|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
127030
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Considerable research has explored the relationship between majority and minority language speaking communities in bilingual contexts. Comparatively little research, however, has explored relations within as opposed to between a language group in these contexts. Antecedent to a new order of social and cultural life in Wales, this article explores how two groups of Welsh speakers, one relatively privileged and one relatively marginalized, positioned themselves as they talked about 'being Welsh speaking'. For all respondents the ability to speak Welsh was understood to confer sameness beyond linguistic competence on Welsh speakers. Claims to a strong Welsh-speaking identity, however, were legitimized by drawing on different resources. Whilst the relatively privileged group identified themselves as 'traditionally Welsh' based on their linguistic and social practices, members of the more marginalized group were unable to define their own linguistic and social practices as 'traditional' for a Welsh speaker. In response they forged a distinctive social space for themselves by developing a class-based communal Welsh identity. With reference to Bourdieu's work on the process of boundary construction and maintenance, this article makes a contribution to understanding ethnolinguistic diversity and how discourses about being Welsh speaking might be reproduced and negotiated in contemporary post-diglossic Wales. It suggests that ethnolinguistic identity may become implicated in the process of classificatory struggle, with social groups emerging through a social space of hierarchical difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
101038
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The emergence in the United States of an increasing number of spaces across the socioeconomic spectrum with majority nonwhite populations merits close attention because of these spaces' potential in reconfiguring historical and contemporary claims to place. In an era in which the neoliberalization of urban development has spurred local governments toward more active involvement in defining relationships between race, ethnicity, consumption, and space, "majority-minority" suburbs are particularly important sites of study. In the late 2000s, two branding campaigns in majority-Asian American and Latina/o municipalities in Los Angeles's San Gabriel Valley-a densely populated region popularly known as a "suburban Chinatown"-put forth specific discourses of race, ethnicity, and culture in attempts to actualize specific visions and claims to place, identity, and history. In doing so, these campaigns illuminated and reinforced larger racial, geographic, and ideological divides. "Diversity" on Main Street embraced pluralist multicultural discourses of the nation, while the "Golden Mile" proposal sought to showcase the transformation of a central thoroughfare by ethnic Chinese capital and immigration. A close examination and comparison of these two campaigns shows how struggles over race, geography, and history are intertwined in the contemporary identities of places and integral to the shaping of civic landscapes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
123763
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Ethnic migration from the former Soviet Union to Israel is widely considered to be a 'laboratory of ethnicity'. Most of the research into this subject focuses on the cultural and linguistic factors of identity restructuring, whereas critical engagement with social status, class, and urban environment is a much newer development. Social, economic, and urban explanations of the remaining relevance of 'old' (ex-USSR) identifications are particularly needed in the face of increasing alienation among various disadvantaged groups in Israel and the mobilization of large numbers of Russian-speakers around nationalist political parties. On the basis of interviews, participant observations, and media analysis, this article argues that simultaneously deterritorialized and reterritorialized ideas of home and belonging shape this group's social and political mobilization patterns in contested city spaces. Further, I suggest that nationalist mobilization is a strategy to reach beyond ethno-politics and make majority rather than minority claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
172048
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this contribution, Alain-G Gagnon reflects on existing scholarship on majority and state nationalism, arguing that minority and majority nationalism are broadly similar in their intent. Both seek to promote a set of values, myths and meaning systems within a given political community which exists on a specific territory, shares a common language and a history. As a result, there are several promising avenues for research on state and majority nationalism, outlined in this piece.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
109566
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Interaction between a minority and the majority is usually multifaceted and can be examined from different angles. This article explores the approach of National-Religious Israelis towards the media, primarily television, radio, and printed press, as a means to understanding the relationship of that group to the larger society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
078563
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Although researchers have deconstructed the myth of stark social differences between the various North American sub-societies, an assimilating American melting pot and an ethnically oppressive monocultural Québec are still popular representations within Canadian majority discourses, such as the English-language mainstream media and parts of academia. In this paper, I argue that images of 'America' and 'Québec' play important roles for the multicultural reconstruction of Canadian nationhood. Examining selected op-ed articles from two Toronto-based mainstream newspapers during the 1990s, I develop and exemplify a theoretical understanding of how national identities are constituted and transformed within inter- and intra-national relations of power and alterity. I pay special attention to the particularisation of Canada through the confrontation with American nationhood, the ambiguities of recognising the distinctiveness of Québec inside Canada, and the consequences of projecting Québec's supposedly 'ethnic' nationalism outside the boundaries of Canadianness
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
102077
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
154417
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Founding Fathers conceived formal counter-majoritarian restrictions
aimed specifically to “render the majority unable”: to prevent the majority from
trampling on minorities in the U.S. democratic system. This article contends that
several such formal restrictions actually fail to protect contemporary minorities as the founders imagined they would. Indeed, counter-majority restrictions embedded
in the Electoral College, the Senate, and the judicial review may actually prohibit
such protection. Using a comparative politics approach, this article builds
on theoretical arguments and data that evaluate democratic functionality and
fairness based on level of social equality provisions as well as optimality of voter
participation. I find that certain counter-majoritarian procedures are empirically
linked to higher inequality levels across twenty-one advanced democracies. This
political suboptimality is reflected in a significant correlation between higher Gini
coefficients and majoritarian systems (with the United States in first place) in the
sample and also between lower scores and consensus democracies. I argue that
comparative analysis shows that some criticisms hitherto only leveled at the United
States are present in an entire family of systems—the majoritarian ones—which
begs significant critical questioning of the impact of institutional design on the
effectiveness of social policies and inclusive democratic procedures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
164045
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper re-examines the demand for Pakistan as part of a wider ‘federal moment’ in India by addressing its connections with the contemporaneous calls for Samyukta Maharashtra in the context of the Cabinet Mission of spring/summer 1946. It highlights how the twinned processes of democratisation and provincialisation during the inter-war years informed these demands. Both Muslim and Maratha representatives looked to locate and create autonomous political spaces that would better secure their political representation. Their demands exemplified a shift away from a commensurative logic expressed through separate representation in the legislatures towards support for majority rule at the provincial level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|