What is the difference between an ethnic group and a nation. How does the formation of an ethnic group occur? Civil and ethnocultural nations

Ethnos- This social community, which is characterized by specific cultural models that determine the nature of human activity in the world, and which functions in accordance with special patterns aimed at maintaining a certain unique for each society correlation of cultural models within society for a long time, including periods of major sociocultural changes.

Signs of ETHNOSIS - Physical appearance in accordance with the anthropological classification divisions of peoples into races (hair shape, skin color, eye color, height, build, head parameters). Based on these parameters, select. 4 big races:

Eurasian(Caucasian)

Asian-American(Mongoloid)

African(Negroid)

Australoids (oceanic race)

What do they have in common?

1. Unity of origin

2. Unity place of residence,

3.unity of language (there are 12 language families in the world )

4.Self-name - how the carriers of the ethnic group call themselves.

People - community of people, members of the cat. They have a common name, language and cultural elements, have a version of a single origin, associate themselves with their territory and have a sense of solidarity. Faith in a common future.

An ethnos enters history and recognizes itself as a people when it accepts religion. The people act rationally and create something greater than themselves:

Civilization

In this section. 3 stages of ethnosocial development of people.

1) primitive society. A traditional society with a traditional culture in which inter-tribal ties are weakly expressed.

2) the stage of nationality is formed as a result of the unity and development of culturally similar tribes. It is at this moment that writing develops, the selection of those oral tales, legends, traditions, attitudes takes place. They will help shape the nation.

The appearance of the state The laws of society are not guided by the laws of their ancestors, but only rely on them, building new social systems. relationship. Ec are born. communications, market eq. the nationality is consolidated into a nation.

3) stage of National Unity. A people recognizes itself as a nation if it is united by territorial culture, language, economy, state, and a single national market.

Nation- an association of people living over a large territory that has lost blood kinship, but divides people into friends and foes, focusing on internal unity.

11.Ethnic culture(e.k.). In a broad sense, e.k. - this is a set of ways of life inherent in an ethnos, necessary for the preservation and development of the ethnos. In the narrow sense, under e.k. is understood as a set of elements of the material and spiritual culture of an ethnos, which are the main ethno-differentiating feature. E.k. - as ancient as humanity itself. Uncultured peoples not only do not exist at present, but also did not exist in the past. In the culture of each nation, phenomena that are unique to it alone are intertwined with features that are common among many ethnic groups or characteristic of all humanity in a given historical era. E.c. is usually divided into material and spiritual. The first includes things that materially exist in space over a certain period of time. To them from
housing, other buildings, food and drinks, dishes, clothing, shoes, jewelry, etc. are worn. Spiritual culture is information that exists in the collective, living memory of any human population, is passed on from generation to generation through storytelling or display, and is manifested in certain forms of behavior. Spiritual culture includes those components that are characterized by tradition and stability: labor skills, morals and customs associated with economic, social and family life, different kinds art and folk art, religious beliefs and cults.

12. Ethnogenesis of modern Russian society. The events of the ethnogenesis of the peoples of our Fatherland constitute the historical outline of the life of at least two different super-ethnic groups of the Ancient Kievan Rus and Moscow Rus'. During the unification of peoples, the Russians’ ability to “understand and accept all other peoples” was demonstrated. Our ancestors were perfectly aware of the unique way of life of the peoples they encountered, and therefore the ethnic diversity of Russia continued to increase. The diversity of Eurasian landscapes had a beneficial effect on the ethnogenesis of its peoples. The Eurasian peoples built a common statehood based on the principle of the primacy of the rights of each people to a certain way of life. In Rus', this principle was embodied in the concept of conciliarity and was observed absolutely strictly. In this way, the rights of the individual were also ensured. Historical experience has shown that as long as each nation retained the right to be itself, United Eurasia successfully held back the onslaught of Western Europe, China, and Muslims. Unfortunately, in the twentieth century. we abandoned this common sense and traditional for our

countries politicians began to be guided by European principles - they tried to make everyone the same. The mechanical transfer of Western European behavioral traditions to Russian conditions has yielded little good. After all, the Russian superethnos (in the passionate theory of ethnogenesis, an ethnic system, the highest link of the ethnic hierarchy, consisting of several ethnic groups that arose simultaneously in one landscape region, interconnected by economic, ideological and political communication, and manifested in history as a mosaic integrity.) arose for 500 years. Later. Both we and Western Europeans have always felt this difference, realized it and did not consider each other as “ours”. Since we are 500 years younger, no matter how we study the European experience, we do not

