The Republic of Dagestan |
1854 |
1925 |
1997 |
2074 |
2095 |
|
The Republic of Ingushetia |
280 |
309 |
313 |
||
|
Chechen Republic |
1 309 |
1307 |
974 |
K 13 |
797 |
|
Kabardino-Balkarian Republic |
777 |
788 |
790 |
790 |
792 |
|
Karachay-Cherkess Republic |
427 |
434 |
436 |
436 |
436 |
|
Republic of North Ossetia Alania |
643 |
651 |
659 |
665 |
669 |
|
Krasnodar region |
4738 |
4879 |
5004 |
5070 |
5075 |
|
Stavropol speck |
2499 |
2580 |
2650 |
2674 |
2682 |
|
Rostov region |
4348 |
4383 |
4429 |
4420 |
4404 |
In 1999, and due to the outbreak of new military operations in Chechnya, the flow of refugees to the Stavropol and Krasnodar Territories sharply increased, which contributed to the growth in the number of their residents and the result of intraregional redistribution of the population (but not its absolute growth in the North Caucasus.
The republics of Adygea, Karachay-Cherkess and Kabardino-Balkaria have entered a period of stabilization of population reproduction, where the transition to modern and rational type reproduction and the conditions arose for a new demographic revolution - the revolution of post-industrial society.
There are also some peculiarities in the distribution of the region’s population between urban and rural areas:
Slow growth of the urban population compared to other regions of the country and Russia as a whole;
Ruralization - a decrease in the share of the urban population by the end of the 1990s. compared to the late 1980s. (56.2 and 56.5% respectively).
A large number of small urban settlements with weakly expressed urban functions (“undivided unity of city and countryside”) both in terms of the functions performed, reflected in the employment structure of the population, and in relation to the level of amenities, provision of urban forms of services, and quality of life.
Ruralization of the population to a certain extent affected all regions of the country, although to a lesser extent than in the North Caucasus. In general, in Russia there is some unstable balance in the distribution of urban and rural population in the 1990s
Urbanization processes have unevenly affected individual republics, territories and regions of the North Caucasus.
Thus. In four subjects of the region (Karachay-Cherkess Republic, Republic of Dagestan, Chechen, Ingush) the urban population is less than half of the total number of residents. North Ossetia-Llania has the highest level of urbanization. Rostov region and Kabardino-Balkaria. The maximum decrease in the share of urban residents in the total population occurs in the Chechen Republic, Rostov region and Kabardino-Balkaria. Both Adygea and Karachay-Cherkessia lost urban residents, although to a lesser extent than the three named subjects of the region. IN Krasnodar region and the Republic of North Ossetia-Alaiya specific gravity urban population stabilized at the level of 1986, and by the Stavropol Territory even increased slightly, which is primarily due to migration processes, which ensured a significant mechanical increase in urban residents.
The natural movement of the population in the region has the same trends as Russia as a whole. Differences are observed within the region itself: in the Rostov region. In the Krasnodar and Stavropol territories, in the Republic of Adygea, the birth rate is lower than the regional average, and in the Rostov region it is even lower than the average for the Russian Federation. Moreover, the decline in the birth rate in the region began much earlier than in Russia as a whole.
However, there are also leaders in the region, but in size general coefficient born) and - Dagestan and Ingushetia - those only within the region, but throughout Russia. Third place belongs to the Republic of Tuva, which, to put it in sporting language, is far ahead (15.8 ppm) from the first two. In the region, third place is occupied by Kabardino-Balkaria (sixth in the Russian Federation).
For the remaining subjects of the North Caucasus region, the main reason for the decline in the level of urbanization is associated with the departure of some city dwellers to the countryside, where it is easier to solve problems.
The decline in the overall fertility rate, as in Russia as a whole, in the region began in the late 1950s and early 1960s, although it proceeded more smoothly and from equal initial levels. Therefore, only in two subjects of the region - the Krasnodar Territory and the Rostov Region - by the beginning of the 1990s. The demographic transition from modern to post-industrial population reproduction has ended. The Stavropol Territory is approaching them today. The Republics of Adygea and Karachay-Cherkess, in which either the majority or a significant proportion are Slavic populations, are more affected by depopulation processes than others.
