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