Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads. Others Others. Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet. Access your One World Week Resource. First Last. Keep me up to date!
We'll send you updates about our work and news from across the youth sector. We always keep your data safe, and you can unsubscribe at any time. I agree to allow NYCI to collect and store my data from this form. We will protect your personal information in accordance with our privacy policy.
Questions to Ask about Your Treatment. Feelings and Cancer. Adjusting to Cancer. Day-to-Day Life. Support for Caregivers. Questions to Ask About Cancer. Choices for Care. Talking about Your Advanced Cancer. Planning for Advanced Cancer. Advanced Cancer and Caregivers. Questions to Ask about Advanced Cancer. Managing Cancer Care. Finding Health Care Services. Advance Directives.
Using Trusted Resources. Coronavirus Information for Patients. Clinical Trials during Coronavirus. Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer.
Emotional Support for Young People with Cancer. Cancers by Body Location. Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Treatment. Pediatric Supportive Care. Rare Cancers of Childhood Treatment. Childhood Cancer Genomics. Study Findings. Metastatic Cancer Research. Intramural Research. Extramural Research.
Cancer Research Workforce. Partners in Cancer Research. What Are Cancer Research Studies. Research Studies. We even may ask ourselves whether the ideologies and we-feelings which constitute the formative forces in a nation are typologically different from those which constitute the formative forces in a religious group.
Would this not be, so to say, a definition ex post facto? Or is ethnic group a more universal, perhaps the most universal; fact of human society, while all other social facts are arrived at by way of elimination?
We hesitate to draw any definite conclusions from the few reflections presented in this paper. But we may state tentatively the following propositions as a working hypothesis for further investigation:. Neither do they describe entia realia in the philosophical sense, if such exist at all, or even definite types of social facts which would be useful for sociological generalizations.
This subtype deserves a special name and formulation because it includes a considerable number of phenomena which are of practical interest to various social sciences.
The basic type of the community includes many other phenomena such as the family, caste, or residential community. Nevertheless, we believe it is possible to distinguish them from the ethnic group. While the family or residential community is unable to satisfy all the basic societal needs of human nature, the ethnic group not only permits a high degree of self-sufficiency and segregation but tends to enforce and preserve it.
On the other hand, the ethnic group is not so much dependent on face-to-face relationship as other types of communities. We find that the pattern of social interaction which is characteristic of the primary group permits its extension under certain conditions to a larger, locally less well-defined, and culturally less homogeneous group.
We may, for instance, think of a peasant village as an ideal primary group. Now, under certain conditions, the we-feeling of this community can be made to include the natives of a valley or of a wider region, even a whole country.
Thus, a larger, but secondary, group is being formed which presents most of the characteristics originally attached to the primary group. In this way, we may say, the ethnic group is the most inclusive, cumulative, and realistic type of secondary community.
The catalyst, or principal factor, which brings about such an extension of we-feeling is a mental process based on abstraction and hypostatical transposition of characteristics from the primary to the secondary group. The followers of a new religion, for instance, are moved by the overriding value they attach to their faith to withdraw their we-feeling from the nonbelieving members of their original community and to extend it to all fellow-believers.
Since human nature seems to crave a pattern of social interaction which is of the community type, the wish and will become effective to substitute a community of all fellow-believers for the original community. In the same way, a national ideology tends to substitute or to widen a pre-existing community. All ethnic groups behave in the same typical manner, regardless of whether the underlying ideologies hinge on religious, political, cultural, racial, or other characteristics and regardless of whether these characteristics are real or fictitious.
Once an ethnic group is well integrated it makes little difference whether these characteristics are real or fictitious. Once an ethnic group is well integrated it makes little difference whether the underlying ideology is rationally disproved; for, by then, the community has become real, that is, a social fact, and it will find new rationalizations for its coherence, if ever its ideological basis should be challenged. But there are certain elements that must be present or which must be deliberately created in the early stages of its genesis, such as a distinctive territory, some sort of distinctive political organization, a common language, a common scale of values.
