UNIT 5

Ethnic Groups, Ethnicity and Ethnic Identity

 Identity

Identity in its basic sense is a characteristic that identifies one thing,

person or group of persons from one another.

 Objects have also their identity.

 Therefore, identity is something that identifies something, someone

and some group as who they are in relation to other individuals or

groups.
 Social identity

 Identities attached to humans can have two types: group and individual.

 Individual identities are studied by psychologists while group or social identities are

studied by sociologists, social anthropologists, and other related disciplines.

 Individual identities are, in a psychological sense, inner-psychological ones.

 Identities that are attached to social groups are called social identities.

 Ethnic identity is one part of social identity.

 Social groups identified by ethnic identities are called ethnic groups.

 Ethnic identity and ethnic groups

 Ethnic identity refers to a set of characteristics that make a social group “ethnic”.

 It is not easy to determine variables that make a group ethnic since they vary

depending on time, place and circumstances.

 Smith (1996) state an ethnic group usually exhibits, albeit in varying degrees, six

main features.

 These are proper name, common ancestry, shared historical memories, common

culture, a link with homeland and a sense of solidarity

 Proper Name

 The first letter of a proper name is written in capital letters.

 Every society gives a personal name for its members since they have

identified one person from another.

 An ethnic group must have a proper name to identify itself from another.

 In Ethiopia, we have many ethnic groups which we call by their name.

 A proper name gives an essence for an ethnic group as it gives for a person.
 Common Culture

 Elements of cultural identity include language , religion, customs, values, and

norms.

 Language is the most obvious aspect of ethnic identity.

 People’s identity can be easily noticed from the language they speak.

 Linguistic identity can be part of a cultural identity since using one’s own

language is a way of practicing and preserving one’s own culture.

 Common ancestry/shared historical memories

 Ethnic groups also have a myth of common ancestry, a myth that includes the idea

of a common origin in time and place that gives an ethnic/a group/sense of fictive

kinship.

 Moreover, they also have shared actual or fictive historical memories, or better,

 Shared memories of a common past, including heroes, events, and their

commemorations.
 A link with homeland

 A homeland can be an actual or imagined physical place where members of a given ethnic

group live or lived in the past.

 Places often give a symbolic attachment to the ancestral land.

 Each ethnic group in Ethiopia, in principle, is associated with a given homeland.

 The Ethiopian administrative boundaries are formed based on an ethnic group inhabiting a

certain land.

 The 1995 FDRE constitution under article 39 (5) defines ethnic groups have
 A sense of Solidarity

 A sense of solidarity on the part of at least some sections of an ethnic group is important.

 If ethnic groups have concrete features of identity that makes them different from other

groups

 There must be knowledge on the part of the group about their own identity.

 A group may not like their own identity and want to be assimilated to another, or they

may like their identity very much and want to coerce the whole world to accept them.
 Ethnicity

 Parsons (1975) considers that ethnicity is ‘a defined group with a unique sense of identity’.

 He states that the main feature of ethnicity is a specific form of group solidarity basically as

the result of ‘transgenerational common cultural tradition and voluntary adherence to that

group’.

 In other words, there are two conditions of ethnicity in this definition.

 First, there must be aggregate groups that have common history and tradition

 Second, there must be the solidarity of these groups, solidarity not essentially based on
Cont.…

 According to Parson second concept, it lies mainly in intra-group relationships

than inter-group ones.

 It views ethnicity as an in-group sense of solidarity, a voluntary action of group

affiliation as the result of common cultural tradition.

 Erikson (2002) states ethnicity is an aspect of relationships between groups that

consider they together belong to a given group.

 He is putting a different perspective and refers to an intergroup relationship rather

than the relationship among members of the same group.
Cont.….

 Identity has an implication or consequence for the people who bear it.

 For example, what does it mean to be an adolescent? What does it mean to be a Muslim

or a Christian? What does it mean to be one or another ethnic group member?

 Ethnic identity simply refers to an in-group content of identification but ethnicity refers to

a framework of interaction.

 While “ethnic identity” refers to a fact, ethnicity is a post facto phenomenon.

