Abstract
The nominal dispute between Greece and the Republic of North Macedonia has now existed for more than twenty-five years. This chapter explores this symbolic threat and its current evolution. The example of the Macedonian question shows the importance given to names, toponyms and ethnonyms, especially when they convey essential identity meanings for the group that bears them. Here, the meaning of the same regional and national denomination is perceived as a symbolic collective threat based on the representative foundations of a glorious collective past and an uncertain present. The paradox of this case is that for both countries, the question of name corresponds, through different processes, to the same central reference: their national identity. However, they do not share the same social representations of this identity. A single word is loaded with antagonistic, even controversial meanings, memories, traditions and identity contents. This symbolic conflict is, for us, an illustrative example of the importance of the role of names and their historicity in social psychology, in order to better understand the identity and memory processes they underlie and thus contribute to a more synthetic understanding of collective ideation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM).
References
Anderson, B. (1991/2016). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso.
Apostolidis, T., Duveen, G., & Kalampalikis, N. (2002). Représentations et croyances. Psychologie & Société,5, 7–11.
Bégout, B. (2005). La découverte du quotidien. Paris: Allia.
Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. London: Sage.
Gerrits, A. (2016). Nationalism in Europe since 1945. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Haas, V. (2002). La face cachée d’une ville. In T. Ferenczi (Ed.), Devoir de mémoire, droit à l’oubli? (pp. 59–71). Paris: Complexe.
Hobsbawm, E. (1992/2012). Nations and nationalism since 1780. Programme, myth, reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jodelet, D. (1991). Madness and social representation: Living with the mad in one French community. California: University of California Press.
Jodelet, D. (2015). Représentations sociales et mondes de vie. Paris: Éditions des Archives contemporaines.
Jovchelovitch, S. (2006). Knowledge in context. Representations, community and culture. London: Routledge.
Kalampalikis, N. (2002). Des noms et des représentations. Cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale,53, 20–31.
Kalampalikis, N. (2006). Affronter la complexité: représentations et croyances. In V. Haas (Ed.), Savoirs du quotidien. Transmissions, appropriations, représentations (pp. 229–237). Rennes: PUR.
Kalampalikis, N. (2007). Les Grecs et le mythe d’Alexandre. Étude psychosociale d’un conflit symbolique à propos de la Macédoine. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Kalampalikis, N. (Ed.) (2019). Serge Moscovici: Psychologie des représentations sociales. Paris: Éditions des Archives contemporaines.
Kalampalikis, N., & Apostolidis, T. (2020). Challenges for social representations theory: The socio-genetic perspective. In S. Papastamou (Ed.), New perspectives in social thinking and social influence. Montpellier: Éditions de la Méditerranée.
Kalampalikis, N., & Haas, V. (2008). More than a theory: A new map of social thought. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour,38(4), 449–459.
Kalampalikis, N., Jodelet, D., Wieviorka, M., Moscovici, D., & Moscovici, P. (Eds.) (2019). Serge Moscovici: un regard sur les mondes communs. Paris: Éditions de la MSH.
Moscovici, S. (1961). La psychanalyse, son image et son public. Paris: PUF.
Moscovici, S. (1993). The return of the unconscious. Social Research,60, 39–93.
Moscovici, S. (2000). Social representations. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Moscovici, S. (2002). Pensée stigmatique et pensée symbolique. Deux formes élémentaires de la pensée sociale. In C. Garnier (Ed.), Les formes de la pensée sociale (pp. 21–53). Paris: PUF.
Moscovici, S. (2012). Raison et cultures. Paris: Éditions de l’Ehess.
Moscovici, S. (2013). Le scandale de la pensée sociale. Paris: Éditions de l’Ehess.
Ricoeur, P. (2004). Memory, history. Forgetting: Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
Rouquette, M.-L., & Flament, C. (2005). Anatomie des idées ordinaires. Paris: Albin Michel.
Schütz, A. (2003). L’étranger. Paris: Allia.
Tajfel, H. (1969). The formation of national attitudes: A social-psychological perspective. In M. Sherif & C. Sherif (Eds.), Interdisciplinary relationships in the social sciences (pp. 137–176). Chicago: Aldine.
Tajfel, H. (1979). Individuals and groups in social psychology. British Journal of Social Psychology,18, 183–190.
Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Viaud, J. (2000). L’objectivation et la question de l’ancrage dans les représentations sociales. In N. Roussiau (Ed.), Psychologie sociale (pp. 89–100). Paris: In press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kalampalikis, N. (2020). A Lasting Symbolic National Threat: The Dispute Over the Name Macedonia. In: Jodelet, D., Vala, J., Drozda-Senkowska, E. (eds) Societies Under Threat. Frontiers in Sociology and Social Research, vol 3. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39315-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39315-1_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-39314-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-39315-1
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)