Disputes on the concept of people: A contribution to de-construction of a de-construct
Sporovi o pojmu naroda - prilog dekonstruisanju jednog de-konstrukta
Abstract
In this paper we want to point out the limitations of the most important moments in the ruling (sceptical )notion of people/nation, where, at least when it comes to criticizing/ destruction of the term, converge outlook of Marxism, political liberalism, and postmodern/ de-constructivism. The main critical theses against, we hold, one-sided criticism towards the concept of people are placing an overemphasis on arbitrariness and the fact of being-constructed in it, and overlooking the peculiarities of the process of crystallization in the history of what was first a matter of sheer accidentallity. In dialogue with the disputed topoi in the perception of the people are at the same time indicated the guidelines to reflect this problem.
U ovom radu želimo da pokažemo ograničenja najvažnijih momenata u vladajućem (skeptičkom) poimanju naroda, u kojem, makar kada je riječ o kritici/destrukciji toga pojma, konvergiraju nazori marksizma, političkog liberalizma, i postmodernog dekonstruktivizma. Glavne kritičke teze spram, držimo, jednostrane kritike spram pojma naroda jesu pretjerano naglašavanje arbitrarnosti i konstruisanosti u njemu, te previđanje osobenosti procesa kristalizovanja u povijesti onoga što je najprije bilo samo slučajnost. U dijalogu sa spornim mjestima u poimanju naroda istovremeno se ukazuju i smjernice za promišljanje ovog problema.
Keywords:
people / nation / community / imagined community / E. Balibar / B. Anderson / Marxism / deconstruction / narod / nacija / zajednica / zamišljena zajednica / Balibar / Benedikt Anderson / marksizam / dekonstrukcijaSource:
Godišnjak Fakulteta političkih nauka, 2015, 9, 14, 13-34Publisher:
- Univerzitet u Beogradu - Fakultet političkih nauka, Beograd
Collections
Institution/Community
FPNTY - JOUR AU - Koprivica, Časlav PY - 2015 UR - http://rfpn.fpn.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/542 AB - In this paper we want to point out the limitations of the most important moments in the ruling (sceptical )notion of people/nation, where, at least when it comes to criticizing/ destruction of the term, converge outlook of Marxism, political liberalism, and postmodern/ de-constructivism. The main critical theses against, we hold, one-sided criticism towards the concept of people are placing an overemphasis on arbitrariness and the fact of being-constructed in it, and overlooking the peculiarities of the process of crystallization in the history of what was first a matter of sheer accidentallity. In dialogue with the disputed topoi in the perception of the people are at the same time indicated the guidelines to reflect this problem. AB - U ovom radu želimo da pokažemo ograničenja najvažnijih momenata u vladajućem (skeptičkom) poimanju naroda, u kojem, makar kada je riječ o kritici/destrukciji toga pojma, konvergiraju nazori marksizma, političkog liberalizma, i postmodernog dekonstruktivizma. Glavne kritičke teze spram, držimo, jednostrane kritike spram pojma naroda jesu pretjerano naglašavanje arbitrarnosti i konstruisanosti u njemu, te previđanje osobenosti procesa kristalizovanja u povijesti onoga što je najprije bilo samo slučajnost. U dijalogu sa spornim mjestima u poimanju naroda istovremeno se ukazuju i smjernice za promišljanje ovog problema. PB - Univerzitet u Beogradu - Fakultet političkih nauka, Beograd T2 - Godišnjak Fakulteta političkih nauka T1 - Disputes on the concept of people: A contribution to de-construction of a de-construct T1 - Sporovi o pojmu naroda - prilog dekonstruisanju jednog de-konstrukta EP - 34 IS - 14 SP - 13 VL - 9 DO - 10.5937/GodFPN1514013K ER -
@article{ author = "Koprivica, Časlav", year = "2015", abstract = "In this paper we want to point out the limitations of the most important moments in the ruling (sceptical )notion of people/nation, where, at least when it comes to criticizing/ destruction of the term, converge outlook of Marxism, political liberalism, and postmodern/ de-constructivism. The main critical theses against, we hold, one-sided criticism towards the concept of people are placing an overemphasis on arbitrariness and the fact of being-constructed in it, and overlooking the peculiarities of the process of crystallization in the history of what was first a matter of sheer accidentallity. In dialogue with the disputed topoi in the perception of the people are at the same time indicated the guidelines to reflect this problem., U ovom radu želimo da pokažemo ograničenja najvažnijih momenata u vladajućem (skeptičkom) poimanju naroda, u kojem, makar kada je riječ o kritici/destrukciji toga pojma, konvergiraju nazori marksizma, političkog liberalizma, i postmodernog dekonstruktivizma. Glavne kritičke teze spram, držimo, jednostrane kritike spram pojma naroda jesu pretjerano naglašavanje arbitrarnosti i konstruisanosti u njemu, te previđanje osobenosti procesa kristalizovanja u povijesti onoga što je najprije bilo samo slučajnost. U dijalogu sa spornim mjestima u poimanju naroda istovremeno se ukazuju i smjernice za promišljanje ovog problema.", publisher = "Univerzitet u Beogradu - Fakultet političkih nauka, Beograd", journal = "Godišnjak Fakulteta političkih nauka", title = "Disputes on the concept of people: A contribution to de-construction of a de-construct, Sporovi o pojmu naroda - prilog dekonstruisanju jednog de-konstrukta", pages = "34-13", number = "14", volume = "9", doi = "10.5937/GodFPN1514013K" }
Koprivica, Č.. (2015). Disputes on the concept of people: A contribution to de-construction of a de-construct. in Godišnjak Fakulteta političkih nauka Univerzitet u Beogradu - Fakultet političkih nauka, Beograd., 9(14), 13-34. https://doi.org/10.5937/GodFPN1514013K
Koprivica Č. Disputes on the concept of people: A contribution to de-construction of a de-construct. in Godišnjak Fakulteta političkih nauka. 2015;9(14):13-34. doi:10.5937/GodFPN1514013K .
Koprivica, Časlav, "Disputes on the concept of people: A contribution to de-construction of a de-construct" in Godišnjak Fakulteta političkih nauka, 9, no. 14 (2015):13-34, https://doi.org/10.5937/GodFPN1514013K . .