Nations are the most stable ethnic entities. How does a nation differ from an ethnic group?

Family is what surrounds every person from the moment of birth. Having matured a little, the child learns about such concepts as nationality, nation. Over time, he begins to understand what clan and nation he belongs to, and gets acquainted with their culture. However, often both children and adults experience confusion between such similar terms as nationality, nation, ethnic group, tribe, clan. Although they are often considered synonymous, they have different meanings.

The meaning of the concept "ethnicity"

The word “ethnos” itself translated from Greek language means "people". Previously, this term meant a community of people united by blood.

Today the concept of ethnicity has become much broader.

Main types of ethnic groups

Clans, families, tribes, nationalities, nations are types of ethnic groups. At the same time, they are also stages in the historical evolution of an ethnos.

According to the hierarchy of ethnic groups, there are six types:

• family;
• clan;
• tribe;
• nationality;
• nation.

They all existed at some point historical period, but later changed under the influence of external and internal factors. At the same time, such types as clan, clan and tribe in a civilized society have long disappeared or remained as a tradition. In some places on the planet they still exist.

Most scientists believe that the most important stages in the development of an ethnic group are the tribe, nationality, and nation. This is due to the fact that these ethnic groups no longer depended on consanguinity; their commonality was based on cultural and economic grounds.

It is worth noting that sometimes modern scientists identify a seventh type of ethnos - an interethnic nation of citizens. It is believed that modern society is gradually moving towards this stage.

Family, clan and clan

The smallest ethnic community is the family (an association of people connected by blood ties). It is noteworthy that before the formation of such a social institution as the family, group marriage was common. In it, the relationship was traced from the mother, since it was almost impossible to establish who the father of a particular child was. did not last long, as incest and, as a result, degeneration became frequent.

To avoid this, over time, an ethnic community - a clan - was formed. The clans were formed on the basis of several families entering into a kinship union with each other. For a long time the tribal way of life was the most common. However, with the increase in the number of representatives of the clan, the danger of incest arose again, and “fresh” blood was required.

Clans began to form on the basis of clans. As a rule, they bore the name of either a famous founding ancestor or one revered as a patron and protector. Clans, as a rule, owned land, passed on by inheritance. Today, the clan system has been preserved as a tradition in Japan, Scotland and among some Indian tribes in South and North America.

By the way, the concept of “blood feud” became widespread precisely during the existence of this

Tribe

The above types of ethnic groups are quite small in the number of their representatives and were based on family ties. At the same time, a tribe, a nationality, a nation are larger and more developed ethnic groups.

Over time, ethnic groups based on blood kinship began to evolve into tribes. The tribe already included several clans and clans, so not all its members were relatives. In addition, with the development of tribes, society began to gradually divide into classes. Compared to clans and clans, tribes were very numerous.

Most often, tribes were united by the need to protect their territories from strangers, although over time they began to develop their own beliefs, traditions, and language.

In civilized society, tribes have long ceased to exist, but in many less developed cultures they're playing today main role(in Africa, Australia and Polynesia, on some tropical islands).

Nationality

At the next stage of evolution, which the ethnos (tribe, nationality, nation) underwent, states appeared. This was due to the fact that the number of members of the tribe was growing, in addition, the arrangement of this type of ethnic group was improving over the years. Closer to the period slave system such a concept as nationality appeared.

Nationalities arose primarily not because of family ties or the need to protect their lands, but on the basis of an established culture, laws (appeared instead of tribal customs), and economic communities. In other words, a nationality differed from tribes in that it not only existed permanently on any territory, but could also create its own state.

Nation and nationality

The formation of a nation has become the next and most advanced stage in the evolution of an ethnos (tribe, nationality).

A nation is not just a grouping of people according to a common territory of residence, language of communication and culture, but also according to similar psychological characteristics and historical memory. The nation differs from the nationality in that its representatives were able to create a society with a developed economy, a system trade relations, private property, right,

The concept of “nation” is associated with the emergence of nationality - belonging to or a state.

