| Summary/Abstract |
In this paper, I attempt to build on and improve a significant conceptual innovation, made by Rogers Brubaker, between the terms ethnic category and ethnic group. This conceptual distinction problematizes groupist approaches and takes ethnic groupness as a variable to explore processes and dynamics of ethnic group formation. In this study, I improve and develop Brubaker’s conceptual distinction in two ways. First, I propose indicators for measuring ethnic category and ethnic group in the phenomenal world. Second, I develop a conceptual model based on the aforementioned conceptual distinction. I propose that ethnic identity can take four forms on the bases of how ethnic category members perform their ethnic identities in social and political domains: (1) socially and politically active ethnic identity, (2) socially active but politically dormant ethnic identity, (3) socially dormant but politically active ethnic identity, (4) socially and politically dormant ethnic identity. I suggest that these identity forms help us better understand the implications of the terms ethnic category and ethnic group at individual level by applying it to the Kurdish case in Turkey.
|