The overall mortality rate in the region, with the exception of Dagestan and Ingushetia, either approaches the overall fertility rate or significantly exceeds it. This figure looks especially dramatic in the Rostov region. Krasnodar region. The Republic of Adygea and partly in the Republic of Northern Ostia-Alapnya and the Stavropol Territory. In the first two, mortality rates are higher than the Russian average, in the last two they are approaching it. Almost only two of the subjects of the SCER have indicators of the traditional type of mortality (Dagestan and Ingushetia); in the rest, the demographic transition to a new type of population reproduction has already been completed.
It should be noted that the increase in the overall mortality rate occurs without such sharp changes as in the birth rate. In general for the region for 1985-1998. it increased by 14%, while the birth rate over the same period of time decreased by 1.7 times! Consequently, the main reason for the depopulation of the 1990s. - a rapid decline in the birth rate and an increase in the death rate only “complements” it. The wave-like nature of both coefficients reflects the “waves” of previous reproduction rates (the difference in the number of individuals entering the critical age).
Of particular concern are the high rates of infant mortality and mortality of the population of working age, especially men.
On average for the region in 1997, all subjects of the SCER had a very high infant mortality rate (except Krasnodar region and Kabardino-Balkaria, above the average for the Russian Federation as a whole). Noteworthy is the spasmodic nature of changes in this indicator. It can hardly be explained by the level of medical care for the population, especially prenatal and postnatal care for mothers and infants. Apparently, the reasons lie in another area. Although the state of medical care cannot be discounted. In any case, infant mortality is 2.0-2.5 times higher than in industrialized countries of the world and 1/3 higher than in St. Petersburg (11.00) and Leningrad region (11,1).
The second problem of the 1980-1990s. - high mortality rate of the population of working age, and the mortality rate of men is 3-4 times higher than that of women.
The natural population growth of the region, as well as Russia as a whole, had a negative balance in 1996 (0.2%), but already in next year it turned out to be positive, although with a slight excess of birth rates over deaths (0.3%). In a territorial context, the total positive outcome deeply differentiated: in the Krasnodar Territory there has been an increase in absolute population losses since 1990, in the Rostov Region - since 1991, in the Stavropol Territory and the Republic of Adygea - since 1992.
By 1997 a stable negative total fertility rate affected half of the regions of the region, concentrating 3/4 of its inhabitants. In this regard, we can say with confidence that with a significant increase in business activity, especially material production the most economically developed subjects of the region, the problem of labor shortage will arise. Migration will become the main source of replenishment of such resources. However, today it already provides not only compensation for natural decline, but also general population growth. And since the overwhelming number of Russian regions will experience a shortage of labor resources, the import of labor will become inevitable. In this regard, today the most important goal demographic policy is the creation of a system of measures that would help reduce the overall mortality rate, primarily of infants and men of working age; The mortality rate of women at this age deviates little from the rate of normal generation extinction and can be reduced with a corresponding increase in the level of medical care).
The entire population policy in the country also requires improvement: improving the health of the family, choosing new values of moral and aesthetic education, etc.
Population migrations in the region were determined by the nature of population reproduction and the level of economic development of each subject. Thus, for the Krasnodar and Stavropol Territories, the Republic of Adygea, migration growth since the 1960s. up to this day. was and remains the most important source of population growth. In the Chechen, Ingush and Dagestan Republics, after the return of deported peoples, seasonal migration of labor resources (the so-called otkhodnichestvo) to all regions of the former Soviet Union, which often ended with relocation to labor-poor areas.
In the 1990s. Among the regions of the Russian Federation that lost their residents during the migration exchange, the following stood out: Northern (especially Karelia and Nenets autonomous region). Republic of Kalmykia in Volga region, East Siberian region with the exception of the Krasnoyarsk Territory (especially the national autonomous okrugs - Taimyr, Evenki and Chita regions) and the Far Eastern region, primarily the Sakhalin, Magadan, Kamchatka regions. Chukotka Autonomous Okrug. The remaining regions, including the North Caucasus (with the exception of the Chechen and Dagestan Republics), have a positive migration growth rate. Kabardino-Balkaria and Karachay-Cherkessia should also be included here.
Thus, areas of intense migration outflow of the population have clearly emerged within the country. On the one hand, these are areas with extreme natural, climatic and socio-economic conditions, on the other, areas of interethnic conflicts and outright separatism.