Throughout history, most nations have gone through all stages of the evolution of an ethnic group: family, clan, clan, tribe, nationality, nation. This contributed to the emergence of nations and countries known to everyone today.

It is noteworthy that, according to the ideology of fascism, there was chosen nation, designed to eventually destroy all the others. But, as practice has shown throughout history, any ethnic group degenerated without interaction with others. Therefore, if only purebred Aryans remained, then after a few generations the majority of representatives of this nation would suffer from numerous hereditary diseases.

There are ethnic groups that do not develop according to general scheme(family, clan, tribe, nationality, nation), - the people of Israel, for example. So, despite the fact that the Jews called themselves a people, according to their structure they were a typical clan (common ancestor Abraham, blood relationship between all members). But at the same time, in just a few generations they managed to acquire the signs of a nation with a clear system of legal and economic relationships, and a little later they formed a state. However, at the same time they retained a clear clan system, which in rare cases allowed family ties with other nationalities. It is interesting that if Christianity had not arisen, dividing the Jews into two opposing camps, and also if their state had been destroyed and the people themselves had scattered, the Jews would have faced degeneration.

Today people live in a society made up of nations. Belonging to one of them determines not only a person’s thinking and consciousness, but also his standard of living. It is interesting that the most developed countries today are multinational, so the likelihood of the emergence of an interethnic nation of citizens is very high.

Nation is a type of ethnic group; historically emerged socio-economic and spiritual community of people with a certain psychology and self-awareness.

Doesn't exist common approach to the definition of this extremely complex phenomenon. Representatives psychological theory They see a nation as a cultural and psychological community of people united by a common destiny.

The largest proponents of the materialist concept emphasized community economic ties as the basis of national community.

One of the classics of modern sociology, P. Sorokin, considers the nation to be a complex and heterogeneous social body, an artificial structure without its own substance. Some of the researchers include essential features Nations are called common territories, economic ties, language, psychological make-up, history, culture and identity.

The processes of nation formation are objectively related to the formation of states. Therefore, K. Kautsky considered the classical form of the state nation state. However, the fate of not every nation is connected with statehood; rather, it is an ideal coincidence. According to the concept of K. Kautsky the most important factors the consolidation of people into a nation was commodity production and trade. Most modern nations were born in the process of the formation of bourgeois relations (from the 9th to 15th centuries), but they were formed and developed before capitalism.

In countries where development was hampered by colonialism for centuries, this process continues to this day.

Last third of the 20th century. marked by the emergence national statehood on the ruins of pseudo-federal and union states.

Ethnicity (from the Greek - “society”, “group”, “tribe”, “people”) is a stable community of people, a cultural and historical group, the members of which were initially united by a common origin, language, territory, economic life, and, over time, and spiritually based general culture, historical traditions, socio-political ideals.

Types of ethnicity - nations, nationalities, ethnic and ethnographic groups. Their representatives can live compactly with or without their national statehood, or they can be distributed among other peoples.

Unlike a nation, a nationality is a socio-ethnic community with a relatively identical ethnic composition, a common consciousness and psychology, and less developed, stable economic and cultural ties.

An ethnic group is a small community, the basis of which is language, common origin, culture, way of life and traditions.

An ethnographic group is a community that speaks the same language as a particular nation or nationality, but also has specificity in everyday life, traditions, and customs.

• 
  Concepts nation And ethnicity. Nation- type ethnicity


• 
  Concepts nation And ethnicity. Nation- type ethnicity; a historically emerged socio-economic and spiritual community of people with a certain psychology and self-awareness.


• 
  Concepts nation And ethnicity. Nation- type ethnicity Concept


• 
  Concepts nation And ethnicity. Nation- type ethnicity


• 
  Concepts nation And ethnicity. Nation- type ethnicity; historically emerged socio-economic and spiritual community of people from. Concept univariate and multivariate stratification.


