View
215
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
elaborated in chapter 7, ‘Minorities and the state’, specifically contrasting the situation
of ethnic minorities in the United States with that of those in European countries. As
was already mentioned, Chapter 8 on ‘Identity politics, culture and rights’, looks at
multiculturalism and multiethnic societies, as well as transnationalism and long-
distance nationalism and the general features of identity politics. The final chapter of the
book, entitled ‘The non-ethnic’, analyses some current tensions in social theory, changes
in the social world, processes of globalisation and localisation, identities and loyalties,
gender, ethnicity and nationhood and the possible end of ethnicity. At the end there is an
excellent bibliography of some 400 books and articles.
The good points of this book are many. It is well written and the use of ethnographic
examples, including the author’s own research in Mauritius and Trinidad, is excellent.
The ideas are very well explained and, while not hiding his own sympathies, Eriksen
gives a pretty fair and balanced account of the various theoretical positions he examines.
There are suggestions for further reading at the end of each chapter. On the other hand,
it is a pity – given the fact that the book is principally intended for students – that the
author did not more fully summarise his main points at the end of each chapter.
As well, he makes a few somewhat polemical statements. For example, while it is
reasonable to affirm, as does Eriksen, ‘Every social community or identity is exclusive in
the sense that not everybody can take part. Groups and collectivities are always
constituted in relation to others’ (p. 62, his emphasis), his following sentence, ‘A shared
European identity, for example, would have to define itself in contrast to Muslim . . .
identity’ (my emphasis), is debatable, to say the least. That it has done so in the past is
undeniable (p. 75), yet with Turkey knocking at the EU door, it remains to be seen
whether it must necessarily do so in the future.
Yet these are minor objections. An excellent book when it first came out, Ethnicity
andNationalism is an even richer, more subtle book in this new edition and I suspect that
many of us will be recommending this new version to our students for some time to
come.
WILLIAM KAVANAGH
Comillas University and San Pablo-CEU University
Donald L. Horowitz, The Deadly Ethnic Riot. Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press, 2001. 605 pp. US$55.00 (hbk), US $24.95 (pbk).
Ethnic vendettas in the form of riot, pogrom or genocide have become ever more
familiar in the contemporary world. Expression of hatred for the supposed enemy, who
bears a different skin colour, has a unique food habit or speaks an unfamiliar tongue, in
the opinion of many scholars is a product of several different prejudices. In this
fascinating book, Horowitz approaches the subject of ethnic riot from three
perspectives: insecurity, rumour and competition over resources.
One of the ways with which Horowitz deals with the subject of insecurity is in
relation to antipathy. He draws out the extent to which the pursuit of one group’s own
perceived insecurity comes at the expense of those around it. In addition to insecurity,
rumour, Horowitz adds, has been a catalyst in spawning riots throughout the history of
the twentieth century. ‘Rumors’, according to Horowitz, form ‘an essential part of the
riot process’. But more importantly rumours ‘justify the violence that is about to occur’.
Furthermore, ‘rumors are structurally embedded in the riot situation, because they are
624 Book Reviews
satisfying and useful to rioters and their leaders. Rumor prevails because it orders and
organizes action-in-process’ (p. 74). In a succinct and original fashion, Horowitz then
goes on to produce a whole catalogue of cases where a single lie or half-truth produced a
cycle of violence.
Horowitz has never been a firm believer in the argument that there is indeed a
correlation between economic development and ethnic peace. Writing during the Cold
War and the relatively less intertwined international economic system of the 1980s, he
argued that ethnic groups do not necessarily share the same economic interests. This is
due to the fact that they could be drawn from different parts of the country and may
specialise in divergent economic pursuits (Horowitz, Ethnic Groups in Conflict, 1985).
Moreover, since they did not operate in a common economic arena, the likelihood of
confrontation between various groups could be minimum or non-existent. Although
Horowitz had made us believe this argument in his earlier seminal work, he has since
revisited the issue.
Poverty per se might not have led to more conflicts between communities, but
poverty certainly has social consequences that cause destabilisation, displacement,
evacuation and tensions between communities in a deeply divided and economically
backward country. AlthoughHorowitz does not share the broad expansive argument of
many scholars looking at the poverty and low levels of economic development as
precursors to ethnic conflict, he nonetheless recognises that economic antagonism
explains muchmore about conflict at the top level involving politicians, bureaucrats and
other policy planners in developing societies.