The dissolution of a community is brought about not so much by the loss of external characteristics as by the collision of conflicting values, solidarities, and loyalties. Finally, no individual group, which is always a singular and unrepeatable phenomenon, will ever coincide with that type of plurality pattern which we have described as an ethnic group.
As is the case with every other type, it will be quite legitimate to state that some concrete social group is an ethnic group to a lesser or greater degree. It appears that the modern nation belongs in the category of ethnic groups just as much as the religious communities of other stages of history.
It is the result of deliberate political action by which all the ethnic groups that pre-exist within the actual or visualized territory of a state are molded into a new unit of we-feeling, into a new more or less homogeneous ethnic group.
In the preceding discussion we have been experimenting with a hypothetical sociological category which we thought could cover a number of phenomena popularly classed together. Taken from American Journal of Sociology , 52 , , with permission of the university of Chicago Press. All rights reserved. Published Composed and printed by The University of Chicago Press. All Rights Reserved. Skip to content Increase Font Size.
Munchen and Berlin: R. Oldenbourg, Hayes, Essays on Nationalism New York, Neumann Leipzig, Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana outlawed parties organized on tribal or ethnic bases. Julius Nyerere, a scion of tribal chieftaincy, stamped out tribalism by fostering nationalistic pride in Tanganyika and later, Tanzania, born out of the union with Zanzibar.
Jommo Kenyatta of Kenya forged a delicate alliance of ethnic groups behind the dominance of his Kenyan African National Union party. In South Africa, apartheid recognized and stratified races and ethnicities to an unsustainable degree. Post-apartheid South Africa, however, remains poised between a racially, ethnically, and tribally blind democratic system and a proud ethnic self-assertiveness, represented and exploited by Zulu nationalists, spearheaded by the emotive leadership of Chief Buthelezi.
Throughout Africa, the goal of safeguarding unity within the colonial state has preserved the stability of colonial borders while generating ethnic tensions and violence within those borders.
Sudan offers an extreme example. The dominant North, a hybrid of Arab and African racial, cultural, and religious elements, is trying to resolve its identity crisis by being more Arab and Islamic than its prototypes. Worse, this distorted self-perception, heightened by the agendas of political elites, is projected as the framework for unifying and integrating the country, generating a devastating zero-sum conflict between the Arab-Muslim North and the indigenously African South, whose modern leadership is predominantly Christian.
The decision of the Founding Fathers of the Organization of African Unity to respect the colonial borders established a normative principle that has been followed with remarkable success. Secession movements have met with strong resistance from the OAU. Katanga tried to break away from the Congo which became Zaire, now back to the Democratic Republic of the Congo but failed.
The secessionist Biafran war in Nigeria also failed. Southern Sudan struggled for 17 years to break away from the North and in the end settled for autonomy in When the fighting resumed in , the stated goal was and remains the creation of a new Sudan that would be free from any discrimination based on race, ethnicity, culture, or religion. Likewise, the de facto breakaway of Northern Somalia is seen as a restoration of colonial borders, since the North had been governed separately by the British.
Even in the Sudan, often said to be a good candidate for partition, should the country be divided, the division might be rationalized as an extension of the British colonial policy that governed the Sudan as two separate entities, one Arab-Islamic and the other indigenous African with rudiments of Christian Western influences. In most African countries, the determination to preserve national unity following independence provided the motivation behind one-party rule, excessive centralization of power, oppressive authoritarian regimes, and systematic violation of human rights and fundamental liberties.
These in turn have generated a reaction, manifested in heightened tension and the demand for a second liberation. Managing ethnic diversity within the unity of the colonial borders is a challenge that African states are reluctant to face, but cannot wish away.
Less idealistically, it can be argued that giving the people the right to determine their destiny leads them to believe that their interests will be provided for, if only to give them a reason to opt for unity. The only sustainable unity is that based on mutual understanding and agreement. Unfortunately, the normative framework for national unity in modern Africa is not the result of consensus.
Except for post-apartheid South Africa, Africans won their independence without negotiating an internal social contract that would win and sustain national consensus. The constitutions for independence were laden with idealistic principles developed outside the continent. The regimes built on them lacked legitimacy and in most cases were soon overthrown with no remorse or regrets from the public.
0コメント