Within the North Caucasus region, like natural growth, mechanical growth divides the subjects into two unequal parts. Subjects whose migration growth rate is positive generally have a negative natural movement coefficient and, conversely, a positive balance of natural growth is accompanied by negative indicator mechanical. The exception is Ingushetia, where both indicators are positive. There are no coincidences in the combination of indicators in both groups.
Only three subjects had a constantly positive coefficient of migration movement of the population: Krasnodar and Stavropol territories and Rostov region. Moreover, the balance of migration growth of the latter is an order of magnitude smaller than the balance of the first two.
According to the absolute number of migrants in 1997. The Stavropol Territory came in first place - 61 thousand people, or 5.1% of the all-Russian figure. Then Ingushetia (55 thousand people). Krasnodar Territory (44.3 thousand people) and Rostov Region (38.2 thousand people) However, according to S.V. Ryazantsev, these data reflect no more than 35-45% of the total number of actually arriving migrants.
The composition of migrants arriving in the North Caucasus from other regions of the country and neighboring countries is dominated by refugees and internally displaced persons. Their massive arrival in the three main centers of gravity in the region (Krasnodar and Stavropol territories, Rostov region) began in the second half of the 1980s. in connection with a number of tragic events (Spitak earthquake. Karabakh, Sumgait, South Ossetian, Abkhazian, Ossetian-Ingush, Chechen, Chechen-Dagestan conflicts both in the former Soviet republics and intra-regional).
Migrants of this period consisted mainly of people who had lost housing, property, work, and pensions in their places of former residence, fleeing persecution and probable physical destruction. Without significant material assistance from local and all-Russian migration services, they could become an explosive social burden. Their placement, provision of work, housing, was extremely important and at the same time, in the conditions of the general collapse of the economy, extremely difficult. However, with this task local authorities managed, although not without some difficulties.
Migrants from the northern territories had a slightly different social status. Eastern Siberia and the Far East. These are either relatively financially secure migrants who were forced to leave as a result of a reduction in production volumes or the liquidation of mining enterprises, or young people who left the North due to liquidation tions of a number of benefits, or pensioners who are in extreme natural conditions was contraindicated for health reasons. All these categories of migrants made the decision to migrate either based on their own financial capabilities, or with the support of the relevant ministries (such as the miners of the Vorkuta coal mines), which took upon themselves the provision of housing for the migrants. Finally, a special category of migrants consisted of demobilized military personnel of the Western Group of Forces stationed in the Warsaw Pact countries and especially Germany. All of them were provided with housing built with funds from the Federal Republic of Germany, which was more interested than others in the liquidation of military bases former USSR within Central and Eastern Europe.
Let's consider the population structure of the North Caucasus region. In the North Caucasus in 1989, persons aged 65 years and older accounted for 12.7% of the total number of permanent residents. At the same time, in the Krasnodar Territory their share reached the level of modern Japan (14.5%), in the Stavropol Territory - 13.3%, in the Rostov Region - 13.2%. By the beginning of 1998 The situation has changed little due to the massive influx of migrants and a decrease in the average life expectancy of the population.
There are problems and regions with traditional or transitional types of population reproduction. In the Russian Federation, despite the completion of the demographic transition from the traditional to the industrial (rational) type of reproduction, some subjects have retained the features of the traditional in the modern socio-economic situation. Characteristic feature Their population structure by age and gender is a significant proportion of people of working age with a relatively low mortality rate. As a result, some regions have a reduced proportion of people of retirement age (for example, the Far Eastern region - 14.1% of all residents, the East Siberian region - 16.1%, the Western region - 17.3%). Autonomous formations have a relatively high proportion of the young population (Yamalo-Nenets, Khanty-Mansiysk, Taimyr, Koryak, Chukotka Autonomous Okrugs. Republics of Tuva and Sakha-Yakutia, Magadan Region), where people of retirement age make up 5-10% of the total population residents. This category of the population is somewhat higher (from 10.2 to 15%) in the Nenets Autonomous Okrug, the Komi Republics, and Ingushetia. Dagestan. Chechen, Buryatia and Sakhalin region. Tyumen, Amur.
The nature of the “youth” of their inhabitants is somewhat different. In Ingushetia, the Chechen Republic, Dagestan, and partly Buryatia, the main factor of rejuvenation is high level mortality in all age groups population and short life expectancy as a result of extreme socio-economic and climatic conditions.