We can now achieve the prosperity and morals characteristic of Europe. Our age, our level of passionarity suggest completely different imperatives of behavior. We must realize that at the cost of Russia’s integration with Western Europe there will be a complete rejection of domestic traditions and subsequent assimilation. “The eighteenth century was the last century of the acmatic phase

Russian ethnogenesis. In the next century, the country entered a completely different ethnic time - a phase of breakdown. Today, on the threshold of the 21st century, we are close to its finale... Russia will have to go through an inertial phase - 300 years of golden autumn, the era of harvesting fruits, when an ethnic group creates a unique culture that will remain for future generations.

Passionarity is an irresistible internal desire for activity aimed at achieving certain goals.

13.Ethnic self-determination- this is the objective possibility of an ethnos to independently carry out linguistic, cultural, economic and political activities.

Ethnic self-determination is presented in the following forms:

1) linguistic self-determination - the ability of an ethnic group to communicate in their native language in another country; 2) cultural self-determination - the ability of an ethnic group to exercise cultural activities in another country (through the presence of schools, cultural institutions; opportunity to celebrate your National holidays); 3) economic self-determination - the ability of an ethnic group to carry out economic activities within another country (for example, the ethnic groups of the Volga region on the territory of Russia have economic self-determination); 4) political self-determination - the presence of one’s own statehood.

Ethnic self-determination- the process of a person’s awareness of his own ethnic characteristics and the search for his own ethnic identity. Ethnic identity is a person’s self-determination of his belonging to a particular nation or association of peoples - “French”, “Russian”, “Russian”, “European”, etc.

14. The problem of national identity. One of the psychological reasons for the growth of ethnic identity in this century is the search for guidelines and stability in a world oversaturated with information and unstable. The second psychological reason is the intensification of interethnic contacts, both direct (labor migration, movement of millions of emigrants and refugees, tourism) and indirect modern means mass communication. Repeated contacts actualize ethnic identity, since only through comparison can one most clearly perceive one’s belonging to Russians, Jews, etc. like something special. The psychological reasons for the growth of ethnic identity are the same for all humanity, but ethnicity acquires special significance in an era of radical social transformations leading to social instability. In these conditions, the ethnic group often acts as an emergency support group.

Ethnic stereotypes.

Ethnic stereotypes are relatively stable ideas about moral, mental, physical qualities, inherent in representatives of various ethnic communities. The content of social emission, as a rule, contains evaluative opinions about the specified qualities. In addition, in the content of S. e. There may also be prejudices and biases towards people of a given nationality. S. e. It is customary to divide them into autostereotypes and heterostereotypes. Autostereotypes are opinions, judgments, assessments attributed to a given ethnic community by its representatives. As a rule, autostereotypes contain a complex of positive assessments. Heterostereotypes, i.e. a set of value judgments about other peoples can be both positive and negative, depending on the historical experience of interaction between these peoples. In the content of S. e. one should distinguish between a relatively stable core - a complex of ideas about appearance representatives of a given people, about its historical past, lifestyle characteristics and work skills - and a number of changing judgments regarding communicative and moral qualities of this people. The variability of assessments of these qualities is closely related to the changing situation in interethnic and interstate relations. Adequacy of the content of S. e. is actually quite problematic. Rather, it should be assumed that S. e. reflect past and present, positive or negative experience of relations between peoples, especially in those areas of activity where these peoples most actively contacted, and sometimes competed.

The concept of “ethnicity” includes a historically established stable group of people who have a certain number of common subjective or objective characteristics. Ethnographic scientists include these characteristics as origin, language, cultural and economic characteristics, mentality and self-awareness, phenotypic and genotypic data, as well as the territory of long-term residence.

The word "ethnicity" has Greek roots and is literally translated as “people”. The word “nationality” can be considered a synonym for this definition in Russian. The term “ethnos” was introduced into scientific terminology in 1923 by the Russian scientist S.M. Shirokogorov. He gave the first definition of this word.

How does the formation of an ethnic group occur?

The ancient Greeks adopted the word “ethnos” designate other peoples who were not Greeks. Long time in Russian the word “people” was used as an analogue. Definition of S.M. Shirokogorova made it possible to emphasize the commonality of culture, relationships, traditions, way of life and language.

