| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
157001
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Jerusalem is a most striking example of the current deterioration in the relations between Israel, the Palestinians and the Arab/Islamic world. The recent escalation of Israeli activities aimed at converting Jerusalem into a totally Jewish city has had no precedent since the occupation of East Jerusalem began in 1967. These activities will not change the reality that Jerusalem, which the Jews claim only for themselves, is at the heart of the Christian and Muslim faiths.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
188576
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Studies of Indigeneity in Southeast Asia have consistently stressed its contested nature. The relevance of the concept has been questioned by governments in this region on the basis that both majority and minority ethnic groups are equally Indigenous. An interesting divergence from this is Cambodia where the term “Indigenous” is recognized in Cambodian law. This has largely been permitted because the term in Khmer is applicable to both ethnic minorities and the Khmer majority. This raises the question of how the concept of Indigenous is interpreted and used in Khmer and other languages. This article explores the root meaning of the Khmer term. Understanding how the concept of Indigeneity has itself been indigenized opens possibilities for building nuances of the term which can provide constructive approaches to addressing majority/minority cultural dynamics. In other words, exploring how terms developed from other contexts have been transposed into local languages can allow for contextualizing concepts to address local realities. A wider understanding of the concept of Indigenous in Khmer allows for building on the concept of Indigeneity in Cambodia, and perhaps other Southeast Asian contexts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
077877
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article explores the different ideas of community circulating in the aftermath of the 7 July 2005 bombings in London. Specifically, it compares the idea of a community in unity with a more cosmopolitan, urban idea of community. While these two ideas seem to present sharply different responses, the article questions the extent to which the cosmopolitan model offers an alternative to the nationalist idea of community. Drawing on various discussions about how ideas of community are produced through different understandings of time and origins, the article argues that in this specific case both the national and the cosmopolitan accounts of community worked according to a very similar logic, and therefore risked reproducing similar problems and exclusions. Consequently, the article suggests that the task of exploring alternative conceptions of community must involve greater sensitivity to the politics of time and other approaches to the politics of origins. This challenge is pursued through the motif of the city as a site expressing a different temporality and thus a different idea of community from that expressed in traditions of national belonging.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|