Identity Policy at National Level as a Theoretical Construct and Real Practice: Expert Assessments Attempt | South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences
Identity Policy at National Level as a Theoretical Construct and Real Practice: Expert Assessments Attempt
Vol. 20 (2019) No. 4, Identity Politics
Vol. 20 (2019) No. 4
Identity Politics

Identity Policy at National Level as a Theoretical Construct and Real Practice: Expert Assessments Attempt

Popova O.V.
St. Petersburg State University
ORCID ID 0000-0002-0701-7767
PDF (Russian)
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-20-4-74-91
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-20-4-74-91

How to Cite Array

Popova O.V. (2019) Identity Policy at National Level as a Theoretical Construct and Real Practice: Expert Assessments Attempt. South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences, 20 (4), pp. 74-91. DOI: 10.31429/26190567-20-4-74-91 (In Russian)
Submission Date 2019-11-12
Accepted Date 2019-11-27
Published Date 2019-12-27

Copyright (c) 2019 Ольга Валентиновна Попова

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

The article highlights the interpretation of the phenomenon of state identity policy by Russian political scientists. The expert survey conducted by method of informal interview of leading Russian scientists during summer — fall 2019 yielded valuable information showing a range of research positions regarding the understanding of this phenomenon as a theoretical construct and a component of real politics. Review of the positions of Russian political scientists on the mechanism, technologies, factors and criteria for assessing the effectiveness of the state identity policy, the importance of embedding informal practices in relevant state programs, and the responsibility of political elites for maintaining the unity of the nation is presented. Historical examples, which, according to scientists, reflect the most successful projects for the formation of national-­state identity, are of interest. A range of issues has been identified on which experts have the most different approaches, including the following: the correctness of the terminological apparatus (“national-­state identity”, “state identity”, “civic identity”, etc.); position of state identity policy in modern Russia; the factors of differentiation of its results in various constituent entities of the Russian Federation; the presence/absence of the need for the political elite to choose focus on "civilian" or "ethnic" projects; the risks of implementation of memory policy with deliberate glossing over important historical facts or their "crafty" interpretations, which in the case of changes in the political situation may lead to disastrous political consequences. Noteworthy is the position of Russian scientists regarding the elite strategy in shaping the “we” and “they” images in the framework of developing the state identity policy, the choice of non-­state actors in its implementation and the resolution of the distribution of financial, organizational and technical resources. The author believes that, despite the divergence of the views of scientists on some issues, their theoretical developments can significantly contribute to an accurate understanding of the reasons for success/failure in the implementation of the state identity policy.

Keywords

identity policy, state, political elites, mechanisms, factors, technologies, practices of implementing state identity policy

Acknowledgements

The research was carried out through the financial support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and Autonomous Non-­Profit Organization “Expert Institute for Social Research”, No. 19–011–31616 (State Policy in the Field of Formation of Identity: Conceptual Foundations, Technologies and Prospects).