Modern science allows us to interpret this concept from 2 points of view:

The origin and formation of any ethnic group implies great length of time. Most often, such formation occurs around a certain language or religious beliefs. Based on this, we often pronounce such phrases as “Christian culture”, “Islamic world”, “Romance group of languages”.

The main conditions for the occurrence ethnic group are availability common territory and language. These same factors subsequently become supporting factors and the main distinguishing features of a particular ethnic group.

Additional factors influencing the formation of an ethnic group include:

1. General religious beliefs.
2. Intimacy from a racial perspective.
3. The presence of transitional interracial groups (mestizo).

Factors that unite an ethnic group include:

1. Specific features of material and spiritual culture.
2. Community of life.
3. Group psychological characteristics.
4. General awareness of oneself and the idea of ​​a common origin.
5. The presence of an ethnonym - a self-name.

Ethnicity is essentially a complex dynamic system, which is constantly undergoing processes of transformation and at the same time maintains its stability.

The culture of each ethnic group maintains a certain constancy and at the same time changes over time from one era to another. Features of national culture and self-knowledge, religious and spiritual-moral values ​​leave an imprint on the nature of the biological self-reproduction of an ethnic group.

Features of the existence of ethnic groups and their patterns

The historically formed ethnos acts as an integral social organism and has the following ethnic relations:

1. Self-reproduction occurs through repeated homogeneous marriages and the transmission from generation to generation of traditions, self-awareness, cultural values, language and religious features.
2. In the course of their existence, all ethnic groups undergo a number of processes within themselves - assimilation, consolidation, etc.
3. In order to strengthen their existence, most ethnic groups strive to create their own state, which allows them to regulate relations both within themselves and with other groups of peoples.

The laws of peoples can be considered behavioral models of relationships, which are typical for individual representatives. This also includes behavioral models that characterize individual social groups emerging within a nation.

Ethnicity can simultaneously be considered as a natural-territorial and sociocultural phenomenon. Some researchers propose to consider the hereditary factor and endogamy as a kind of connecting link that supports the existence of a particular ethnic group. However, it cannot be denied that the quality of a nation’s gene pool is significantly influenced by conquests, living standards, and historical and cultural traditions.

The hereditary factor is tracked primarily in anthropometric and phenotypic data. However, anthropometric indicators do not always completely coincide with ethnicity. According to another group of researchers, the constancy of an ethnic group is due to national identity. However, such self-awareness can simultaneously act as an indicator of collective activity.

The unique self-awareness and perception of the world of a particular ethnic group may directly depend on its activities in developing the environment. The same type of activity can be perceived and evaluated differently in the minds of different ethnic groups.

The most stable mechanism that allows preserving the uniqueness, integrity and stability of an ethnic group is its culture and common historical destiny.

Ethnicity and its types

Traditionally, ethnicity is considered primarily as a generic concept. Based on this idea, it is customary to distinguish three types of ethnic groups:

1. Clan-tribe (species characteristic of primitive society).
2. Nationality (a characteristic type in slaveholding and feudal centuries).
3. Capitalist society is characterized by the concept of nation.

There are basic factors that unite representatives of one people:

Clans and tribes historically were the very first types of ethnic groups. Their existence lasted several tens of thousands of years. As the way of life and the structure of mankind developed and became more complex, the concept of nationality appeared. Their appearance is associated with the formation of tribal unions in the common territory of residence.

Factors in the development of nations

Today in the world there are several thousand ethnic groups. They all differ in level of development, mentality, numbers, culture and language. There may be significant differences based on race and physical appearance.

For example, the number of ethnic groups such as Chinese, Russians, and Brazilians exceeds 100 million people. Along with such gigantic peoples, there are varieties in the world whose number does not always reach ten people. The level of development of different groups can also vary from the most highly developed to those living according to primitive communal principles. For every nation it is inherent own language However, there are also ethnic groups that simultaneously use several languages.

In the process of interethnic interactions, processes of assimilation and consolidation are launched, as a result of which a new ethnic group can gradually form. The socialization of an ethnic group occurs through the development of such social institutions as family, religion, school, etc.

TO unfavorable factors for the development of the nation include the following:

1. High level mortality among the population, especially in childhood.
2. High prevalence of respiratory infections.
3. Alcohol and drug addiction.
4. Destruction of the family institution - a high number of single-parent families, divorces, abortions, and parental abandonment of children.
5. Low quality of life.
6. High unemployment rate.
7. High crime rate.
8. Social passivity of the population.