Problems associated with the “young” population of the region are essentially characteristic of only two republics: Dagestan and Ingushetia, but in the near future they will be compensated by the economic revival of the country and the urgent need for young labor resources in labor-scarce areas. In the meantime, the high proportion of people of working age with limited economic opportunities makes it difficult to overcome the depressive trends in the economic development of these republics.
The problem of the age structure of the population of working age is somewhat different in the Krasnodar and Stavropol territories. Rostov region, republics of Adygea and North Ossetia-Llania. Concern is caused by the sharp reduction in the number of children aged 0-7 years, which by 2001 threatens a new wave of reduction in the working-age population. For example, in the Rostov region, as of January 1, 1998, the number of children aged 0-7 years was 131.7 thousand (37.5%) less than in 1989. Although in general, according to the SCER, from 1989 to 1995, the total number of people of working age increased by 58 thousand people. due to an increase in the number of children aged 8-15 years. Consequently, a particularly sharp decline in the birth rate has occurred since the early 1990s, more precisely since 1992.
Thus, we list the following demographic problems of the North Caucasus economic region, which includes the Krasnodar Territory:
DEMOGRAPHIC POLICY IN RUSSIA: TASKS AND THEIR IMPLEMENTATION
ESSENCE, CONCEPT AND TYPES OF DEMOGRAPHIC FORECASTING
Introduction
2. The concept of “ethnicity” in foreign and domestic ethnopsychology
3. Problems of ethnic identity
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
The relevance of the study is determined by two the most important aspects, characteristic of modern social development.
Firstly, this is the unprecedented role played by the concepts of ethnicity and nation in modern society.
These two concepts are increasingly becoming a system-forming factor of society on a regional, national and global scale.
They are the determining condition for the realization of the creative potential of the individual and society, a form of affirmation of the identity of the people and the basis for the spiritual health of the nation, a humanistic guideline and criterion for the development of society and the individual.
Secondly, there is an ever-increasing interest in the concepts of nation and ethnicity, in their existence and interaction.
All this poses difficult tasks of understanding what is happening and forming a conceptual apparatus. It is necessary to substantiate the main priorities that are most important in our research, one of the conditions of which is the relationship between the concepts of “nation” and “ethnic group” in the typology of ethnopsychology.
The need to study this set of issues is also dictated by modern practical problems of coexistence and mutual determination various types concepts. Any nation and ethnic group appears as a set of special methods and forms of human activity.
A nation is a complex phenomenon. It contains various elements united by the stamp of national identity. It developed during the long cultural development of the people, as a result of the work cultural values, as a result of his aesthetic mastery of reality. The unity and plurality of cultures of the peoples of the world - this is the objective dialectic of the cultural progress of mankind.
The relevance of the research topic also lies in the fact that the analysis of the typology of concepts implies an appeal to those universal determinants of development that are always assumed at its basis, reflection on which makes it possible to understand it. The concept of “ethnicity” is much deeper than “nation” and carries ideological content. “Ethnicity is a social community that is characterized by specific cultural models that determine the nature of human activity in the world, and which functions in accordance with special patterns aimed at maintaining a unique correlation of cultural models within society for a long time, including periods of major socio-cultural changes." In this meaning of SV. Lurie considers ethnological culture as a structure that holds a given society together and protects it from collapse. Ethnicity has three levels of organizations - family, groups, and subethnic groups. On the basis of ethnic groups, the phenomenon of national culture is formed, which persists even if the ethnic group dies or dissolves among other ethnic groups. The object of the study is the concepts of “nation” and “ethnicity” in the context of historical typology.
The subject of the study is the relationship between the concepts of “national” and “ethnic” as a construct of the typology construction model.
The purpose of the study is to identify the characteristics and conditions of modern stage research of the concepts of “nation” and “ethnicity”.
The set goal dictates the need to solve the following tasks:
1) define the concept of “nation”;
2) define the concept of “ethnicity”;
3) consider national exclusivity and ethnic roots;
4) reveal the relationship between “national” and “ethnic” in a single type of culture
1. The concept of “nation” in foreign and domestic ethnopsychology
Often an equal sign is placed between the concept of “nation” and the concepts of “people” and “ethnic group”. In fact, the French are a people, an ethnic group, and they are also a nation. This naturally leads to the conclusion: an ethnic community (people) and a nation are one and the same thing. In our literature, they usually added to this that a nation is not just an ethnic group, but its highest form, which replaced a nationality.