As an appendage to the above argument, Horowitz highlights how a skewed vision of
enforced ethnic pluralism in Assam by the government of India resulted in the economic
marginalisation of the original inhabitants of the state and the consequent ethnic war
there (pp. 208–9). Equally important is his assessment of relative deprivation in
explaining ethnic violence. He is both sympathetic and sensitive to the scholarship in
this regard that views aggression on the part of ethnic groups as ‘a product of anger
induced by frustration, where frustration results from impediments placed in the path of
goal-directed behaviour’ (pp. 36–7). A random survey of participants in ethnic conflicts
suggest that it is young unemployed males with very little or no resource base and any
clear vision of the future who are more likely to participate and perpetrate hate crimes.
Although this is a worldwide phenomenon and applies to all deeply divided societies, it
is particularly true of economically backward Africa.
A student interested in a comparative analysis of ethnic conflict might be tempted to
ask the place of riots in developed industrialised societies. Horowitz has some sober
revelations. The decline of deadly ethnic riot in the West in recent years, he cautiously
remarks, might be owing to consistent economic prosperity and the extension of its
benefit to all the communities within that given state (p. 561).
Horowitz has approached the subject ofDeadly Ethnic Riotswith the same directness
and work ethic as his earlier highly successful work Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Each
individual case study is addressed from a variety of theoretical positions in order to
underscore its conflict dynamics. While the book makes a satisfying read, it also has an
added bonus in the sense that one emerges from it as a matured student capable of
making careful policy decisions and judgements on the subject. But there are areas and
issues that require interrogation, especially when read alongside books that share the
same theme and platform.
Horowitz writes in the tradition of grand narratives. His earlier well-received book
Ethnic Groups in Conflict contained some 697 pages. Deadly Ethnic Riot is equally
Book Reviews 625
voluminous and has 605 pages. In the current volume, Horowitz’s style is one of
improvised set pieces and intimate unobtrusive reflections which allows one a clear sense
of the conflicts within complex social frameworks. Without slipping pace, we move to
and from the interlocking case studies, presented with economy and grace and this helps
build a diverse view of the architecture and anatomy of riots in recent history. The ideas
presented in it remain accessible and intelligent and the analyses bristle with sharp wit
and little emotion. Horowitz’s skilful exploration of ethnic riots in the twentieth century
and pointed argument set the standard against which most twenty-first-century
scholarship would measure itself.
Although The Deadly Ethnic Riot is a large book, it never drags. Like his earlier
work, Horowitz’s latest offering will be constantly in use by generations of students. At
a time when the Internet has become a ready source of reference it is almost humbling to
see a scholar producing references to every minute archival detail, an odd newspaper
story and lengthy government dossiers to substantiate an argument.
AMALENDU MISRA
Queen’s University, Belfast
Alexis de Tocqueville, Writings on Empire and Slavery, Jennifer Pitts (ed. and trans.)
Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001. 320 pp. US$47.00 (hbk),
US$21.95 (pbk).
Alexis de Tocqueville’s reputation as a political thinker and as one of modern
democracy’s most perspicacious observers continues to grow. His books Democracy in
America and The Old Regime and the Revolution are widely read and acclaimed across
ideological as well as geo-political divides.
Considerably less known are Tocqueville’s writings dating from his decade-long
career as a parliamentarian and, briefly, minister of foreign affairs. These writings testify
to Tocqueville’s preoccupation for much of his political career with two questions: the
colonisation of Algeria and the abolition of slavery in the old French colonies. While
some of the anti-slavery articles have been previously translated, Tocqueville’s works on
Algeria appear in English for the first time in this volume.
Given the great interest in Tocqueville’s oeuvre, the relative obscurity that marks his
writings on colonialism is indeed puzzling. It may be due to the fact that, scattered
through notes, drafts, parliamentary reports and journal articles, they do not amount to a
systematic reflection on the subject. However, more than the occasional or fragmentary
character of these writings, whatmay account for their neglect by scholars is Tocqueville’s
controversial and unfashionable political stance on the Algerian question.
In light of his Algerian writings, Tocqueville emerges as a promoter of national
grandeur and a steadfast supporter of the French colonial expansion in North Africa.
He advocates the imperial enterprise both as an historical opportunity to enhance
France’s position abroad and as remedy for the political instability born out of the
democratic transition at home. Hence, Tocqueville’s arguments for colonising Algeria
as a paramount national interest make him not only a defender of colonialism, but also a
spokesman for nineteenth-century French nationalism.
Tocqueville’s peculiarity here lies in his endorsement of national grandeur on neither
ethnic nor racial terms, but rather as an aspiration to universal political principles. If,
while defending French preponderance, he appeals to the right of conquest, Tocqueville
626 Book Reviews