Classification and examples of ethnicity

Classification is carried out according to a variety of parameters, the simplest of which is number. This indicator not only characterizes the state of the ethnic group at the current moment, but also reflects the nature of its historical development. Usually, formation of large and small ethnic groups proceeds along completely different paths. The level and nature of interethnic interactions depends on the size of a particular ethnic group.

Examples of the largest ethnic groups include the following (according to data from 1993):

The total number of these peoples is 40% of the total population globe. There is also a group of ethnic groups with a population of 1 to 5 million people. They make up about 8% of the total population.

Most small ethnic groups may number several hundred people. As an example, we can cite the Yukaghir, an ethnic group living in Yakutia, and the Izhorians, a Finnish ethnic group inhabiting territories in Leningrad region.

Another classification criterion is population dynamics in ethnic groups. Minimal population growth is observed in Western European ethnic groups. The maximum growth is observed in the countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America.

Off the top of my head, this is a rhetorical question. It seems that everything here is absolutely clear and understandable.

A nation is people unitedby its origin, language, common views, common place of residence.

The people are people united not only by one history, land and common language, but also unitedstate system.

It is from the identity of worldviews that such phrases as “the great American nation,” “Russian people,” and “the people of Israel” arose.

It must be said that the words “nation” and “people” are closely related to the concept “ nationalism" And there are plenty of stories when liberal nationalism (protecting the interests of each people separately) can easily turn into extreme nationalism (chauvinism). Therefore, the issue under consideration requires an attentive attitude.

Foundations of Russian statehood

In the opinion of the progressively thinking part of the population, the question of peoples and nations should, first of all, be based on Constitution the country in which the person lives and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The first article of the founding document of the United Nations explains clearly and simply that human beings are “born free and equal” in both “dignity” and “rights.”

People living on the territory of Russia and using a single state language (Russian) proudly call themselves Russians.

It should be noted that the Constitution of the Russian Federation begins with words that reflect the essence of the life principles of Russians: “We, a multinational people Russian Federation..." And in Chapter 1 of the “Fundamentals of the Constitutional System,” Article 3 explains that “the bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power in the Russian Federation is its multinationalpeople».

Thus, the concept of “people” means all nations and nationalities living within one state.
And Russia is no exception. It is the homeland of different peoples who speak different languages ​​and profess different religions, and, most importantly, they differ in the originality of cultures and mentality.

But the question posed in the title of the article excites the consciousness of the public and gives rise to many completely different opinions to this day.

One of the main and state-supported opinions is the assertion that “ in the friendship of peoples - the unity of Russia" And “interethnic peace” is the “basis of life” Russian state. But this opinion is not supported by radical nationalists who, because of their beliefs, are ready to blow up political system Russian Federation.

Therefore, issues of tolerance, patriotism, interethnic conflicts, active life position, are brought up for wide public discussion not by accident.

After all, it is no longer a secret that in interethnic relations the problem of not only cruelty, but also real aggression has become very acute. This is due, first of all, to economicproblems(competition for jobs), and then with the search for those responsible for the current economic situation in the state. After all, it’s always easier to say that if “not for these...”, then we would have butter on the table.

Scientific understanding of the terms “people” and “nation”

Let us consider the concepts of “nation” and “people” more specifically. Today there is no single understanding of the term “nation”.
But in the sciences that deal with development issues human society, two main formulations of the word “nation” are accepted.
The first says that this is a community of people who it worked outhistorically based on the unity of land, economy, politics, language, culture and mentality. All this together is expressed in a single civic identity.

The second point of view says that a nation is a unity of people who are characterized by a common origin, language, land, economy, worldview and culture. Their relationship is manifested in ethnicconsciousness.
The first point of view states that a nation is democraticco-citizenship.
In the second case, it is argued that a nation is an ethnic group. This point of view exists in the universal human consciousness.
Let's consider these concepts as well.

It is believed that ethnicity is historicallystable community of people living on a certain land, who have features of external similarity, a common culture, language, a common way of thinking and consciousness. A nation was formed on the basis of associations of clans, tribes and nationalities. The creation of a cohesive state contributed to their formation.

Therefore, in the scientific understanding, a nation is considered as a civil community of people. And then, as a community of people of a certain state.

Civil and ethnocultural nations

Despite the different approaches to the concept of the word “nation,” all participants in the discussions are unanimous in one thing: there are two types of nations – ethnocultural and civil.

