From nationalism to nation-building: Latvian politics and minority policy*
From nationalism to nation-building: Latvian politics and minority policy*
复制标题
从民族主义到国家建设：拉脱维亚政治和少数民族政策*
DOI：
10.1080/00905990600841918
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
D. Galbreath
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Galbreath
随着苏联的解体和拉脱维亚随后的独立，少数群体成为多数群体，多数群体成为少数群体。1991年8月以后，拉脱维亚人和俄罗斯人的情况就是如此。波罗的海国家率先走向自治，然后是独立。拉脱维亚苏维埃社会主义共和国的民族主义运动主要是少数民族主义运动。为什么少数民族要动员起来？Gurr发现少数民族的反叛有两个原因：相对剥夺和群体动员。相对匮乏回答了为什么这样做的问题，它反映了拉脱维亚语言和文化维斯于苏联时期俄罗斯语言和文化的地位。虽然相对剥夺受到相当多的批评，因为它无法解释一个群体何时会动员起来，但这个概念可以在拉脱维亚恢复独立之前和之后的民族主义言论中找到。群体动员进一步解释了少数群体何时可以提出政治主张。考虑到政治机会结构的变化，开放政策的变化使民族主义运动在波罗的海国家动员起来。
With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the subsequent independence of Latvia, a minority group became a majority and a majority group became a minority. This has been the situation for Latvians and Russians after August 1991. The Baltic States led the way towards first autonomy and then independence. The nationalist movement in the Latvian SSR was primarily a minority nationalist movement. Why do minorities mobilise? Gurr finds that minorities rebel for two reasons: relative deprivation and group mobilisation. Relative deprivation answers the question of why and it characterizes the status of the Latvian language and culture vis-à-vis that of Russia during the Soviet period. While relative deprivation has come under considerable criticism because of its inability to explain when a group will mobilise, the notion can be found in the nationalist rhetoric before and since the restoration of Latvian independence. Group mobilisation goes further in explaining when minorities may assert political claims. Considered in terms of changes in the political opportunity structure, the changing politics of glasnost allowed the nationalist movements to mobilise in the Baltic States.