The Construction of National Identity and its Challenges in Post-Yugoslav Censuses

The Construction of National Identity and its Challenges 891
As such, censuses are elementary moments of group making, and an opportunity for
ethnic entrepreneurs to assert and define groupness (Brubaker, 2004:7–20). Thus, in addition
to the arena of contention between state and minorities, censuses are fundamentally
about citizens and how they respond to the different demands, categories, and pressures.
Individual Challenges to Ethno-National Identity
The final aspect of the census as a site where identities are negotiated is the response of
citizens. Here, we are interested in citizens who fail to identify themselves along the lines
prescribed by the states and ethnic entrepreneurs. While categories, as noted above, are
suggestive and citizens had been subject to strong pressure and campaigning, the ultimate
census choices rested with them. The contestations between minority organizations and
the state represent the conflict of two (or more) concepts of collectivities (i.e., how does the
state vs. how do the representatives of a minority define the collectivity or does the state
discourage the self-identification as a minority).
However, an important subject neglected in the literature to date that has broader repercussions
for the study of nationalism is the study of respondents. Do respondents accept
the identity categories offered by the state or the categories suggested by their presumed
political representatives? The responses allow us not only to ascertain the acceptance of
these categories, but also to assess the success of ethnic boundary making. If citizens refuse
to follow ethno-nationalist logic, they can undermine groupness and challenge its legitimacy.
An ethnic group without members does not exist, and if a nation is the result of a
“daily plebiscite” (Renan, [1882] 1996), then the census is the most visible plebiscite for
(or against) a nation. Here, we are less interested in motives for rejecting these categories,
which can range from social or political protest, to the perceived inappropriateness of the
categories for one’s own identity.
Individuals have a range of options to respond to censuses. The most visible level of
rejection might be a boycott of the census. For example, the German census of 1987 was
controversial due to concerns about data protection, and because a number of civil society
groups led a campaign to boycott the census. For the post-Yugoslav censuses, boycotts
were not widely promoted outside of “ethno-national boycotts” led by minority parties
or organizations mentioned above. In Bosnia, in addition to some ethno-national groups,
civil groups also threatened a boycott if the forms would not comply with their preference.
However, boycotting a census, especially for individuals without organized support, is
difficult, as participation in censuses is mandatory and boycotts usually carry fines (even if
not always enforced in practice).
Another tool for individual contestation is to opt for identity categories that mock
the established groups, often through drawing on imagined groups. From Martians to
Earthlings, the name of the favorite soccer club, to Jedi and Sith, a wide range of groups
were used. The Jedi/Sith category has been widely used in other censuses, including Australia
and the United Kingdom and had its echoes in the post-Yugoslav censuses. These categories
are not officially listed in the census results and are subsumed either in the residual category
of “Others” (Montenegro), “Unknown” (Serbia), or “Unallocated” (Croatia). 6
While invisible in the official statistics (but available on request), these movements
achieved considerable media attention. The media response generally dismissed them as a
6 E-mail communication with Statistical Offices of Serbia, Montenegro, and Croatia, 2014 and 2015, on
file with the author.