Acceso usuarios
Nationalism, boundaries and violence [DANIELE CONVERSI] «Boundary» and related terms have been in use since the commencement of disciplines like geography and history, yet their conceptualization is relatively novel in other social sciences.
Since Frederick Barth's pioneering study, the concept of ethnic boundary has shed light on the process of ethnic identity formation and maintenance. For a while it has remained confined to the realm of anthropology, encountering moderate difficulty in expanding to other disciplines. The anthropological stress was on de-territorialisation and subjectivity. However, the concept has only recently been applied to the study of nationalism, an inter-disciplinary field par excellence which has remained for long quite marginal to the anthropological mainstream. Nationalism involves a typical process of boundary creation or maintenance.
Drawing on the Barthian distinction between ethnic boundaries and ethnic content, this article proposes a renewed emphasis on cultural selection in nationalist mobilizations. The main independent variable is the availability or absence of ethnic markers. A model for reassessing the role of the boundary in relation to its content is proposed. This content will be associated with two different types, or outcomes, of ethnic mobilization, namely violent and non-violent conflicts.
The process of selection is analysed with the help of concepts derived from the study of race relations and immigration, particularly the works of Jerzy Smolicz and Heribert Gans. Examples from former Yugoslavia and other areas will shed light on the relationship between boundary-building and violence.