References

  1. Achkasov, V. A. (2012). Politika identichnosti mul'tietnichnykh gosudarstv v kontekste resheniya problemy bezopasnosti [Identity Policy of Multi-ethnic States in the Background of Solving Security Issues]. Sankt-Peterburg: Izd-vo SPbGU.
  2. Achkasov, V. A., Babayev, S. A. (2000). “Mobilizovannaya etnichnost'”: etnicheskoye izmereniye politicheskoy kul'tury sovremennoy Rossii [“Mobilized Ethnicity”: The Ethnic Dimension of the Political Culture of Modern Russia]. Sankt-Peterburg: Izd-vo Sankt-Peterburgskogo filosofskogo obshchestva.
  3. Anspach, R. R. (1979). From Stigma to Identity Politics: Political Activism among the Physical Disabled and Former Mental Patients. Social Science and Medicine. Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, 13(C), 765–773.
  4. Bernstein, M. (2005). Identity Politics. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 47–74.
  5. Brubaker, R. (2012). Etnichnost' bez grup [Ethnicity without Groups]. Moskva: Izd-vo NIU VSHE.
  6. Calhoun, C. (Ed.) (1994). Social Theory and the Politics of Identity. Oxford, UK and Cambridge, USA, Blackwell.
  7. Castells, M. (1997) The Power of Identity. Oxford and Maiden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
  8. Gillis, J. (Ed.) (1994). Commemorations. The Politics of National Identity. Princeton, Princeton UP.
  9. Hall, S. (1991). Old and New Identities, Old and New Ethnicities. In A. D. King (Ed.). Culture, Globalization and the World System (pp. 41–68). London, Macmillan.
  10. Heyes, C. (2002). Identity Politics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-politics/.
  11. Jensen, M. (2018). Russian Trolls and Fake News: Information or Identity Logics? Journal of International Affairs, 71(1.5), 115–124.
  12. Kenny, M. (2004). The Politics of Identity: Liberal Political Theory and the Dilemmas of Difference. Cambridge, Polity Press.
  13. Lee, M. J. (2017). Considering Political Identity: Conservatives, Republicans, and Donald Trump. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 20(4), 719–730.
  14. Malinova, O. Yu. (2010). Simvolicheskaya politika i konstruirovaniye makropoliticheskoy identichnosti v postsovetskoy Rossii [Symbolic Policy and the Construction of Macropolitical Identity in Post-Soviet Russia]. Polis [Polis. Political Studies], 2, 90–105.
  15. Margulies, J. D. (2018). The Conservation Ideological State Apparatus. Conservation and Society, 16(2), 181–192.
  16. Mouffe, C. (Ed.) (1995). Democratic Politics and the Question of Identity. In J. Rajchman The Identity in Question. New York, Routledge.
  17. Parekh, B. A. (2008). New Politics of Identity: Political Principles for an Interdependent World. New York, Palgrave MacMillan.
  18. Potseluyev, S. P. (2012). “Simvolicheskaya politika”: k istorii kontsepta [Symbolic Politics: Towards a History of a Concept]. In O. Yu. Malinova Simvolicheskaia politika. Sbornik nauchnykh trudov [Symbolic Politics] (pp. 17–53). Moskva: Institut nauchnoi informatsii po obshchestvennym naukam RAN.
  19. Schwartz, S. J., Luyckx, K., & Vignoles, V. L. (Eds.) (2011). Handbook of Identity Theory and Research. New York, Springer.
  20. Semenenko, I. (2015). Ethnicities, Nationalism and the Politics of Semenenko, I. (2015). Ethnicities, Nationalism and the Politics of Identity: Shaping the Nation in Russia. Europe-Asia Studies, 67(2), 306–326.
  21. Semenenko, I. S. (2015). Diskursy identichnosti i obshchestvennyye nastroyeniya v Italii 2010-kh godov [Discourses of Identity and Public Sentiment in Italy in the 2010s]. In Italiya v nachale XXI veka [Italy at the Beginning of the XXI Century] (pp. 51–57). Moskva: IMEMO.
  22. Semenenko, I. S. (2016). Politika identichnosti i identichnost' v politike: etnonatsional'nye rakursy evropeiskii kontekst [Identity Politics and Identities in Politics: Interethnic Perspectives in a European Context]. Polis [Polis. Political Studies], 4, 8–28.
  23. Semenenko, I. S. (2017). Politika identichnosti [Identity Policy]. In I. S. Semenenko (Ed.) Identichnost': Lichnost', obshchestvo, politika. Entsiklopedicheskoye izdaniye [Identity: Personality, Society, Politics. Encyclopedic Edition] (pp. 647–655). Moskva: Ves' Mir.
  24. Semenenko, I. S. (2018a). Natsionalizm, separatizm, demokratiia… Metamorfozy natsional'noy identichnosti v “staroy” Yevrope [Nationalism, Separatism, and Democracy. New Patterns of National Identity in “Old” Europe]. Polis [Polis. Political Studies], 5, 70–87.
  25. Semenenko, I. S. (2018b). Proshloye na perednem kraye politiki identichnosti [History on the Frontline of Identity Politics]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnyye otnosheniya [World Economy and International Relations], 62(11), 65–76.
  26. Semenenko, I. S. (Eds.) (2017). Identichnost': Lichnost', obshchestvo, politika. Entsiklopedicheskoye izdaniye [Identity: Personality, Society, Politics. Encyclopedic Publication]. Moskva: Izd-vo “Ves' mir”.
  27. Semenenko, I. S., Рantin, V., Lapkin, V. (2016). Historical Forecasting in the Twenty-First Century: The Kondratyev Cycles, Evolutionary Cycles and Prospects for World Development: Book Reviews. Social Sciences, 47(1), 137–142.
  28. Semenenko, I., Lapkin, V., Bardin, A., Pantin, V. (2018). Between the State and the Nation: Dilemmas of Identity Politics in Post-soviet Society. Social Sciences, 49(2), 52–74.
  29. Tuck, E., Yang, K.W. (2017) Late Identity. Critical Ethnic Studies, l (3), 1–19.
  30. Vogt, P. (2018). How Moravian Are the Moravians? The Paradox of Moravian Identity. Journal of Moravian History, 18(1), 77–101.