Search Results

Examines and compares three constitutional mechanisms for the political recognition of ethnic minorities and their potential to ameliorate or aggravate ethnic tensions—communal representation through the electoral process (with examples from Cyprus, India, Bosnia‐Herzegovina, and Fiji), territorial autonomy through asymmetric federalism, and cultural autonomy.

This chapter evaluates the competing models or understandings of culture currently available to social theory using the concept of cultural autonomy. It highlights the fundamental flaws that characterize most of these models and proposes an alternative approach that can be broadly understood as a kind of structural hermeneutics. It explains that structuralism and hermeneutics can be made into fine bedfellows because the former offers possibilities for general theory construction, prediction, and assertions of the autonomy of culture while the latter allows analysis to capture the texture and temper of social life.

Three institutional forms of non-territorial autonomy (NTA) are presented as possible mechanisms of governance: personal autonomy, functional autonomy, and national cultural autonomy. National cultural autonomy is singled out for a more detailed study against the backdrop of Bauer and Renner’s theories, looking particularly at Estonia, Finland, and Serbia. Because territorial autonomy is clearly more common as a form of organization, different non-territorial forms of autonomy have remained in the sidelines. The need to tailor-make each solution means that setting up non-territorial forms of autonomy is probably perceived as difficult, complex, and arduous. Therefore, and somewhat unjustifiably, the category of NTA is commonly populated by examples of national cultural autonomy. If NTA is set up, such institutions should not become vehicles of symbolism and of façade participation, but be tasked with realistic functions and the necessary public power for the promotion of, inter alia, the linguistic rights of minorities.

Estonia has implemented the principles of national cultural autonomy in the interwar period and after 1991, that is, when its independence was regained. Cultural autonomy laws of 1925 and 1993 are different, especially as regards control over public education in minority languages. Cultural autonomies in pre-war Estonia led to or preserved self-segregation of Jewish and German minorities. Nowadays the autonomy concept seems to belong to the domain of symbolic rather than instrumental policies in Estonia. Cultural autonomy as a specific self-organization of minorities fits in with the idea of nation-state based on genuine ethnic nationalism. Autonomies have been founded by local Swedes and Ingrian Finns but not Russians. The creation of a single representative body for a heterogeneous minority group is hardly feasible. Furthermore, there are fears that cultural autonomy might be used for mobilization in Estonia of the largest Russian minority group.

This chapter explores the issue of cultural autonomy as it relates to our portrayals of religion. First, it looks at the recent move toward a more robust view of religion and culture. Then it considers at some of the critiques of the idea of cultural autonomy that have taken place over the last few decades. Finally, it reviews some alternatives for understanding the causal impact of religious culture.

During the ‘long’ 18th century, the black presence in the British Empire assumed formidable proportions. Between 1680 and 1810, the Empire’s black population rose elevenfold. Although most Africans arrived in the Empire as slaves, their experiences were not uniform. The black world in the Empire is described in this chapter. A survey of the black population at the beginning, middle, and end of the long 18th century highlights the changing distribution of blacks throughout the Empire. The 18th-century black world was multi-faceted. There was a majority experience — located on plantations— where in many ways slaves suffered a similar fate. The black experience varied most fundamentally depending on the nature of population growth, the type of employment, the size of the slave-holding unit, the level of material well-being, the quality of family life, encounters with whites, patterns of interaction among blacks, the extent of cultural autonomy, and the degree of resistance and accommodation to the system. There was no single black experience in the Empire.

This chapter addresses non-territorial autonomy (NTA) as a mode of framing ethnic relations; respectively ‘policies of NTA’ are regarded as top-down arrangements which are designed for the accommodation and facilitation of collective activities pursued on behalf of identity-based groups and which imply special treatment of certain activities and organizations. The chapter analyses the post-Soviet official policies which rest on the idea of symbolic and instrumental treatment of ethnic groups as cohesive social entities possessing distinct identities, interests, will, and rights. Three types of arrangements, namely, cultural autonomy, mono-ethnic elected representative bodies, and multi-ethnic representative ‘assemblies of peoples’, fit into this framework. The chapter concludes that although these set-ups basically perform functions of symbolic participation in public life and are regulated by informal rules, they turn out to be efficient in terms of shaping public agendas and satisfying aspirations of ethnic activists and the general public.

This chapter explores mechanisms of realization of national minority cultural autonomy in Croatia that do not bear the traits of a conventional non-territorial autonomy. The competences for realization of cultural autonomy in this country are principally split between the Council for National Minorities, national minority associations, and national minority councils. In the first part the chapter therefore analyses means of cultural autonomy realization through financing projects of national minority associations that promote minority cultural autonomy. The chapter subsequently analyses the background of the establishment, competences, and achievement of the national minority councils, directly elected consultative bodies that will allow for more efficient participation of national minorities at the local and regional levels in Croatia, arguing that their role in the realization of national cultural autonomy, due to unclear mandate and limited competences, is quite marginal.

This chapter focuses on Russia’s unlikely experiment in national cultural autonomy (NCA). It looks at the wide variety of forms of autonomy in the Russian Empire and provides an overview of a number of cases, including Finland, the Baltics, and Russian Germans. It examines religious diversity after Catherine II’s reforms, Bolshevik nationalities policy, the creation of the territorial autonomies in 1920–2, Terry Martin’s The Affirmative Action Empire, and the Russian government’s new ‘Strategy of State National Policy for the Period to 2025’, an apparent retreat from the NCA model. This chapter seeks in particular to address the paradox identified by Alexander Osipov—why does the concept of NCA sound attractive to ethnic activists? Its aim is to show that autonomy has rather deeper roots in Russia than might at first be supposed.