If we talk about the peoples of Russia, then we can say that all the small nationalities inhabiting the North of the Russian Federation are ethnocultural nations.
And the Russian people are a civil nation, since it was practically formed within the existing statehood with a common political history and laws.

And, of course, when it comes to nations, we should not forget their fundamental right - the nation’s right to self-determination. This international term, which is taken into account by representatives of all states, gives a nation the opportunity to secede from one or another state and form its own.

However, it must be said that during the collapse of the USSR, the Russian people, who were in large numerical superiority in most republics, were unable to take advantage of this right and practically remained most divided nation in the world.

On the main differences between a people and a nation

Based on all of the above, we can safely say that the nation and people are conceptstotally different, but having a single root of formation.

The people are culturalcomponent, that is, these are people connected not only by blood ties, but having a single official language, culture, territory and shared past.

Nation – politicalcomponent of the state. That is, a nation is a people who have managed to create their own state. Without it, the nation does not exist. For example, Russians who live abroad are among the Russian people, but not the Russian nation. They are identified with the nation of the state where they live.

Citizenship is the only criterion by which a nation is defined. In addition, we must take into account such a concept as a “titular” nation. Their language is most often the official language, and their culture becomes dominant. At the same time, other nations and nationalities living on their territory do not lose their individuality.

Conclusion

And there’s one more thing I’d definitely like to say. There are no nations, good or bad, there are people, good or bad, and their actions. This is always worth remembering. After all, Russia has many nationalities. And knowledge of the concepts of “people” and “nation” will help to accept and understand the ethnic diversity of the country with the proud name of Russia.

lives on our planet more quantity of people. As a rule, people live with those close to them by blood and spirit. Accordingly, people of the same nationality try to stay closer to each other. In such groups it is easier to understand customs and culture, communicate in the same language, and even use National dishes for food. The wide variety of nationalities on the planet leads to great fragmentation of people into many groups. So what is nationality? Are people really that different from each other? This question can be answered.

Nationality and ethnicity

It is generally accepted that nationality is a person's affiliation with a country or a group of related countries, usually located in close proximity to each other. Such countries have the same religion, the same culture, and even the people look the same. The passport even had a column in the USSR - nationality. This indicated that the person belonged to one of the union states, for example, Georgian, Armenian, Tajik, etc. But nationality is just a man-made term that conventionally divides people into groups. There is no such term in genetics, scientists divide people into ethnic groups.

If nationality can take into account both spiritual and physical parameters, then ethnicity determines the true, genetic roots of a person. We can say that ethnicity is the same set of unique genetic mutations that assigns a person to a certain haplogroup and determines his ethnic origin. Let us define this new term for us, haplogroup. Haplogroup – is a set of mutations in the human genome(for example, measuring one nucleotide for another, alanine for guanine), leading to the emergence of a new genotype, different from the ancestral one. Such mutations usually arose as a result of mixing of tribes, which could occur due to wars, cataclysms, relocations, etc.

Ethnic groups

Ethnic groups, or more precisely, haplogroups of people, are based on 23 lines. Of these, African and non-African branches can also be distinguished. The African branch has the most ancient history and begins approximately 220,000 years ago. The non-African one is much younger, about 64,000 years ago. Naturally, we are now talking about homo sapiens. A if we take the Slavic haplogroup, which is considered the main Slavic R1a, then this haplogroup is one of the youngest. This calculation is carried out from the first ancestor, who will receive those very unique mutations as a result of genealogical evolution.

Every person can find out their genealogy. To do this, you just need to do a DNA test for ethnic origin. To begin the test, you need to collect DNA samples - this can be a mouth swab or any genetic material(nails, hair, blood, Toothbrush etc.). Next, DNA is extracted from the sample and research is carried out. DTL has it all necessary equipment and a staff of qualified specialists to conduct DNA genealogy tests. As a result, a colorful and understandable expert opinion is issued. Which can be wonderful and an original gift not only for yourself, but also for your loved one.

A little
about nations, ethnic groups and scientific approaches.