• 
  Concepts nation And ethnicity. Nation- type ethnicity; historically emerged socio-economic and spiritual community of people from. Loading.


• 
  Concepts nation And ethnicity. Nation- type ethnicity; historically emerged socio-economic and spiritual community of people with a certain... more details ».


• 
  ...possessing a common mentality, national identity and character, stable cultural features, as well as awareness of its unity and difference from other similar entities ( concepts « ethnos" And " nation"not identical...


• 
  Psychology nation. Large social groups are communities of people characterized by the presence of weak contacts between representatives. In world history, people were classified into races And ethnic groups.


• 
  Consequently, the mentality is also manifested in the characteristics characteristic of representatives of a given ethnicity ways to act in the environment.
  There are general ideas and concepts, which carry answers to the following questions: what is the nature and capabilities of a person, what he is, can...

Similar pages found:10

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 of place of residence,

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

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

People - community of people, members of the cat. Have 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 ethno-social development of people.

1) primitive society. A traditional society with a traditional culture in which intertribal 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- association of people living in large territory, which has lost blood kinship, but divides people into friends and foes, focuses 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 in the narrow sense under e.c. 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 at a given time. 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 V certain forms 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, various types 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. 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. Thus, the rights were ensured individual. 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

political countries 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 super-ethnos (in the passionate theory of ethnogenesis, an ethnic system, the highest link in 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 the price of Russia’s integration with Western Europe will be a complete rejection 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 threshold of XXI century, we are close to its finale... Russia will have to go through an inertial phase - 300 years of the 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 objective possibility ethnic group 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 native language in another country; 2) cultural self-determination - the ability of an ethnic group to carry out cultural activities in another country (through the presence of schools, cultural institutions; the opportunity to celebrate their national holidays); 3) economic self-determination - the ability of an ethnic group to exercise economic activity 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 mediated by modern means of 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 the era of radical social transformation 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 the moral, mental, and 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 historical experience 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 the past and present, positive or negative experience relations between peoples, especially in those areas of activity where these peoples were most actively in contact, and sometimes even competed.

A little
about nations, ethnic groups and scientific approaches.

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

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. Gumilyov understands ethnicity
first of all how 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 extreme point 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 in lately there is a widespread belief that ethnicity
(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 should be noted 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 this state regardless of their race, 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 civil 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 national 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 important concept“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 (ethnicities), it would be appropriate to recall the definition
given to an ethnic group by the 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 shared memory. What is emphasized here is
FAITH 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 certain 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
the impact of 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 position of “common 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 the language, material culture(food, shelter,
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 more late work 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 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].
E.M. 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 in Russian literature began to spread
views close to constructivist. According to them, ethnic groups are not real
existing communities, but constructs created by the political elite or
scientists in 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 name “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 the ideas of Max Weber 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, ethnic groups consider objective reality, existing independently of ours
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 different approaches to the study of ethnicity.
Moreover, his definition of an ethnic group was sometimes used almost verbatim
supporters of different paradigms.

Ethnicity - this is a stable cultural and historical association (collective) of people, formed on the basis of tribal kinship, which contrasts itself with other similar associations (collectives) based on a sense of complementarity (i.e. a feeling of subconscious mutual sympathy/antipathy, which determines the division into “us” and "strangers").

Nation - this is a political association of people, membership to which is formed on the basis of a feeling of love and devotion to one’s country and people, a sense of common historical destiny, etc. - i.e. through a positive and responsible self-perception of one's citizenship. The main function of a nation is to create its own statehood and ensure the sovereignty of its state on its historically established territory.

§ ethnicity is a socio-biological community,

§ nation - socio-political community.

In reality, ethnicity and nation are phenomena belonging to different social spheres.

The essence of ethnic community most clearly manifested in ethnic processes: ethnic assimilation (retraction, dissolution), ethnic fusion (consolidation), ethnic inclusion (incorporation) and ethnic splitting (divergence). They occur spontaneously and largely independent of the consciousness and will of people.

