‘Nation?state’ and ‘minority’ types of discourse ?problems of communication between the majority and the islamic minorities in contemporary bulgaria

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Ethnic problems may be investigated via either or both of two types of discourse — ‘nation‐state discourse’ and ‘minority discourse’. The first type constitutes a declarative, dia‐chronic‐oriented type of discourse, centred around easily perceivable semiotic codes (language, history, tradition, religion). These codes are invested with qualities which relate to the existence and sustainability of the nation‐state. As a consequence the defence of such codes is experienced as a defence of the nation‐state. By contrast a ‘minority type’ of discourse does not, in principle, centre on nation‐state semiotic codes. In Bulgaria, the discourse of the Islamic communities of the country (Turks, Pomaks, Turkish Gypsies) revolves, by and large, around issues of integration and accommodation, especially of either a demographic and/or economic character. The paper surveys domains that display a close interaction between the nation‐state institutions and the Bulgarian minority communities, namely the mass media, national holidays, educational bodies, army and police. It is argued that a careful and critical appraisal of existing attitudes with respect to these domains is necessary if ethnic conflicts, most likely to emerge during the present atmosphere of post‐totalitarian changes, are to be avoided. The study of ethnic relations relies on two types of discourse: ‘nation‐state discourse’ and ‘minority discourse’. In the present paper, the minorities under investigation are the Islamic minorities of the Bulgarian Turks and the Pomaks, and the Gypsy minority.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: