Cultural Identity Politics in the (Post-)Transitional Societies

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Cultural Identity Politics in the (Post-)Transitional Societies Bulgarian and those who disagree with the official history of the Republic of Macedonia. Often, the posts are signed by “bloggers from Bulgaria”, “Bulgarian bloggers” or “bloggers that write in Bulgarian”. Deleting or ignoring such comments is usually followed by comments such as “first learn Macedonian and then comment”, “I don’t understand what you are trying to say”, “write in our language because this is our blog”, or similar. In spite of all these comments, bloggers understand what other bloggers are saying. A proof of this are the long (both time-wise and space-wise) blog-debates between bloggers who write in Bulgarian and those who write in Macedonian. The call to censor or block “Bulgarian bloggers” actually points to the real motivation behind such acts – to define cyberspace as OURS. In such cases, the virtual community is defined both nationally and linguistically. Considering the fact that cyberspace is defined as a world without actual borders, the question that arises is: “What defines ‘blogosphere’ as a Macedonian blogosphere, when the term ‘Macedonian’ refers to a particular country, territory, people and nation” On the other hand, it is confusing that many of the bloggers on this particular network, Blog.mk, do not live in Macedonia. In addition, we cannot claim with certainty that all bloggers who are active participants on Blog.mk feel like Macedonians (regardless of their ethnic, national or any other identity). One of the rules of the biggest Macedonian blog service is that, for example, in order to log in, you have to use the Cyrillic alphabet. If you use the Roman alphabet, your comment will not be posted on the blog. The posts written using Roman script are not shown on the main page, which reduces the number of people who will read your post. Irena Cvetkovik (2010), an author who has been studying the Macedonian blogosphere, says that “this is one of the most literal implementations of the message “I write in Cyrillic, I exist”. This is actually one of the slogans of a popular campaign in Macedonia which says, “I protect what is mine when ‘I write in Cyrillic-I exist’”, which was launched by the Idea Plus Communications marketing agency and the Macedonian Information Agency (MIA) and supported by the academic, cultural and state institutions as well as the business community and media in the Republic of Macedonia. Cvetkovik (2010) poses the question: “Where does the need to construct national identity in cyberspace or computer-related space come from when cyberspace offers a world beyond borders, nations and ethnicity” Her answer to this question is that there is “a virtual national identity” which is represented through pictures and discourses and which by the ways in which it is expressed is more or less different from national identity construction in reality. The difference lies in the absence of the physical body, or the non-existence of a body, that prevents biological and genetic identification and proving national and ethnic togetherness. Ethnic identity in cyberspace can be proven through being part of a collective interpretation of a mutual past and shared ancestors. This does not allow for someone to drastically distance themselves from the construction of the national and ethnic identity that exists in the physical and real world. In other words, the choice of pictures, topics and myths in representing one’s national identity is almost identical in both the virtual and real world. 110
How modern technology shape-shifts our identity Building a strong and stable Macedonian national and ethnic identity is done through particular strategies. In the essay called “Border cultures/cultures of borders”, Elizabeta Sheleva talks about the question of identity, here and now in the Balkans and in Macedonia. According to Sheleva, the basic definition of “identity” includes “difference” as a key distinction. In other words, “the identity is a sum of distinctive features which differentiate us from others” (Sheleva, 2003: 124). Hence, the category of identity is based on exclusion and elimination. Unfortunately, this is the “reality” of the virtual space in the Balkans, in which learning about your own identity is done only through experiencing togetherness and difference. References Anders, G. (1980) Die Antiquiertheit des Menschen, München: Verlag C.H.Beck. Arnold, R. (1989) Art as technology, Hillcrest Press, Technology: Rubin’s definition, 17, 184. Bair, D. (1978) Samuel Beckett: A Biography, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Baym, N. K. (1998) `The emergence of on-line community`, Cybersociety 2.0: Revisiting computermediated communication and community, ed. Steven G. Jones, 35–68. London: Sage. Bell, G. (2004) “Insights into Asia: 19 Cities, 7 Countries, 2 Years-What People Really Want from Technology”. Castells, M. (2000) The rise of the network society. The information age: Economy, society and culture, 2nd ed., vol. 1. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Castells, M. (2001) The Internet galaxy, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cousineau, T. (1990). Waiting for Godot - form in movement, Boston: Twayne Publishers. Cvetkovik, I. (2010) Identities and Communities in Cyberspace, МА thesis, Institute “Euro-Balkan”. Deirdre, B. (1978) Samuel Beckett. A Biography., London: Jonathan Cape. Ellul, J. (1990) The Technological Bluff, (Translated from the French: Bluff technologique by Geoffrey W. Bromiley). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. Fuchs, C. (2008) Internet and Society: Social Theory in the Information Age, Routledge. Gergen, K. (2003) Self and community in the floating worlds. Mobile democracy. Ed. Kristof Nyiri, 103-114. Vienna: Passagen. Giddens, A. (1991) Modernity and self-identity. Self and society in the late modern age, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Giddens, A. (1980) The class structure of the advanced societies, 2nd ed. London: Hutchinson. Jenkins, R. (2008) Social Identity, 3 rd ed. Oxon: Routledge. Lash, S. and Lury, C. (2007) Global Culture Industry, Cambridge: Polity Press. 111
Page 1 and 2:
Cultural Transitions in Southeaster
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
C o n t e n t s Foreword . . . . .
Page 9:
FOREWORD
Page 12 and 13:
Cultural Identity Politics in the (
Page 14 and 15:
Page 17:
PART ONE Histories, memories and na
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 69 and 70: Culture of trauma and identity poli
Page 75 and 76: References Culture of trauma and id
Page 77: PART TWO Communication, media and c
Page 80 and 81: Cultural Identity Politics in the (
Page 109 and 110: How modern technology shape-shifts
Page 117: How modern technology shape-shifts
Page 121 and 122: Cultural identities in Southeastern
Page 131: Cultural identities in Southeastern
Page 135 and 136: Cultural identities from the bottom
Page 149 and 150: From productivity to creativity - t
Page 155: From productivity to creativity - t
Page 168 and 169:
Page 171 and 172:
Repetition of difference - the sear
Page 173 and 174:
Repetition of difference - the sear
Page 175 and 176:
Report on the conference “Questio
Page 177 and 178:
Report on the conference Peace Inst
Page 179:
Report on the conference of ‘inde
Page 183 and 184:
Notes on the authors PAŠKO BILIĆ
Page 185 and 186:
Notes on the authors ANDREA KOMLOSY
Page 187 and 188:
Culturelink Joint Publications Seri
show all

Cultural Identity Politics in the (Post-)Transitional Societies

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?