In reality, ethnicity and nation are phenomena belonging to different social spheres. The essence of an ethnic community is most clearly manifested in ethnic processes: ethnic assimilation, ethnic fusion, ethnic inclusion and ethnic splitting. They occur spontaneously and largely independent of the consciousness and will of people.
The essence of a nation is most clearly expressed in national movements, which are the activities of masses of people aimed at achieving certain goals, most often political. Each such movement has a specific program. National movements Unlike ethnic processes belong to the political sphere. They are one of the types political movements. The nation in these movements acts as a certain social, primarily political, force that must be reckoned with.
Ethnic communities as more or less independent education began to arise with the transition from primitive society to class society. The formation of nations is associated with the emergence, first, of the preconditions of capitalism, and then of capitalism itself. Capitalism arose spontaneously in only one area globe- in Western Europe. It is she who gives us classic examples the birth and development of nations.
In the era preceding the shifts that led to capitalism, in each of the territories on which capitalist geosocial organisms subsequently developed, the bulk of the population belonged to one ethnic community or several related ethnic communities, which in our historical and ethnological literature are most often called nationalities. In turn, these ethnic groups were divided into sub-ethnic groups, and the latter were often divided into sub-sub-ethnic groups or ethnographic groups. This kind of ethnic picture had its roots in the structure of society, which was characterized by economic and political fragmentation, usually called feudal.
A turning point in development feudal society occurred with the emergence of cities as centers of industry and trade. Development commodity-money relations gradually led to the consolidation of previously isolated regions into a single economic whole, which necessarily presupposed political centralization. United in economically the sociohistorical organism was formed simultaneously as a single centralized state.
The emergence of capitalist ties, the transformation of the market covering the entire country into a capitalist one determined the further increase in the economic and political unity of the sociohistorical organism. Along with the emergence of such an economically unified sociohistorical organism, its objective interests arose, which could not but be the interests of the bulk of the people who were part of it.
As a result of this, a single sociohistorical organism, which at the same time was and centralized state, appeared in the eyes of its members as their common fatherland, and they, all taken together, became a social force that defended the interests of this fatherland, i.e. nation. A nation is a collection of people who have one common fatherland.
The fatherland in the sense that this word acquired with the transition from the Middle Ages to modern times is (we are, of course, talking about the ideal case, the norm, and not always possible and even inevitable deviations from it) a more or less large sociohistorical organism that has its foundation was initially simply market, and then market-capitalist relations. In an ideal case, belonging to a nation coincides with belonging to such a sociohistorical organism. This is precisely what gave rise to the identification of the nation with a socio-historical organism. As a result, the following characteristics began to be attributed to the nation (“common territory”, “common economic life"), which in reality characterize the capitalist geosocial organism.
The identification of the nation and the geosocial organism was facilitated by the fact that when the capitalist geosocior arose, the need arose to designate its objective interests. The easiest way, of course, would be to call them state, but this was prevented by the ambiguity of the term “state”. The interests of the state could be understood as the interests of not only the sociohistorical organism, but also the state apparatus, primarily the ruling elite, which may not coincide with the sociological ones. In this regard, the term "national interests" was preferable. The interests of the nation completely coincided with the interests of the sociohistorical organism.
This is the reason for the widespread use in literature of the word “nation” to designate a sociohistorical organism. This was observed already in the 18th century. The title of the main work of the great economist A. Smith (1723-1790), published in 1776, is usually translated into Russian as “An Inquiry into the Causes and Nature of the Wealth of Nations,” which is incorrect, because the original does not use the word “peoples”, and “nations”. And by nations, A. Smith did not mean nations at all, but sociohistorical organisms based on market relations.
But even before A. Smith, the word “nation” was used to designate socio-historical organisms, of any type, by such outstanding thinkers as G. Vico (1668-1744) in his work “Foundations of a new science of the general nature of nations” (1725) and A. Ferguson (1723-1816) in An Essay on the History of Civil Society (1767). This tradition has been preserved to this day. Suffice it to recall such names as “League of Nations” and “United Nations”.
Thus, the word “nation” also has multiple meanings. A nation is not only a nation itself, but a sociohistorical organism. In addition, this word in English-language literature is often used in the same senses as the word “people”, with the exception of only one meaning: it is never used to designate the lower social classes.
