INSTRUMENTALIZATION OF THE SUBJECT OF THE FAMINE OF 1932‒1933 IN THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN: FRAME ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC SPEECHES OF THE REPUBLIC'S LEADERSHIP

E. A. Varfolomeev
{"title":"INSTRUMENTALIZATION OF THE SUBJECT OF THE FAMINE OF 1932‒1933 IN THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN: FRAME ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC SPEECHES OF THE REPUBLIC'S LEADERSHIP","authors":"E. A. Varfolomeev","doi":"10.17072/2218-1067-2023-3-65-74","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using the past for political purposes is a powerful tool in the formation of identities. Post-Soviet countries demonstrate various strategies when dealing with the memory of the past. This article focuses on the political use of the topic of the famine of 1932-1933 in Kazakhstan. This topic is usually associated with Ukraine, however, starting from 2012, the famine of 1932-1933 has become one of the tools for shaping national identity in Kazakhstan. This article uses Yanow and van Hulst's dynamic frame analysis to determine the dynamics of famine framing in the speeches of Kazakhstan's presidents and their representatives. The central question of this article is how the famine of 1932-1933 is framed by the ruling elite, and what common and distinctive features can be identified through comparison with the famine framing in competing narratives. The analysis shows that the ruling elites of Kazakhstan present the famine as an artificially created tragedy without focusing on the culprit. The constructed official narrative thus differs from rival narratives in its diplomatic language. This both helps to maintain internal balance and avoids memory wars in the international arena, which distinguishes the case of Kazakhstan from the case of Ukraine.","PeriodicalId":24044,"journal":{"name":"Вестник Пермского университета. Серия «Химия» = Bulletin of Perm University. CHEMISTRY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Вестник Пермского университета. Серия «Химия» = Bulletin of Perm University. CHEMISTRY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17072/2218-1067-2023-3-65-74","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Using the past for political purposes is a powerful tool in the formation of identities. Post-Soviet countries demonstrate various strategies when dealing with the memory of the past. This article focuses on the political use of the topic of the famine of 1932-1933 in Kazakhstan. This topic is usually associated with Ukraine, however, starting from 2012, the famine of 1932-1933 has become one of the tools for shaping national identity in Kazakhstan. This article uses Yanow and van Hulst's dynamic frame analysis to determine the dynamics of famine framing in the speeches of Kazakhstan's presidents and their representatives. The central question of this article is how the famine of 1932-1933 is framed by the ruling elite, and what common and distinctive features can be identified through comparison with the famine framing in competing narratives. The analysis shows that the ruling elites of Kazakhstan present the famine as an artificially created tragedy without focusing on the culprit. The constructed official narrative thus differs from rival narratives in its diplomatic language. This both helps to maintain internal balance and avoids memory wars in the international arena, which distinguishes the case of Kazakhstan from the case of Ukraine.
哈萨克斯坦共和国1932-1933年饥荒主题的工具化:共和国领导人公开演讲的框架分析
为了政治目的而利用过去是形成身份认同的有力工具。后苏联国家在处理过去的记忆时表现出各种各样的策略。本文关注的是1932-1933年哈萨克斯坦饥荒这一话题在政治上的运用。这个话题通常与乌克兰联系在一起,然而,从2012年开始,1932-1933年的饥荒已成为塑造哈萨克斯坦民族认同的工具之一。本文使用Yanow和van Hulst的动态框架分析来确定哈萨克斯坦总统及其代表演讲中饥荒框架的动态。本文的中心问题是统治精英是如何定义1932-1933年的饥荒的,以及通过与竞争叙事中的饥荒框架进行比较,可以识别出哪些共同和独特的特征。分析表明,哈萨克斯坦的统治精英将饥荒描述为人为制造的悲剧,而没有关注罪魁祸首。因此,建构的官方叙事在外交语言上不同于对手的叙事。这既有助于维持内部平衡,又有助于避免国际舞台上的记忆战争,这一点使哈萨克斯坦的情况有别于乌克兰的情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信