About some concepts.
Ethnology from the Greek words - ethnos - people and logos - word, judgment - the science of the peoples of the world (ethnic groups, more precisely,

ethnic communities) their origin (etognesis), history (ethnic history), their culture. The term ethnology has its own
owes its spread to the famous French physicist and thinker M. Ampere, who determined the place of ethnology in the system humanities along with history, archeology and other disciplines. At the same time, ethnology included, according to
Ampere's thoughts, as a subdiscipline of physical anthropology (the science of the physical properties of individual ethnic
groups: hair and eye color, structure of the skull and skeleton, blood, etc.). In the 19th century in Western European countries
ethnological research developed successfully. Along with the term “ethnology”, another name for this science has become widespread - ethnography.
– from the Greek words – ethnos – people and grapho – I write, i.e. description of peoples, their history and cultural characteristics. However, in
second half of the 19th century the prevailing point of view was that ethnography was viewed as
predominantly a descriptive science based on field materials, and ethnology as a theoretical discipline,
based on ethnographic data. Finally, the French ethnologist K. Lévi-Strauss believed that ethnography, ethnology and anthropology - three successive stages in the development of human science: ethnography represents the descriptive stage of the study of ethnic groups, field
research and classification; ethnology – synthesis of this knowledge and its systematization; anthropology seeks to study
man in all his manifestations. As a result, at different times and in different countries gave preference to any of these terms, depending on
developed tradition. Thus, in France the term “ethnology” (l’ethnologie) still prevails, in England along with it
The concept of “social anthropology” (ethnology, social anthropology) is widely used; in the USA the designation
This science is “cultural anthropology”. In the Russian tradition
the terms “ethnology” and “ethnography” were initially considered synonymous. However, since the late 1920s. in the USSR ethnology, along with sociology, began to be considered
"bourgeois" science. Therefore, in the Soviet era, the term “ethnology” was almost completely replaced by the term “ethnography”. IN last years, however,
the prevailing tendency is to call this science, following Western and American models, ethnology or sociocultural
anthropology.

What is an ethnos, or ethnic group (more precisely, an ethnic community or ethnic
group)? This understanding varies greatly in different disciplines - ethnology,
psychology, sociology and representatives of different scientific schools and directions. Here
briefly about some of them.
Thus, many Russian ethnologists continue to consider ethnicity as a real
existing concept – social group, formed during the historical
development of society (V. Pimenov). According to Yu. Bromley, ethnicity is historically
a stable population of people that has developed in a certain territory and has
common relatively stable features of language, culture and psyche, and
also by awareness of one’s unity (self-awareness), fixed in self-name.
The main thing here is self-awareness and a common self-name. L. Gumilev understands ethnicity
primarily as a natural phenomenon; this is one or another group of people (dynamic
system), opposing itself to other similar groups (we are not
we), having its own special internal
structure and a given stereotype of behavior. Such an ethnic stereotype, according to
Gumilyov, is not inherited, but is acquired by the child in the process
cultural socialization and is quite strong and unchanged throughout
human life. S. Arutyunov and N. Cheboksarov considered ethnicity as spatially
limited clusters of specific cultural information, and interethnic
contacts – as an exchange of such information. There is also a point of view according to
which ethnicity is, like race, an initially, eternally existing community
people, and belonging to it determines their behavior and national character.
According to the extreme point of view, belonging to an ethnic group is determined by birth -
at present, practically no one shares it among serious scientists.

In foreign anthropology, there has recently been a widespread belief that ethnos
(or rather an ethnic group, since foreign anthropologists avoid using
the word "ethnicity") is an artificial construct that arose as a result of purposeful
efforts of politicians and intellectuals. However, most researchers agree that ethnos (ethnic group)
represents one of the most stable groups, or communities, of Lyuli.
This is an intergenerational community, stable over time, with a stable composition, with
In this case, each person has a stable ethnic status, it is impossible to “exclude” him
from the ethnic group.

In general, it is necessary to pay attention that the theory of ethnos is the favorite brainchild of domestic
scientists; in the West, problems of ethnicity are discussed in a completely different way.
Western scientists have priority in developing the theory of the nation.

Back in 1877, E. Renan gave a statist definition of the concept of “nation”: a nation unites
all residents of a given state, regardless of their race or ethnicity. Religious
accessories, etc. Since the 19th century.
Two models of the nation took shape: French and German. French model following
Renan, corresponds to the understanding of the nation as a civil community
(state) based on political choice and civic kinship.
The reaction to this French model was the model of the German romantics, appealing
to the “voice of blood”, according to her, a nation is an organic community connected
general culture. Currently, they talk about “Western” and “Eastern” models of society,
or about the civil (territorial) and ethnic (genetic) models of the nation, Quite a lot
scientists believe that the idea of ​​a nation is often used for political purposes - by the ruling
or those wishing to gain power by groupings. What
concerns ethnic groups, or ethnic groups (ethnic groups), then in foreign, and in recent times
years and in domestic science it is customary to distinguish three main approaches to this
range of problems – primordialist, constructivist and instrumentalist
(or situationist).