Among ethnologists there is no unity in the approach to the definition of ethnos and ethnicity. In this regard, several of the most popular theories and concepts are highlighted. Thus, the Soviet ethnographic school worked in line with primordialism, but today the highest administrative post in official ethnology in Russia is occupied by constructivist supporter V. A. Tishkov.
Primordialism
This approach assumes that a person’s ethnicity is an objective fact that has its basis in nature or society. Therefore, ethnicity cannot be created artificially or imposed. Ethnicity is a community with really existing, registered characteristics. You can point out the characteristics by which an individual belongs to a given ethnic group, and by which one ethnic group differs from another.
"Evolutionary-historical direction." Proponents of this trend view ethnic groups as social communities that arose as a result of the historical process.
Dualistic theory of ethnicity
This concept was developed by employees of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences (now) headed by Yu. V. Bromley. This concept presupposes the existence of ethnic groups in 2 senses:
Sociobiological direction
This direction assumes the existence of ethnicity due to the biological essence of man. Ethnicity is primordial, that is, initially characteristic of people.
Pierre van den Berghe's theory
Pierre L. van den Berghe transferred certain provisions of ethology and zoopsychology to human behavior, that is, he assumed that many phenomena of social life are determined by the biological side of human nature.
Ethnicity, according to P. van den Berghe, is an “extended kinship group.”
Van den Berghe explains the existence of ethnic communities by a person’s genetic predisposition to kin selection (nepotism). Its essence lies in the fact that altruistic behavior (the ability to sacrifice oneself) reduces the chances of a given individual to pass on its genes to the next generation, but at the same time increases the possibility of its genes being passed on by blood relatives (indirect gene transfer). By helping relatives survive and pass on their genes to the next generation, the individual thereby contributes to the reproduction of his own gene pool. Since this type of behavior makes the group evolutionarily more stable than similar other groups in which altruistic behavior is absent, the “altruism genes” are maintained by natural selection.
Passionary theory of ethnos (Gumilyov’s theory)
In it ethnos- a group of people that naturally formed on the basis of an original behavioral stereotype, existing as a systemic integrity (structure), opposing itself to all other groups, based on a sense of complementarity and forming an ethnic tradition common to all its representatives.
An ethnos is one of the types of ethnic systems, it is always part of superethnoses, and consists of subethnoses, convicts and consortia.
Elitist instrumentalism
This direction focuses on the role of elites in the mobilization of ethnic feelings.
Economic instrumentalism
This direction explains interethnic tensions and conflicts in terms of economic inequality among members of different ethnic groups.
Ethnogenesis
The basic conditions for the emergence of an ethnos - common territory and language - subsequently act as its main features. At the same time, an ethnos can be formed from multilingual elements, formed and consolidated in different territories in the process of migration (gypsies, etc.). In conditions of early long-distance migrations " homo sapiens“from Africa and modern globalization, ethnic groups as cultural and linguistic communities that move freely throughout the planet are becoming increasingly important.
Additional conditions for the formation of an ethnic community can be a common religion, the proximity of the components of an ethnic group in racially or the presence of significant mestizo (transitional) groups.
In the course of ethnogenesis, under the influence of the characteristics of economic activity in certain natural conditions and other reasons, features of material and spiritual culture, everyday life, and group psychological characteristics specific to a given ethnic group are formed. Members of an ethnos develop a common self-awareness, in which the idea of their common origin occupies a prominent place. External manifestation This self-awareness is the presence of a common self-name - ethnonym.
The formed ethnic community acts as a social organism, self-reproducing through predominantly ethnically homogeneous marriages and the transfer of language, culture, traditions, ethnic orientation, etc. to the new generation.
Anthropological classification. Ethnicity and race
The basis of anthropological classification is the principle of dividing ethnic groups into races. This classification reflects the biological, genetic and, ultimately, historical kinship between ethnic groups.
Science recognizes the discrepancy between the racial and ethnic divisions of humanity: members of one ethnic group can belong to both the same and different races (racial types), and, conversely, representatives of the same race (racial type) can belong to different ethnic groups, etc.
A fairly common misconception is expressed in the confusion of the concepts of “ethnicity” and “race”, and as a result, erroneous concepts are used, for example, such as “Russian race”.