 By this argument, when we talk about ethnic conflicts, we are referring to ethnicity.
 Ethnic Identity Vs Ethnicity

Ethnic Identity Ethnicity

Raw material for differentiation Raw material consumed /interpreted

Comes after the fact, ethnic identity

A priority Condition and then ethnic groups must exist
first for ethnicity to exist
Group of Peoples Situation
Cont.…
 Since ethnicity is a sense of belongingness, solidarity, commitment to one’s

ethnic group identity, then we can realize that there are different levels of

expression of ethnicity.

 Ethnicity may range from a group having the most extreme sentiment which

urges to consider their own ethnic group alone as the best others are inferior.

 Thus, ethnicity can range from the weakest manifestation of solidarity or even

negative solidarity to vanity.

 Range of Ethnicity

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

• Group denies itself • Group accepts and • Group considers itself as a

(negative consequences recognizes itself as superior while others are

about itself). a distinct a group
inferior so would be
• The result would be • It also recognizes
destroyed or assimilated by
assimilation. others as distinct
force.
groups.
• This can be the stage of
• This result would
be mutual respect. vanity.
Cont.…

 Thus, as ethnicity escalates into the level of vanity, there will be ethnic conflict.

 As one ethnic group boasts against others, it will trigger other ethnic groups to boast too.

 As one ethnic group wants to take advantage of another, another ethnic group will likely

start to resist.

 On the other hand, when the relationship between ethnic groups becomes moderate,

cooperation and peaceful coexistence will likely exist. Otherwise, there will be conflict.

 Immoderate manifestation of ethnicity has become a global problem.

 Historical Background about Ethnicity

 After the end of the Second World War, words like “ethnicity”,

“ethnic groups” “ethnic conflict” and “nationalism” have become quite

common terms in the English language, and they keep cropping up in

the presses, TV news, political programs and casual conversations.

 Also, there has been a parallel development in the social sciences with

a growing interest in such studies.

Cont.…

 During the 1980s and early 1990s, we have witnessed an explosion in the growth

of scholarly publications on ethnicity, ethnic phenomenon and nationalism

across different disciplines within the social sciences.

 An important reason for the current academic interest in ethnicity and nationalism

is the fact that such phenomena have become so visible in many societies that it

has become impossible to ignore them.

Cont..

 In the early 20th C, many social theorists held that ethnicity and nationalism

would decrease in importance and eventually vanish as a result of modernization,

industrialization and individualism.

 This never came about. On the contrary, ethnicity and nationalism have grown

in political importance in the world, particularly since World War II.

 The study of ethnicity and ethnic relations has in recent years come to play a

central role in the social sciences, to a large extent replacing class structure and
Cont..

 This has occurred on an interdisciplinary basis involving social anthropology,

sociology, political theory, political philosophy and history (Erikson, 2002).

 In this regard, the academic and popular use of the term ‘ethnicity’ is fairly

modern.

 According to John Hutchinson and Anthony Smith (1996), the term “ethnicity” is

relatively a new concept, first appearing in the Oxford English Dictionary in

1953.
Cont..

 The English origin of the term ‘ethnicity’ is connected to the term

“ethnic”, which has been in use since the Middle Ages.

 The word is derived from the Greek term ‘ethnos’ which, in turn, derived

from the Latin word ‘ethnikos’.

 Literally ‘etnikos’ means a group of people bound together by the

same manners, customs or other distinctive features (Vanderwerf et al.,

Cont..

 Contrary to its literal meaning, ancient Greeks were using the term ‘ethnos’ in

practice to refer to non-Hellenic, people who are non-Greek and considered as

second-class

 Likewise, in early England, it used to refer to someone who was neither

Christian nor Jewish.

 In its modern sense, it was only after the end of World War II that the term ethnic

is widely adopted and began to use when replaced “race” within both the North
Cont.…

 The North American tradition adopted ‘ethnic’ as a substitute for minority groups

within a larger society of the nation-state referring to the Jews, Italians, Irish and

other people considered inferior to the dominant group of largely British descent.

 On the other hand, the European tradition regularly chose to use ‘ethnic group’ as

a synonym for nationhood, defined historically by descent or territory

(Vanderwerf et al., 2009).

Cont.…

 The fall of communism and the breakup of the Soviet-style federations along

‘ethnic’ lines and the emergence of ‘ethnic cleansing’ policies in the Balkans and

the Caucasus have further complicated these definitional issues.

