Managing Diversity: Why Is Consociationalism Not an Optimal Solution for Pakistan?

IF 0.7 Q3 ETHNIC STUDIES
Muhammad Mushtaq
{"title":"Managing Diversity: Why Is Consociationalism Not an Optimal Solution for Pakistan?","authors":"Muhammad Mushtaq","doi":"10.1080/13537113.2022.2122685","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This research seeks to enhance our understanding of consociationalism’s effectiveness in managing differences in plural societies by assessing its applicability to Pakistan. The primary objective of the paper is to determine whether consociationalism is the best solution for managing ethnic diversity in Pakistan. The article applies a mixed-methods approach and relies on secondary and primary sources. The study argues that the success of consociationalism appears uncertain in the face of intragroup party-based divisions, constant fluctuations in ethnoregional party support, the territorial nature of political grievances, and democratic instability in Pakistan. Equally, the lack of various favorable conditions for consociationalism in the case endangers its viability. In addition, the majority of all ethnolinguistic groups do not prefer consociational solutions to ethnic differences. This analysis suggests that consociationalism cannot be a one-size-fits-all solution because not all plural societies are compatible with this system. Therefore, consociationalism is not a universally viable option for all multiethnic societies, and its utility varies across cases.","PeriodicalId":45342,"journal":{"name":"Nationalism and Ethnic Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nationalism and Ethnic Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2022.2122685","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This research seeks to enhance our understanding of consociationalism’s effectiveness in managing differences in plural societies by assessing its applicability to Pakistan. The primary objective of the paper is to determine whether consociationalism is the best solution for managing ethnic diversity in Pakistan. The article applies a mixed-methods approach and relies on secondary and primary sources. The study argues that the success of consociationalism appears uncertain in the face of intragroup party-based divisions, constant fluctuations in ethnoregional party support, the territorial nature of political grievances, and democratic instability in Pakistan. Equally, the lack of various favorable conditions for consociationalism in the case endangers its viability. In addition, the majority of all ethnolinguistic groups do not prefer consociational solutions to ethnic differences. This analysis suggests that consociationalism cannot be a one-size-fits-all solution because not all plural societies are compatible with this system. Therefore, consociationalism is not a universally viable option for all multiethnic societies, and its utility varies across cases.
管理多样性:为什么联合主义不是巴基斯坦的最佳解决方案?
本研究旨在通过评估联合主义在巴基斯坦的适用性,提高我们对联合主义在管理多元社会差异方面的有效性的理解。本文的主要目的是确定联合主义是否是管理巴基斯坦种族多样性的最佳解决方案。本文采用混合方法,并依赖于二手和一手资料。该研究认为,面对党派内部的分裂、民族地区政党支持的持续波动、政治不满的地域性质以及巴基斯坦的民主不稳定,联合主义的成功似乎不确定。同样,在这种情况下,缺乏各种有利的社会主义条件危及其生存能力。此外,所有民族语言群体中的大多数不喜欢联合解决种族差异。这一分析表明,联合主义不可能是一种放之四海而皆准的解决办法,因为并非所有的多元社会都与这一制度兼容。因此,联合主义并不是所有多民族社会普遍可行的选择,其效用也因情况而异。
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
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Nationalism & Ethnic Politics explores the varied political aspects of nationalism and ethnicity in order to develop more constructive inter-group relations. The journal publishes case studies and comparative and theoretical analyses. It deals with pluralism, ethno-nationalism, irredentism, separatism, and related phenomena, and examines processes and theories of ethnic identity formation, mobilization, conflict and accommodation in the context of political development and "nation-building". The journal compares and contrasts state and community claims, and deal with such factors as citizenship, race, religion, economic development, immigration, language, and the international environment.
×
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