Ethnicity and religion
Ethnicity and culture
Culture - it is difficult and, perhaps, even impossible to give a universal, comprehensive definition for this concept. The same can be said about " ethnic culture”, since it manifests itself and is realized in different ways and ways, so it can be understood and interpreted in different ways.
However, some researchers clearly formulate the differences between a nation and an ethnos, pointing to the different nature of the origin of the concepts of “ethnicity” and “nation”. Thus, in their opinion, an ethnos is characterized by supra-individuality and stability, repeatability of cultural patterns. In contrast, for a nation, the determining factor becomes the process of its own awareness based on the synthesis of traditional and new elements, and the actual ethnic identification criteria (language, way of life, etc.) of belonging fade into the background. For a nation, those aspects that ensure supra-ethnicity, the synthesis of ethnic, interethnic and other ethnic components (political, religious, etc.) come to the fore.
Ethnicity and statehood
Ethnic groups are subject to changes in the course of ethnic processes - consolidation, assimilation, etc. For a more sustainable existence, an ethnic group strives to create its own socio-territorial organization (state). Modern history knows many examples of how various ethnic groups, despite their large numbers, were unable to solve the problem of socio-territorial organization. These include the ethnic groups of Jews, Palestinian Arabs, Kurds, divided between Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey. Other examples of successful or unsuccessful ethnic expansion are the expansion of the Russian Empire, the Arab conquests in North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula, the Tatar-Mongol invasion, and the Spanish colonization of South and Central America.
Ethnic identity
Ethnic identity is an integral part of a person’s social identity, awareness of one’s belonging to a certain ethnic community. In its structure, two main components are usually distinguished - cognitive (knowledge, ideas about the characteristics of one’s own group and awareness of oneself as a member of it based on certain characteristics) and affective (assessment of the qualities of one’s own group, attitude towards membership in it, the significance of this membership).
One of the first to study the development of a child's awareness of belonging to a national group was the Swiss scientist J. Piaget. In a 1951 study, he identified three stages in the development of ethnic characteristics:
1) at 6-7 years old, the child acquires the first fragmentary knowledge about his ethnicity;
2) at 8-9 years old, the child already clearly identifies himself with his ethnic group, based on the nationality of his parents, place of residence, and native language;
3) in early adolescence (10-11 years old), ethnic identity is fully formed; the child notes the uniqueness of history and the specifics of traditional everyday culture as the characteristics of different peoples.
External circumstances can force a person of any age to rethink their ethnic identity, as happened with a resident of Minsk, a Catholic, born in the Brest region bordering Poland. He “was listed as a Pole and considered himself a Pole. At the age of 35 I went to Poland. There he became convinced that his religion united him with the Poles, but otherwise he was Belarusian. From that time on, he realized himself as a Belarusian” (Klimchuk, 1990, p. 95).
The formation of ethnic identity is often a rather painful process. For example, a boy whose parents moved to Moscow from Uzbekistan before his birth speaks Russian at home and at school; however, at school, due to his Asian name and dark skin color, he receives an offensive nickname. Later, having reflected on this situation, to the question “What is your nationality?” he may answer “Uzbek”, but maybe not. The son of an American and a Japanese woman may turn out to be an outcast both in Japan, where he will be teased as “long-nosed” and “butter-eater,” and in the United States. At the same time, a child who grew up in Moscow, whose parents identify themselves as Belarusians, most likely will not have such problems at all.
The following dimensions of ethnic identity are distinguished:
see also
- Ethnopolitics
- Ethno-territorial conflict
Notes
Literature
- Kara-Murza S. G. “Theory and practice of constructing nations”
- Shirokogorov S. M. “Ethnicity. Study of the basic principles of change in ethnic and ethnographic phenomena"
- Gulyaikhin V. N. Ethno-collective unconscious as a determinant of socio-political development // Bulletin of Volgograd State University. Episode 7: Philosophy. Sociology and social technologies. 2007. No. 6. P. 76-79.
- Sadokhin A. P., Grushevitskaya T. G. Ethnology: Textbook for students. higher textbook establishments. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Publishing center "Academy", 2003. - P. 320. -
Who led the 1945 victory parade
Kisa and Osya were here Yulia Slapoguzova, journalist, writer
Express x from the equation. Equations online. Things to Remember When Solving Linear Equations