 With the wars on former Yugoslav soil, extensive and influential mass media

coverage of ‘ethnic conflict’ has seen the term ‘ethnic’ degenerate into a synonym

for tribal, primitive, barbaric and backward.

Cont.…

 Finally, the ever-increasing influx of asylum seekers, refugees and economic

migrants to Western Europe, North America and Australia, who do not necessarily

express visible or significant physical, cultural or religious differences to their

hosts,

 Together with their uncertain legal status (i.e., waiting for a decision on asylum),

has relegated the term ‘ethnicity’ again to non-citizens who inhabit ‘our land’, just

as it did in the days of ancient Greece and Judea; that is, to second-class people.
Cont.…

 What is obvious from this short history of the term is the fact that ‘ethnicity’ contains a

multiplicity of meanings.

 Such a plasticity and ambiguity of the concept allows for deep misunderstandings as

well as political misuses.

 As Jack David Eller (1999:8), “some of the most confusing problems arise from the

vagueness of the term and phenomenon called ethnicity and from its indefinite and

ever-expanding domain.
Theories of Ethnicity
 1. Primordialism

 It was popular theory until the mid-1970s.

 Clifford Geertz and Anthony D. Smith are among the main proponents of this theory.

 Primordialism has three basic features

 First, primordial identities are given a priori conditions.

 They are not derived from some other sources Such as, for example, culture or interactions

of man with ecology or other neighboring cultures.

 Rather, they exist in their own right. “They are ‘natural’ even ‘spiritual’ rather than

sociological”.
Cont.…

 Second, primordial identities are “ineffable”. Gifted with a certain coercive

power of action.

 Third, primordial attributes are also qualitatively different from others

 E.g. (class attributes) because they are loaded with emotion and affection.

 They bear special quality which confers a special feeling to its bearers.

 Primordialism is believed to be the oldest theory on ethnic identity in

sociological and anthropological literature.

Cont.…

 Clifford Geertz considers ethnicity as a natural phenomenon with its foundations

in primordial ties - deriving mainly from kinship, locality and culture.

 In its general sense then, it can be said that ethnicity is something given, ascribed

at birth, deriving from the kin-and-clan structure of human society, and hence

something more or less fixed and permanent (Geertz, 1963; Isaacs, 1975; Stack,

1986).
Cont.…
 Smith (1994) also suggests differentiating between two forms of primordialism.

 These are “strong” and “weak” primordialism.

 The strong version holds that ethnic ties are “universal, natural, and given in all human

association, as much as are speech or kinship”

 The weak version claims that ethnic ties and sentiments are deep-seated and non-rational so

far as participants are concerned, members of a community feel that their community has

existed from time-immemorial,

 And that its symbols and traditions possess a “deep-antiquity” which gives them a unique
 Many scholars today agree that primordialism is a bankrupt concept which of less helpful for

the analyses of ethnicity and identity

Strengths Weaknesses
 Ignores individuals who attach little
 Ability to explain the power of ethnic
importance to group identity;
ties (Cornell and Hratmann 2007),  Ascriptive nature of ethnic identities

 Compelling nature of ethnic is a controversial issue;

 Ignores origin and extinction of ethnic

attachments
groups
 2. Instrumentalism

 Instrumentalism sees ethnic groups are, primarily, interest groups.

 They are organized by common identities by means of which they promote their needs.

 So, changing circumstances alert the revival of ethnic groups carrying some common

interests under the cover of common identity and pursued in association with changing

circumstances.

 This means, while certain circumstances may refresh them to pursue some interests,

others may cause them to respond by hibernation of their identities.

Cont.….
 The central notion of circumstances in alerting or hibernating ethnic groups, Sometimes

called circumstantial theory (Cornell and Hartmann 2007).

 Proponents of this perspective Abner Cohen, Paul Brass and Ted Gurr advocate that in the

contexts of modern states, leaders (political elites) use and manipulate perceptions of ethnic

identity to further their own ends and stay in power.

 In this regard, “ethnicity is created in the dynamics of elite competition within the
boundaries determined by political and economic realities” and ethnic groups are to be seen
as a product of political myths, created and manipulated by culture elites in their pursuit of
advantages and power.
Cont.…

 Ethnic groups share common interests, and in pursuit of these interests they
develop “basic organizational functions: such as

 Distinctiveness or boundaries (ethnic identity);

 Communication;

 Authority structure;

 Decision making procedure;

 Ideology; and

 Socialization” (Cohen 1974: xvi–xvii).

