A resynthesis of the primordial and circumstantial approaches to ethnic group solidarity: Towards an explanatory model

Scott, George M.

doi:10.1080/01419870.1990.9993667

Cited by 82 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Laitin (1998) argues that culture is "Janusfaced," with both a constraining primordial element and a manipulable, flexible, constructed element, an argument elaborated by Fearon (1999). Scott (1990) sees identities as primordial but their relative importance as constructed. Nagata (1981) avers that circumstantial factors determine how and why certain aspects of shared culture are "primordialized" such that people come to accept them as primordial for the purposes of defining who is a group member.…”

Section: Theories Of Groups and Groups Of Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining Ethnicity

Hale

2004

Comparative Political Studies

196

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although scholars often treat “ethnicity” as one of the most important phenomena in politics, nothing close to a consensus has emerged about not only what its effects are but also what it is. Theorists typically divide this debate into two camps, usually dubbed “primordialism” and “constructivism,” but these categories are unhelpful and actually obscure some of the most important questions. This study recasts the debate by providing a micro-level explanation for why and how people tend to think and act in terms of macro-level identity categories in the first place. Drawing heavily on recent psychological research, this approach reveals why ethnicity is special and why it is ascribed importance by researchers in fields as diverse as sociology, anthropology, and political science. As it turns out, neither constructivism nor primordialism is fully accurate, and theorists are advised to think in terms that are more consistent with psychological research.

show abstract

Section: Theories Of Groups and Groups Of Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining Ethnicity

Hale

2004

Comparative Political Studies

196

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first ambivalence is that both actors vying for cultural recognition and those pursuing political or economic interest are usually involved in the same ethnic movement (McKay, 1982;Scott, 1990;Eller & Coughlan, 1993;Smith, 1998;Gil-White, 1999;Webb, 2013). Considering the Islamic revival in developed countries, Immigrants who were not initially very religious come to realize their need for Islam as a support system when they suffer from job discrimination, unemployment, and low academic achievement (Keaton, 2006).…”

Section: The Problems Of Primordialism and Instrumentalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Capital Approach for Explaining Ethnic Conflicts Within a Liberal Society

Kawamura¹

2017

IRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the reasons why many ethnic movements surge in liberal societies-even though these societies are supposed to enable the coexistence of different types of people-and whether it is possible to resolve ethnic conflicts within these societies. Social capital, such as mutual trust, diffusion of information, and social support is used in this discussion, as successful coexistence in a liberal society is only possible when social capital is adequately provided to all people. Since social capital is generated from social networks, minorities want networks that may increase the likelihood that they will attain an adequate level of social capital. They attempt to build such networks by making their cultural symbols recognized by others. Confrontations that result from this kind of movement often cause ethnic conflicts. The key to resolution, then, is whether a broad network can be built, to which all different people are satisfactorily connected. As a result, this paper shows that even though such a resolution is theoretically possible, in reality there are three serious obstacles: (1) people tend to be driven by strong emotions; (2) people cannot accurately estimate the extent of suffering and/or the level of required support; and (3) minorities' primary networks are too solidified to be connected suitably to the wider network. These findings will contribute to the further argument of what conditions should be met in order to take feasible measures to resolve ethnic conflicts within a liberal society.

show abstract

“…3 Despite the expansiveness of the literature, most scholars agree on some fundamental characteristics of ethnicity: First, they agree on its description (Gil-White 1999; Scott 1990). An ethnic category is frequently defined as an aggregation of individuals sharing the perception of a common origin based on a set of shared attributes such as language, culture, history, locality, and/or physical appearance (e.g.…”

Section: Disaggregating the Term "Ethnicity"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Researching Ethnic Relations as the Outcome of Political Processes

Flesken

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in Researching Ethnic Relations as the Outcome of Political Processes AbstractEthnic diversity is often seen to be detrimental to peace and stability, particularly if ethnicity is the basis for political mobilization. Mobilization is assumed to increase the salience of ethnicity, and with it in-group cohesion, out-group animosity, and national instability; yet the mechanisms have rarely been studied empirically. This article argues that we need to study ethnicity as the outcome of political processes, focus on the attitudinal mechanisms underlying ethnic relation; and examine this phenomenon at the individual level.To this end, the article first disaggregates the term "ethnicity" into attributes, meanings, and actions. Referring to constructivism, it then argues that political science should focus on meanings. Building on the theory and findings of social psychology, this paper shows that political science must distinguish analytically between meanings regarding different in-and out-group processes. Doing so can help advance the study of ethnic relations and conflict-management practices.

show abstract

A resynthesis of the primordial and circumstantial approaches to ethnic group solidarity: Towards an explanatory model

Cited by 82 publications

References 26 publications

Explaining Ethnicity

Explaining Ethnicity

Social Capital Approach for Explaining Ethnic Conflicts Within a Liberal Society

Researching Ethnic Relations as the Outcome of Political Processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About