A few words about each of them:

One of the “pioneers” in the study of ethnicity, whose research had a huge impact on social science,
there was a Norwegian scientist F. Barth, who argued that ethnicity is one of the forms
social organization, culture (ethnic – socially organized
variety of culture). He also introduced the important concept of “ethnic border” - el
that critical feature of an ethnic group beyond which attribution to it ends
members of this group itself, as well as assignment to it by members of other groups.

In the 1960s, like other theories of ethnicity, the theory of primordialism (from the English primordial - original) was put forward.
The direction itself arose much earlier, it goes back to the already mentioned
ideas of the German romantics, his followers considered ethnos to be the original and
an unchanging unification of people according to the principle of “blood”, i.e. possessing unchanging
signs. This approach was developed not only in German, but also in Russian
ethnology. But more on that later. In the 1960s. did not become widespread in the West
biological-racial, but a “cultural” form of primordialism. Yes, one of her
founders, K. Geertz argued that ethnic self-awareness (identity) refers
to “primordial” feelings and that these primordial feelings largely determine
people's behavior. These feelings, however, wrote K. Geertz, are not innate,
but arise in people as part of the socialization process and subsequently exist
as fundamental, sometimes – as unchangeable and determining people’s behavior –
members of the same ethnic group. The theory of primordialism has repeatedly been subjected to serious criticism, especially
from supporters of F. Barth. So D. Baker noted that feelings are changeable and
situationally determined and cannot generate the same behavior.

As a reaction to primordialism, ethnicity began to be understood as an element of ideology (attributing oneself to
this group or attributing someone to it by members of other groups). Ethnicity and ethnic groups became
also be considered in the context of the struggle for resources, power and privileges. .

Before characterizing other approaches to ethnicity (ethnic groups), it would be appropriate to recall the definition
given to an ethnic group German sociologist M. Weber. According to him, this
a group of people whose members have a subjective belief in a common
descent due to similarity in physical appearance or customs, or both
another together, or because of common memory. What is emphasized here is
BELIEF in common origin. And in our time, many anthropologists believe that the main thing
the IDEA of community can be a differentiating feature for an ethnic group
origin and/or history.

In general, in the West, in contrast to primordialism and under the influence of Barth’s ideas, they received the greatest
dissemination of the constructivist approach to ethnicity. His supporters believed
ethnicity is a construct created by individuals or elites (powerful, intellectual,
cultural) with specific goals(struggle for power, resources, etc.). Many
also especially emphasize the role of ideology (primarily nationalisms) in the construction
ethnic communities. Followers of constructivism include English
scientist B. Anderson (his book bears the “talking” and expressive title “Imaginary
community" - fragments of it were posted on this site), E. Gellner (about him too
discussed on this site) and many others whose works are considered classics.

At the same time, some scientists are not satisfied with the extremes of both approaches. There are attempts to “reconcile” them:
attempts to present ethnic groups as “symbolic” communities based on
sets of symbols - again, belief in a common origin, a common past, a common
fate, etc. Many anthropologists especially emphasize that ethnic groups arose
relatively recently: they are not immemorial and unchangeable, but change under
influence specific situations, circumstances - economic, political and
etc.

In domestic science, the theory of ethnos has become especially popular, and, initially
in its extreme primordialist (biological) interpretation. It was developed by S.M. Shirokogorov, who
considered an ethnos as a biosocial organism, highlighting its main
characteristics of origin, as well as language, customs, way of life and tradition
[Shirokogorov, 1923. P. 13]. In many ways, his follower was L.N. Gumilev,
partly continuing this tradition, he considered ethnicity as a biological system,
especially highlighting passionarity as highest stage its development [Gumilev, 1993]. About
Quite a lot has been written about this approach, but now few serious researchers
completely shares the views of L.N. Gumilyov, which can be considered an extreme expression
primordialist approach. This theory has its roots in the views of German
romantics on a nation or ethnic group from the perspective of “ total blood and soil", i.e.
some kind of consanguineous group. Hence L.N.’s intolerance. Gumilyov to
mixed marriages, the descendants of which he considered “chimerical formations”,
connecting the incompatible.

P.I. Kushner believed that ethnic groups differ from each other in a number of specific characteristics,
among which the scientist especially highlighted language, material culture (food, housing,
clothes, etc.), as well as ethnic identity [Kushner, 1951, pp. 8-9].

The studies of S.A. stand apart from the range of domestic studies. Arutyunov and N.N.
Cheboksarova. According to them, “...ethnic groups are spatially limited
“clumps” of specific cultural information, and interethnic contacts are an exchange
such information”, and information connections were considered as the basis for the existence
ethnicity [Arutyunov, Cheboksarov, 1972. P.23-26]. In a later work by S.A. Arutyunova
an entire chapter devoted to this problem bears a telling title: “Network
communications as the basis of ethnic existence" [Arutyunov, 2000]. Introduction to
ethnic groups as specific “clumps” of cultural information and
internal information relations very close to modern understanding any
systems as a kind of information field, or information structure. IN
further S.A. Arutyunov directly writes about this [Arutyunov, 2000. P. 31, 33].

A characteristic feature of the theory of ethnos is that its followers consider
ethnic groups as a universal category, i.e. people, according to it, belonged to
to some ethnic group/ethnic group, much less often to several ethnic groups. Supporters
this theory believed that ethnic groups were formed in one or another historical
period and transformed in accordance with changes in society. Influence of Marxist
theory was also expressed in attempts to correlate the development of ethnic groups with the five-member division
development of humanity - the conclusion that each socio-economic formation
corresponds to its type of ethnic group (tribe, slave-owning nation, capitalist
nationality, capitalist nation, socialist nation).

Subsequently, the theory of ethnos was developed by many Soviet researchers, including
features of Yu.V. Bromley, which
believed that ethnicity is “...a historically established
in a certain area
a stable collection of people who have relatively stable common
peculiarities of language, culture and psyche, as well as the consciousness of its unity and
differences from other similar formations (self-awareness), fixed in
self-designation" [Bromley, 1983. pp. 57-58]. Here we see the impact of ideas
primordialism - S. Shprokogorov, and M. Weber.

The theory of Yu.V. Bromley, like his supporters, was rightly criticized back in the Soviet period.
So, M.V. Kryukov has repeatedly and, in my opinion, quite rightly noted
the artificiality of this entire system of nationalities and nations [Kryukov, 1986. P.58-69].
EAT. Kolpakov, for example, points out that under Bromley’s definition of ethnos
many groups are suitable, not only ethnic ones [Kolpakov, 1995. P. 15].

Since the mid-1990s,
views close to constructivist. According to them, ethnic groups are not real
existing communities, but constructs created by the political elite or
scientists for practical purposes (for more details see: [Tishkov, 1989. P. 84; Tishkov,
2003. P. 114; Cheshko, 1994. P. 37]). So, according to V.A. Tishkova (one of the works
which bears the expressive title “Requiem for an Ethnicity”), Soviet scientists themselves
created a myth about the unconditionally objective reality of ethnic communities, as
certain archetypes [Tishkov, 1989. P.5], but the researcher himself considers ethnic groups to be artificial
constructions that exist only in the heads of ethnographers [Tishkov, 1992], or
the result of elite efforts to construct ethnicity [Tishkov, 2003. P.
118]. V.A. Tishkov defines an ethnic group as a group of people whose members have
common name and elements of culture, a myth (version) about a common origin and
general historical memory, associate themselves with a special territory and have a feeling
solidarity [Tishkov, 2003. P.60]. Again - the influence of Max Weber's ideas expressed
almost a century ago...

Not all researchers share this point of view, which was formed not without the influence of ideas
M. Weber, for example, S.A. Arutyunov, who has repeatedly criticized it [Arutyunov,
1995. P.7]. Some researchers working in line with Soviet theory
ethnic group, consider ethnic groups to be an objective reality that exists independently of our
consciousness.

I would like to note that, despite the sharp criticism addressed to supporters of the theory of ethnos,
the views of constructivist researchers are not so radically different from
first glances. In the definitions of ethnic groups or ethnic groups given
listed by the scientists, we see a lot in common, although the attitude towards the defined
objects diverge. Moreover, wittingly or unwittingly, many researchers
repeat the definition of an ethnic group given by M. Weber. I'll repeat it again
times: an ethnic group is a group of people whose members have subjective
belief in a common origin due to similar physical appearance or customs,
or both together, or due to shared memory. Thus, the main provisions
M. Weber had a noticeable impact on various approaches to the study of ethnicity.
Moreover, his definition of an ethnic group was sometimes used almost verbatim
supporters of different paradigms.