Cont.…

 According to instrumentalism, the latent persistence of ethnic identities for any longer

period is not due to their immutable nature, but the absence of situational imperatives for

their resurgence.

 Moreover, this theory suggests that ethnic identities can be adhered to or changed

depending on certain practical functions.

 Depending on a certain utility factor, ethnic group identities may respond even by

switching to some other identity, let alone refreshing existing ones (Cornell and Hartmann

2007: 59).
Cont.…

 Common to instrumentalism approaches, regardless of the degree to which they focus on

the interests or instrumentality, is the idea that

 Ethnic groups are largely products of concrete social and historical situations that for a

variety of reasons heighten or reduce the salience and/or utility of such identities in

the lives of individuals and groups.

 Interest and utility remain in most cases central features of this approach.

 But the most important point in instrumentalism is that ethnicity is a dependent variable.
 Strength and Weakness of Substantial theory
Strength Weakness

 Too much focus on economic analyses.

 Rings about non-primordial features  Does not focus on ethnicity existing

to explain identity independent of power and economy.

 Focus on circumstances means that if there are

no circumstances, there is no ethnicity.

 It does not explain why the masses follow the

elites.
 3. Constructivism

 Scholars influenced by instrumentalism but eager to remove its limitations

 The scholars focused their attention not only on circumstances that make ethnic

identities but also on ways ethnic groups construct their own identities, shaping and

reshaping them and the boundaries that enclose them.

 Ethnic groups may be influenced by other circumstances including by what others make

about them, but they also use the inputs of history, cultural practices, and preexisting

identities to fashion their own distinctive notions of who they are (Cornell and Hartmann

2007:81-82).
Cont.…

 Fredrik Barth is the leading proponent of this approach viewed ethnic identity as an

“individualistic strategy” in which individuals move from one identity to another to

“advance their personal economic and political interests, or to minimize their losses”

(Jones 1997:74).

 Following Barth, ethnic identity forms through boundary maintenance and interaction

between individuals.

 Overall, interaction between individuals does not lead to an assimilation or

Cont.…

 Ethnic group is hence a result of group relations in which the boundaries are

established through mutual perceptions and not by means of any objectively distinct

culture.

 According to constructionists, it is true to primordia lists that ethnic identity has a

trace of primordialism.

 It legitimizes the role of internal factors in the making of ethnic identity.

 Even when circumstances or groups adhere to, construct or reconstruct

Cont.….

 Yet, the formation of ethnic identities is not completely instrumental either.

 It is not appropriate to give complete subordination of ethnic identities to the

occurrence of situations.

 Moreover, it is not also helpful to attach the purpose of the existence of ethnic

phenomenon to some kind of utility alone.

 This approach denies the existence of ethnic identities in sui generic (Cornell

and Hartmann 2007: 95).

Cont.…

 Therefore, constructivists have come up with a synthesis of both theories.

 It sees the construction of identities as a two-way process.

 Identities are made by an interaction between circumstantial factors on the one

hand and assertion, interpretation, definition, and redefinition of the groups

themselves.

 Construction also involves not a one-time occasional circumstance but a

continuous process, which continues to unfold.

 As a result, ethnic identities are constructed but are never finished.

Cont.…

 There are different contextual factors which facilitate construction of ethnic identities.

 It can occur in any part of societal relations. However, identify politics, labor markets,

residential spaces, social institutions, culture and daily experience as “critical sites”.

 E.g. Politics facilitates either construction of group identities through

 Its systems of boundary maintenance, political organizations and Informal practices,

 Government classifications systems of ethnic groups.

 In short, politics governs ethnic relations in some way in its policy, and that policy
contributes to the construction of identities of ethnic groups in a given political system
Cont.…

 Another factor, labor market facilitates the construction of ethnic group

identities through its pattern of labor division.

 Every society has a form of division of labor that offers a readymade

categorical scheme contributing construction of new identities.

 Besides Cornell and Hartmann further go that social institutions such as

schools, churches, social service organizations, and the like contribute to

the construction of new identities (see Cornell and Hartmann 2007:170-178).