Essence of a Nation is most clearly expressed in national movements, which are the activities of masses of people aimed at achieving certain goals, most often political. Each such movement has a specific program. National movements, unlike ethnic processes, belong to the sphere of politics. They represent a type of political movement. The nation in these movements acts as a certain social, primarily political, force that must be taken into account.

The consolidation of previously economically separate regions into a single economic community was the result of their involvement in the general trade turnover and the emergence of a single market throughout the country. The most important means communication is language. Therefore, economic ties were most easily established between regions whose population spoke the same language or closely related languages, i.e. belonged to the same ethnic community or related ethnic groups.

In turn, the establishment of strong economic ties between the regions contributed to the merging of related ethnic communities into one, as well as the blurring of the boundaries between subethnic groups and ethnographic groups into which they had previously broken up. Ideally, the entire population of such a single geosocial organism would form one ethnic community. Ideally, it should have formed one nation. Thus, the same objective processes that led to the formation of a nation resulted in the metamorphosis of an ethnos. The emergence of the nation itself also had an impact on the ethnic group.

Ethnicity is a historical phenomenon. Having arisen, it does not remain unchanged.

Three stages of its development can be distinguished. At the first stage, the ethnos consists of more or smaller number subethnic groups, and each member of the ethnic group is necessarily included in one of the subethnic groups. Subethnic self-awareness at this stage often dominates over ethnic self-awareness. A person first of all recognizes himself as a member of a subethnic group and only then of an ethnos. The language of an ethnic group at this stage exists as a collection of many dialects. Often as a general written language a foreign language appears (Latin in Western Europe, Old Church Slavonic in Ancient Rus'). Such an ethnic community could be called an early ethnos.

The late ethnos, in contrast to the early ethnos, is characterized by the dominance of consciousness of belonging to an ethnos, ethnic self-awareness. Subethnic self-awareness, if preserved, fades into the background. However, most often subethnic groups turn into ethnographic groups. Specific part people begin to enter the ethnic group, bypassing subethnic groups and ethnographic groups. A common literary language of the ethnos emerges, close to the spoken one. The literary language is usually based on one of the dialects of the language of the ethnic group. Often the transformation of an early ethnic group into a later one is associated with the maturation of the preconditions of capitalism, but this is not at all necessary.

The origin and development of capitalism has one of its consequences the transformation of a late ethnos into a later ethnos. We have already spoken above about the establishment of strong economic ties and the emergence of a market throughout the country. This leads to sharp increase mobility of the population and its intensive mixing. Literacy is spreading everywhere. As a result of the collapse of peasant communities, the common people, primarily peasant culture, which acted as the culture of the ethnos, is gradually disappearing. It is being replaced by elite and urban cultures, which, having merged together, gradually penetrate into the widest strata of the population and become a general sociological national culture. As a result, subethnic groups and ethnographic groups gradually disappear. At first most people, and then all of them directly enter into the ethnos.

A common literary language is being formed that simultaneously functions as a common colloquial language. The language of the later ethnos exists not in dialects, not as a set of dialects, but as if next to them, gradually absorbing and displacing them. This is greatly facilitated by the emergence and development of the media (newspapers, radio, television). The ideal later ethnos is one in which there are not only no subethnic groups, but even ethnographic groups, and there are no dialect differences.

As noted above, in ideally the population of the country must simultaneously be one nation and one ethnic group. In such a case, ethnic self-awareness should merge with the national one, the culture of the ethnic community should be completely replaced by national culture, and the language of the ethnic group should become national language. This is precisely what gave the basis for attributing to the nation such characteristics (“common language”, “common culture”) that actually characterize the ethnic group.

But even with the closest rapprochement between nation and ethnic group, complete identity does not arise between them. In the extreme case, a national community, including an ethnic community as a component, can never be reduced to it. But, of course, the most obvious difference between a national community and an ethnic one is when the nation includes people belonging to different ethnic communities.