《内在、外在、颠倒:极右翼民族志中族群认同的权力、定位与局限》

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
Bhakti Deodhar
{"title":"《内在、外在、颠倒:极右翼民族志中族群认同的权力、定位与局限》","authors":"Bhakti Deodhar","doi":"10.1177/08912416211060666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Methodological literature on ethnographies of the far-right has largely centered around the ethical and political implications of such studies. Discussions on researcher’s positionality with regard to his/her insider–outsider positioning, ethnic-racial characteristics and concomitant power relations in the field remain relatively undertheorized. What occurs, for example, when the researcher studying anti-minority, ethnic nationalist right-wing groups is from a minority ethnic community? To what extent s(he) can gain access and develop rapport with the respondents? In this article, I seek to answer these questions by providing insights from my fieldwork experiences. I reflect upon my own position as a non-White, minority ethnic, and female ethnographer who conducted extensive fieldwork among grassroot activists of “Alternative für Deutschland,” a German right-wing political party. The article demonstrates that even in face of an apparent noncongruence between an immigrant ethnographer and right-wing, pro-majority respondents, researcher’s position is not static but fluid, intersectional and deeply situational. Ethnographer’s long term sustained proximity to the respondents, exposure to the everyday contexts of their lives create zones of congruence for an apparent outsider and can at times undermine the dominant category of ethnicity as primary social signifier.","PeriodicalId":47675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Ethnography","volume":"51 1","pages":"538 - 565"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inside, Outside, Upside Down: Power, Positionality, and Limits of Ethnic Identity in the Ethnographies of the Far-Right\",\"authors\":\"Bhakti Deodhar\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08912416211060666\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Methodological literature on ethnographies of the far-right has largely centered around the ethical and political implications of such studies. Discussions on researcher’s positionality with regard to his/her insider–outsider positioning, ethnic-racial characteristics and concomitant power relations in the field remain relatively undertheorized. What occurs, for example, when the researcher studying anti-minority, ethnic nationalist right-wing groups is from a minority ethnic community? To what extent s(he) can gain access and develop rapport with the respondents? In this article, I seek to answer these questions by providing insights from my fieldwork experiences. I reflect upon my own position as a non-White, minority ethnic, and female ethnographer who conducted extensive fieldwork among grassroot activists of “Alternative für Deutschland,” a German right-wing political party. The article demonstrates that even in face of an apparent noncongruence between an immigrant ethnographer and right-wing, pro-majority respondents, researcher’s position is not static but fluid, intersectional and deeply situational. Ethnographer’s long term sustained proximity to the respondents, exposure to the everyday contexts of their lives create zones of congruence for an apparent outsider and can at times undermine the dominant category of ethnicity as primary social signifier.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contemporary Ethnography\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"538 - 565\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contemporary Ethnography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08912416211060666\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary Ethnography","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08912416211060666","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于极右翼民族志的方法论文献主要集中在这些研究的伦理和政治含义上。关于研究者在该领域的内部人-外部人定位、族群-种族特征以及随之而来的权力关系等方面的定位讨论,理论化程度相对较低。例如,当研究反少数民族、民族主义右翼团体的研究人员来自少数民族社区时,会发生什么?他(她)在多大程度上可以接触和发展与受访者的关系?在本文中,我试图通过提供我的实地工作经验来回答这些问题。我反思了自己作为一名非白人、少数民族和女性人种学家的立场,她在德国右翼政党“德国新选择党”(Alternative fr Deutschland)的草根活动家中进行了广泛的田野调查。本文表明,即使面对移民民族志学者与右翼亲多数受访者之间明显的不一致,研究人员的立场也不是静态的,而是流动的,交叉的,深刻的情境。人种学家长期持续接近被调查者,接触到他们生活的日常背景,为一个明显的局外人创造了一致的区域,有时会破坏作为主要社会能指的种族的主导类别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Inside, Outside, Upside Down: Power, Positionality, and Limits of Ethnic Identity in the Ethnographies of the Far-Right
Methodological literature on ethnographies of the far-right has largely centered around the ethical and political implications of such studies. Discussions on researcher’s positionality with regard to his/her insider–outsider positioning, ethnic-racial characteristics and concomitant power relations in the field remain relatively undertheorized. What occurs, for example, when the researcher studying anti-minority, ethnic nationalist right-wing groups is from a minority ethnic community? To what extent s(he) can gain access and develop rapport with the respondents? In this article, I seek to answer these questions by providing insights from my fieldwork experiences. I reflect upon my own position as a non-White, minority ethnic, and female ethnographer who conducted extensive fieldwork among grassroot activists of “Alternative für Deutschland,” a German right-wing political party. The article demonstrates that even in face of an apparent noncongruence between an immigrant ethnographer and right-wing, pro-majority respondents, researcher’s position is not static but fluid, intersectional and deeply situational. Ethnographer’s long term sustained proximity to the respondents, exposure to the everyday contexts of their lives create zones of congruence for an apparent outsider and can at times undermine the dominant category of ethnicity as primary social signifier.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contemporary Ethnography publishes in-depth investigations of diverse people interacting in their natural environments to produce and communicate meaning. At its best, ethnography captures the strange in the familiar and the familiar in the strange. JCE is committed to pushing the boundaries of ethnographic discovery by building upon its 30+ year tradition of top notch scholarship.
×
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