{"title":"在统一前的德国,“穆斯林”作为一个社会范畴的相关性","authors":"J. Sterphone","doi":"10.1080/0031322X.2020.1807714","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Sterphone’s article engages with the relevance and consequentiality of ‘Muslim’ as a social category for everyday Germans during the 1970s and 1980s. Specifically, it examines commonsense knowledge about the characteristics and actions bound to the category ‘Muslim’ and (re)produced in newspapers and speeches. It demonstrates that the German essentialization of ‘Turks’ following the end of the guest worker programme in 1973 deployed and (re)produced their simultaneous categorizability as ‘Muslims’. Thus Germans employed ‘Muslim’ as a resource for (re)producing category-tied knowledge about irreconcilable civilizational difference. Sterphone’s analysis combines discourse analysis with an ethnomethodological approach to studying categories and categorization practices. Since categories are ‘inference rich’ and act as storehouses for commonsense knowledge about the social world, they constitute resources for a variety of social actions. This paper demonstrates that not only did politicians and news journalists demonstrably orient themselves to the relevance of ‘Muslim’ as a means for (re)constructing and emphasizing incommensurable social difference, they also called on readers to participate in seeing these traits and behaviours as the kind of thing done or embodied by Muslims. Such practices produced the category ‘Muslim’ as mutually exclusive with ‘German’ long before the influx of refugees in the 1990s or the post-9/11 securitization. Thus Sterphone’s paper contributes to studies of German nationhood and its intersections with race, ethnicity and religion. Specifically, it highlights Germany’s post-war movement towards alignment with ‘the West’ and, consequently, the Muslim Turk’s position as a salient Other in Germany’s westernizing project. It therefore contributes to both theoretical and empirical discussions of anti-Muslim racism that demonstrate how Germans employ and (re)produce ‘Germanness’ (Deutsch-Sein) and ‘Muslimness’ (Muslimisch-Sein) so that they preclude one another.","PeriodicalId":46766,"journal":{"name":"Patterns of Prejudice","volume":"54 1","pages":"367 - 391"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0031322X.2020.1807714","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the relevance of ‘Muslim’ as a social category in pre-unification Germany\",\"authors\":\"J. Sterphone\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0031322X.2020.1807714\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Sterphone’s article engages with the relevance and consequentiality of ‘Muslim’ as a social category for everyday Germans during the 1970s and 1980s. Specifically, it examines commonsense knowledge about the characteristics and actions bound to the category ‘Muslim’ and (re)produced in newspapers and speeches. It demonstrates that the German essentialization of ‘Turks’ following the end of the guest worker programme in 1973 deployed and (re)produced their simultaneous categorizability as ‘Muslims’. Thus Germans employed ‘Muslim’ as a resource for (re)producing category-tied knowledge about irreconcilable civilizational difference. Sterphone’s analysis combines discourse analysis with an ethnomethodological approach to studying categories and categorization practices. Since categories are ‘inference rich’ and act as storehouses for commonsense knowledge about the social world, they constitute resources for a variety of social actions. This paper demonstrates that not only did politicians and news journalists demonstrably orient themselves to the relevance of ‘Muslim’ as a means for (re)constructing and emphasizing incommensurable social difference, they also called on readers to participate in seeing these traits and behaviours as the kind of thing done or embodied by Muslims. Such practices produced the category ‘Muslim’ as mutually exclusive with ‘German’ long before the influx of refugees in the 1990s or the post-9/11 securitization. Thus Sterphone’s paper contributes to studies of German nationhood and its intersections with race, ethnicity and religion. Specifically, it highlights Germany’s post-war movement towards alignment with ‘the West’ and, consequently, the Muslim Turk’s position as a salient Other in Germany’s westernizing project. It therefore contributes to both theoretical and empirical discussions of anti-Muslim racism that demonstrate how Germans employ and (re)produce ‘Germanness’ (Deutsch-Sein) and ‘Muslimness’ (Muslimisch-Sein) so that they preclude one another.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46766,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patterns of Prejudice\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"367 - 391\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0031322X.2020.1807714\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patterns of Prejudice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322X.2020.1807714\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHNIC STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patterns of Prejudice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322X.2020.1807714","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
On the relevance of ‘Muslim’ as a social category in pre-unification Germany
ABSTRACT Sterphone’s article engages with the relevance and consequentiality of ‘Muslim’ as a social category for everyday Germans during the 1970s and 1980s. Specifically, it examines commonsense knowledge about the characteristics and actions bound to the category ‘Muslim’ and (re)produced in newspapers and speeches. It demonstrates that the German essentialization of ‘Turks’ following the end of the guest worker programme in 1973 deployed and (re)produced their simultaneous categorizability as ‘Muslims’. Thus Germans employed ‘Muslim’ as a resource for (re)producing category-tied knowledge about irreconcilable civilizational difference. Sterphone’s analysis combines discourse analysis with an ethnomethodological approach to studying categories and categorization practices. Since categories are ‘inference rich’ and act as storehouses for commonsense knowledge about the social world, they constitute resources for a variety of social actions. This paper demonstrates that not only did politicians and news journalists demonstrably orient themselves to the relevance of ‘Muslim’ as a means for (re)constructing and emphasizing incommensurable social difference, they also called on readers to participate in seeing these traits and behaviours as the kind of thing done or embodied by Muslims. Such practices produced the category ‘Muslim’ as mutually exclusive with ‘German’ long before the influx of refugees in the 1990s or the post-9/11 securitization. Thus Sterphone’s paper contributes to studies of German nationhood and its intersections with race, ethnicity and religion. Specifically, it highlights Germany’s post-war movement towards alignment with ‘the West’ and, consequently, the Muslim Turk’s position as a salient Other in Germany’s westernizing project. It therefore contributes to both theoretical and empirical discussions of anti-Muslim racism that demonstrate how Germans employ and (re)produce ‘Germanness’ (Deutsch-Sein) and ‘Muslimness’ (Muslimisch-Sein) so that they preclude one another.
期刊介绍:
Patterns of Prejudice provides a forum for exploring the historical roots and contemporary varieties of social exclusion and the demonization or stigmatisation of the Other. It probes the language and construction of "race", nation, colour, and ethnicity, as well as the linkages between these categories. It encourages discussion of issues at the top of the public policy agenda, such as asylum, immigration, hate crimes and citizenship. As none of these issues are confined to any one region, Patterns of Prejudice maintains a global optic, at the same time as scrutinizing intensely the history and development of intolerance and chauvinism in the United States and Europe, both East and West.