Advertisement

In Search of an Alternative Perspective on Minority Rights and Minority Group Formation: Re-politicizing Non-territorial Autonomy

  • Ahmet Murat Aytaç
  • Zafer Yılmaz
Chapter
Part of the Comparative Territorial Politics book series (COMPTPOL)

Abstract

The word autonomy is undoubtedly key in almost all contemporary democratic formulations, which aim to protect the territorial integrity and attempt to overcome ethnic conflicts in the modern world. However, in spite of the increasing significance of the term, a micropolitical aspect of the notion, individual freedom, has been mainly neglected. To fill this gap, this paper aims to underline the insights of the concept of non-territorial autonomy (NTA), which activates and re-politicizes the social actors deactivated and depoliticized through culturalist definitions of the group. To highlight the counters of a more emancipatory and egalitarian conception of NTA, the paper proposes the reformulation of collective rights on the grounds of empowerment of individual freedom and the political activation of minority groups. In that context, it provides analysis of historical examples of NTA and traditional and local solutions like the “millet system” in order to shed light on the limits of and insights into NTA for solving the problems of modern societies.

References

  1. Açıkel, F., & Ateş, K. (2011). Ambivalent Citizens: The Alevi as the ‘Authentic Self’ and the ‘Stigmatized Other’ of Turkish Nationalism. European Societies, 13(5), 713–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aktürk, Ş. (2009). Persistence of the Islamic Millet as an Ottoman Legacy: Mono-religious and Anti-ethnic Definition of Turkish Nationhood. Middle Eastern Studies, 45(6), 893–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barkey, K., & Gavrilis, G. (2016). The Ottoman Millet System: Non-territorial Autonomy and Its Contemporary Legacy. Ethnopolitics, 15(1), 24–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bauböck, R. (2001, December). Territorial or Cultural Autonomy for National Minorities? (IWE–Working Paper Series No. 22).Google Scholar
  5. Blum, M. E., & Smaldone, W. (2016). Austro-Marxism: The Ideology of Unity Austro-Marxist Theory and Strategy. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  6. Braude, B. (2014). Foundation Myths of the Millet System. In B. Braude (Ed.), Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire (pp. 65–85). London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Coakley, J. (1994, July). Approaches to the Resolution of Ethnic Conflict: The Strategy of Non-territorial Autonomy. International Political Science Review, 15(3), 297–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eğilmez, D. B. (2017). Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Hoşgörü Söylemi (1545–1566). İstanbul: İletişim.Google Scholar
  9. Ghai, Y. (2000). Ethnicity and Autonomy: A Framework for Analysis. In Y. Ghai (Ed.), Autonomy and Ethnicity, Negotiating Competing Claims in Multi-ethnic States (pp. 1–24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kadıoğlu, A. (1996, April). The Paradox of Turkish Nationalism and the Construction of Official Identity. Middle Eastern Studies, 32(2), 177–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Koçan, G., & Öncü, A. (2004, December). Citizen Alevi in Turkey: Beyond Confirmation and Denial. Journal of Historical Sociology, 17(4), 464–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kymlicka, W. (2002). Contemporary Political Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Kymlicka, W. (2003). Multicultural Citizenship, A Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  14. Légaré, A., & Suksi, M. (2008). Introduction, Rethinking the Forms of Autonomy at the Dawn of the 21st Century. International Journal on Minority and Group Rights, 15, 143–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Levy, J. T. (2000). Multiculturalism of Fear. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nimni, E. (1999). Nationalist Multiculturalism in Late Imperial Austria as a Critique of Contemporary Liberalism: The Case of Bauer and Renner. Journal of Political Ideologies, 4(3), 289–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nimni, E. (2005). Introduction: The National Cultural Autonomy Model Revisited. In E. Nimni (Ed.), National Cultural Autonomy and Its Contemporary Critics (pp. 1–14). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Paul, E. F., Miller, F. D., & Paul, J., Jr. (2003). Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Renner, K. (2017). State and Nation: A Constitutional Investigation of the Possible Principles of a Solution and the Juridical Prerequisites of a Law of Nationalities. In M. E. Blum & W. Smaldone (Eds.), Austro-Marxism: The Ideology of Unity (pp. 369–403). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  20. Shankland, D. (2010, December). Maps and the Alevis: On the Ethnography of Heterodox Islamic Groups. British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 37(3), 227–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Smith, D. J. (2013). Non-territorial Autonomy and Political Community in Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe. Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, 12(1), 27–55.Google Scholar
  22. Tkacik, M. (2008). Characteristics of Forms of Autonomy. International Journal on Minority and Group Rights, 15, 369–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Weller, M., & Wolff, S. (2005). Autonomy, Self-Governance and Conflict Resolution, Innovative Approach to Institutional Design in Divided Societies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmet Murat Aytaç
    • 1
  • Zafer Yılmaz
    • 2
  1. 1.Independent AcademicianAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Potsdam UniversityPotsdamGermany

Personalised recommendations