Josephine Iben Kjeldbjerg Classical and Anthropological Theories on Ethnicity In early modernity, industrialisation and the consequent urbanisation caused 'dramatic social changes' on a global scale (Malešević 14). In an attempt to explain these changes, the classics of sociology perceived ethnicity as an 'old and disappearing phenomenon' that, eventually, would become unimportant in the emergence of the modern heterogenous and individualised societies (14). Malešević thus argues, in spite of opposing claims stating that the classics of sociology 'had little to say about ethnicity', that all four founding fathers of sociology - Marx, Durkheim, Simmel, and Weber - developed theories of ethnicity which contemporary sociology is built upon (13). Although ethnicity was not their primary analytical focus, with the exception of Weber, they felt compelled to shed light on why and how ethnicity was on the brink of vanishing or changing into something completely different. This essay will present the central ideas of both Durkheim's and Weber's notions on ethnicity and will lastly go over Fredrik Barth's later theory of ethnicity as boundary construction. Émile Durkheim The French sociologist, Émile Durkheim, found the answer to the gradual disappearance of ethnicity in the transition from mechanical to organic solidarity (Malešević 14). As a socialist evolutionist, Durkheim perceived societies as evolving in a linear process from primitive ethnic groups to advanced modern societies. He thus differentiated between small homogenous and 'traditional, simple societies' characterised by self-sustenance and the heterogenous 'modern complex societies' consisting of highly autonomous members that are deeply interdependent (18). The traditional and modern societies are characterised by two different types of solidarity categorised on the basis of division of labour: mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity (19). The mechanical solidarity in traditional societies is defined by the low level of division of labour and the consequent low level of interdependence among its members. What fuels the mechanical solidarity are, rather, shared resemblance, family ties, and synchronised behaviour that brings about collective effervescence (19). Organic solidarity in modern societies is contrarily defined by a high level of division of labour and the consequent high level of interdependence among its members. The group solidarity is, thus, upheld by the perception of shared reliance of each other and the belief in the importance of one's competence and expertise to the whole of the society (19). On the basis of the evolutionist approach, Durkheim argues that modernisation will cause ethnicity to become simply a 'relic of the past' (20) as it will transform the ethnic loyalty into patriotism and eventually into a 'world patriotism' seeing that Josephine Iben Kjeldbjerg organic solidarity's principles of mutual dependency constitute a much more powerful force than kinship ties (19). Georg Simmel Georg Simmel, a German sociologist, found his answer to the gradual disappearance of ethnicity in the nature of sociation and social differentiation (Malešević 14). Although he agreed with Durkheim on some aspects of the explanation on why ethnicity was about to disappear, Simmel proposed rather different conclusions (24). Seeing ethnicity as a form of sociation, he argues that ethnicity is a way for individuals to create groups and a sense of unity in which they can realise their interests (21). One factor that helps construct and maintain this sense of unity is the confrontation and interaction with 'alternative forms of cultural organization of social life' (22). For Simmel, conflict is thus a crucial and positive part of ethnic interaction as it is not a 'negation of unity' but rather brings groups together in the wish for ultimately obtaining a new form of unity (23). He also points towards the size of a group, both socially and geographically, as a factor that determines unity of the ethnic group (22). The degree of social differentiation in groups also has a big influence on the unity of the group. Similar to Durkheim's ideas on group integration, Simmel states that there is a higher degree of differentiation in modern complex societies compared to 'primitive' groups due to the 'principle of heredity [that] operates in favour of the similarity of individuals' (24). Simmel argues, however, in complete contrast to Durkheim, that the degree of solidarity is weak in complex societies seeing that they are characterised by 'loose group ties and diffuse individuality' whereas the small ethnic groups have a much stronger connection and sense of solidarity. Due to modernity's increasing differentiation and societal complexity, ethnic groups are, therefore, seen as something that eventually will die out leaving behind 'highly individualized and socially detached' cosmopolitans (24). Fredrik Barth The theory of ethnicity as a boundary construction by the Norwegian anthropologist, Fredrik Barth, stands in opposition to the classical sociological notion that ethnicity will disappear due to modernisation. Instead, he argues that it is through the modern complex society's differentiation and interaction between different groups that ethnicity is constructed and maintained (Barth 9-10). Barth shifts the focus of ethnicity theory from typology, that is, seeing ethnic groups as bearers of specific Josephine Iben Kjeldbjerg cultural traits, to the processes involved in ethnic boundary construction and maintenance as he states, 'the critical focus of investigation … becomes the ethnic boundary that defines the group, not the cultural stuff that it encloses' (10, 15). Barth, rather, perceives ethnic groups as 'categories of ascription' (10), emphasising that ethnicity is not defined by objective differences but by subjective perception and maintenance of unity (14). When seeing ethnic groups as ascriptive rather than mainly culture bearers, he emphases the 'nature of continuity in time' of ethnic groups (12, 14). It is not, however, a continuation of the cultural content but the dichotomization between members and outsiders of ethnic groups that continues. This emphasis positions Barth in direct rejection of the traditional structural-functionalism's notion of ethnic groups as static, isolated units. In the process of constructing and maintaining ethnic boundaries and dichotomies there are two types of cultural content: (i) overt signals, that is, the diacritical features such as language and clothes, and (ii) basic value orientations which includes moral values (14). In Barth's fluid notion of ethnicity, it is not, however, what this cultural content is made up of that is of highest salience, but rather how this content is emphasised by ethnic group members in their attempt to distinguish themselves in interaction with other ethnic groups. This fluid view of ethnicity thus explains how many minority groups in modern societies, in spite of the beliefs of the classical sociologists, exist without assimilating into the majority culture even though, or according to Barth perhaps because, they are interacting with groups characterised by alternative cultural content. Josephine Iben Kjeldbjerg Reference List Malešević, Siniša. ‘Classical Sociological Theory and Ethnicity’. The Sociology of Ethnicity, SAGE Publications Ltd, 2004, pp. 13-30. Barth, Fredrik. ‘Introduction’. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture Difference, Waveland Press, 1998, pp. 9-38.
