Ethnic minority organisations in Russia and Poland: a comparison challenge

IF 0.7 Q2 AREA STUDIES
P. Oskolkov
{"title":"Ethnic minority organisations in Russia and Poland: a comparison challenge","authors":"P. Oskolkov","doi":"10.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article proposes a framework for classifying ethnic minority organisations based on a broad combination of discursive and non-discursive criteria rooted in their political opportunities profile. One diasporic and one non-diasporic organisation were chosen for Russia and Poland, respectively. Diasporicity is understood according to William Safran’s criteria and Rogers Brubaker’s triadic configuration. The Russian study cases are Komi Voityr and the Russian Polish Congress; the Polish, the Silesian Autonomy Movement and the Belarussian House. The analysis of their status, activities, domestic and external political impact, localisation and role in the ‘triadic configuration’ has shown that the four cases are ethnic minority associations, and their legal status and scope of activities differ significantly. Their domestic political opportunities are rather scarce. Out of the four cases, just one organisation is an active part in Brubaker’s classical triadic configuration; its role is not traditional, ascribed to the respective ‘angle’. Although both Russian associations enjoy an official status, their activities are limited to the cultural, memorial and linguistic domains, primarily at the national level. In Poland, both associations act internationally as advocacy groups, and their activities are not confined to culture and language. Far from being universally applicable, the proposed classification framework can still add to the comparative ethnic politics toolkit.","PeriodicalId":43257,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Baltic Region","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2022-4-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article proposes a framework for classifying ethnic minority organisations based on a broad combination of discursive and non-discursive criteria rooted in their political opportunities profile. One diasporic and one non-diasporic organisation were chosen for Russia and Poland, respectively. Diasporicity is understood according to William Safran’s criteria and Rogers Brubaker’s triadic configuration. The Russian study cases are Komi Voityr and the Russian Polish Congress; the Polish, the Silesian Autonomy Movement and the Belarussian House. The analysis of their status, activities, domestic and external political impact, localisation and role in the ‘triadic configuration’ has shown that the four cases are ethnic minority associations, and their legal status and scope of activities differ significantly. Their domestic political opportunities are rather scarce. Out of the four cases, just one organisation is an active part in Brubaker’s classical triadic configuration; its role is not traditional, ascribed to the respective ‘angle’. Although both Russian associations enjoy an official status, their activities are limited to the cultural, memorial and linguistic domains, primarily at the national level. In Poland, both associations act internationally as advocacy groups, and their activities are not confined to culture and language. Far from being universally applicable, the proposed classification framework can still add to the comparative ethnic politics toolkit.
俄罗斯和波兰的少数民族组织:比较挑战
本文提出了一个框架,基于广泛的话语和非话语标准的组合,根植于他们的政治机会概况。俄罗斯和波兰分别选择了一个侨民组织和一个非侨民组织。散居性是根据William Safran的标准和Rogers Brubaker的三元结构来理解的。俄罗斯的研究案例是科米沃特尔和俄罗斯波兰国会;波兰人、西里西亚自治运动和白俄罗斯之家。分析其在“三位一体配置”中的地位、活动、国内外政治影响、本土化和作用,发现这四个案例均为少数民族社团,其法律地位和活动范围存在显著差异。他们在国内的政治机会相当少。在这四种情况中,只有一个组织在布鲁贝克的经典三元结构中是活跃的;它的作用不是传统的,而是归因于各自的“角度”。虽然这两个俄罗斯协会都享有官方地位,但它们的活动仅限于文化、纪念和语言领域,主要是在国家一级。在波兰,这两个协会作为倡导团体在国际上发挥作用,它们的活动并不局限于文化和语言。所提出的分类框架远不是普遍适用的,但仍然可以添加到比较种族政治工具包中。
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
Baltic Region
Baltic Region AREA STUDIES-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
37.50%
发文量
11
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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