This introductory chapter discusses Thomas Mann's peculiar role as an authority on German culture to oppose the Nazi regime. It explains that two factors characterize Mann's unique position in literary history—the battle of cultural autonomy against totalitarian dependence and the struggle between international and national sources of literary esteem—both of which continue to have a clear relevance for literary production into the present day. To that end, this chapter briefly explores the complex relationship connecting his battle for cultural autonomy to his struggle for international recognition. It also considers what it means for Mann when he defines his theory of exile as a “cosmopolitan Germanness.” Finally, this chapter looks at how Mann developed and employed strategies to wage a cultural war against Nazism and how he found success in this endeavor in the United States.

This chapter discusses the emergence of the Vilna Education Society from the peculiar situation of the war and the subsequent incorporation of Vilna into Poland. It demonstrates the Vilna Education Society's attempt to champion nonpartisan Jewish cultural autonomy as an outgrowth of the particular circumstances and personalities in Vilna. It also highlights how the Vilna Jewish community had to adjust its goals and expectations to those of the country they were now a part of. The chapter explores how education, youth, and a preoccupation with the future of Polish Jewry were intensely intertwined with the political and cultural rights of the Polish Jewish minority in the Second Polish Republic. It mentions Jewish pedagogues and intellectual and political leaders that considered language as the basis for identity formation, especially in the city of Vilna with its multi-ethnic population.

This chapter examines some problems posed by the Jewish pluralism paradigm. With regard to the metasolution of influence, there is a firm article of faith shared by practically all of today's Judaica scholars that, in all times and places, pre-modern or ‘traditional’ Jews lived in intimate interaction with surrounding cultures to the point where they may be considered to be embedded in them and, consequently, indebted to them in terms of culture. This contrasts with an older conception of Jewish culture which represented Jews as living in at least semi-isolation from the non-Jewish world. The chapter thus demonstrates that there are more than these two possible approaches to the history of Jewish culture, and that these two themselves should be understood in a more sophisticated way. It asserts that the first approach (universal cultural influence, in its incarnation as hybridity theory), when applied mechanically, unimaginatively, and uncritically can be as ideological, dogmatic, and inappropriate as the second (Jewish cultural autonomy) often has been. The chapter next contemplates the metahistories implied by the various approaches to Jewish cultural history and their relationship to intellectual presuppositions for engaging in Jewish studies in the academy.

This chapter discusses whether non-territorial autonomy can be granted to the Sorbian people according to German law. The Sorbs (numbering about 60,000) are one of the four recognized national minorities in Germany. They are organized in a number of civil society associations, and nearly all of them belong to Domowina, a civil law umbrella organization. Government grants allocated to the Sorbian institutions are distributed via the public law Foundation for the Sorbian People. The concept of establishing a corporation for them under public law is tested under the conditions of German administrative law. The main problem is the discrepancy between the public law principle that all members of a public law corporation of natural persons must be known and the principle of the freedom to manifest or not one’s affiliation to a national minority. Forms of cultural or functional collective autonomy are proposed as a solution.

The first chapter of the book maps out the manner in which Black manifestations of cultural autonomy, from music to visual arts, have been systematically eliminated from public education. This discussion is bookended by a discussion of the central force that fomented Black cultural enclosures – Western Christianity.

This chapter examines the pervasive pattern of disproportionate minority contact (DMC) in the existing juvenile justice system, suggesting that its origin can be traced to the oppressed status of African American communities within America's broader social/political/economic construct. As a result, African American children (and other communities of color with similar issues) are more likely to become involved with the juvenile justice system, are treated more harshly, and are more likely to end up in the deep end of the system. Because the juvenile justice system is itself a societal construct, it is structured—and functions—as a mechanism of social and political oppression. The chapter considers the Black nationalist norm of cultural autonomy and argues that this norm must be embraced in order to promote empowered communities that resist oppression and would reduce minority contacts with the juvenile justice system.

Bahia has played a central role in representing Brazil's African roots. Afro Bahians, whose ancestors were brought forcibly by the Atlantic slave trade, have reinvented its culture and maintained a cultural autonomy in Brazil. This book focuses on Bahia's racial ideology and its search for identity. It addresses the cultural transformation in Bahia as Athens lost its claim of privilege over Africa, and pays particular attention to the most important arena for racial thinking: medical discourse.

This chapter narrates David Whippy's turn away from dependence on Fijians as he engineered the emergence of an independent foreign community. Living in a Fijian village, dressing as a Fijian in wartime, and marrying Fijian women integrated Whippy into Fijian society but deceptively so since he retained a more profound loyalty to his own kind. As the number of foreigners in Fiji increased with each passing decade, he directed his energies toward meeting their needs. The relationships he formed with traders, missionaries, naval officers, and other beachcombers had at least three outcomes. His eagerness to help them earned him their accolades and gratitude. His efforts on others' behalf enabled them to fulfill their myriad intentions and make inroads on Fijian cultural and political autonomy from all directions. Lastly, his ties to other foreigners made him less dependent on Fijian patronage and fed the emergence of an independent enclave of “white men” at Levuka with Whippy as “their chief.” Indeed, he was commended for his usefulness and good character.

This chapter shows how formal recognition by the Soviet state of ethnolinguistic elites and cultures created opportunities for republican leaders to negotiate the problems of authoritarian control and authoritarian power sharing through ethnic mobilization. It looks at the early post-Stalin era that witnessed various campaigns to raise the political or cultural autonomy of national groups. The chapter describes the campaigns that rode on the coattails of the center's policy of reinvigorated indigenization and designed to promote ethnoterritorial elites and cultures. It talks about the litmus test of nationalism, in which an ethnoterritorial elite presented its interests as being opposed not only to those of other ethnoterritorial groups but also to those of the Soviet Union as a whole. It also explains ethnic mobilization that meant going over the heads of the party membership and appealing to the wider titular ethnic group.