Arzyutov 2017 Review of The Socialist Way of Life in Siberia: Transformation in Buryatia. By Melissa Chakars. Budapest: Central European University Press, 2014. (original) (raw)
Related papers
Symbols of Post-Soviet Buryat National Consolidation
2011
The paper presents the findings of research that constitutes a part of a larger project titled “Buryat Ethnicity in the Context of Sociocultural Modernization”. This is the first time scholars studying Buryatia have undertaken such a comprehensive research on the question of the relationship between the Buryat ethnic consolidation integration and sociocultural modernization. The complex methodological principles introduce new ground for scientific discourse to analyze the processes of national-cultural revival far beyond the Buryat topic. The research of ethnopolitical processes analyzes: (i) elites’ activities directed at re-ethnicization; (ii) coexistence and opposition of national (ethnic) and Russian (civil) identities by placing ethnicity in the first place within the hierarchy of ideological, public, and individual identities; construction of a so-called boundary identity that implies a separation from Russia and an affinity for other historical and cultural groups; and (iii) ...
Journal of Eurasian Studies, 2020
This article examines the All-Buryat Congress for the Spiritual Rebirth and Consolidation of the Nation that was held in the Buryat Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic in February 1991. The congress met to discuss the future of the Buryats, a Mongolian people who live in southeastern Siberia, and to decide on what actions should be taken for the revival, development, and maintenance of their culture. Widespread elections were carried out in the Buryat lands in advance of the congress and voters selected 592 delegates. Delegates also came from other parts of the Soviet Union, as well as from Mongolia and China. Government administrators, Communist Party officials, members of new political parties like the Buryat-Mongolian People's Party, and non-affiliated individuals shared their ideas and political agendas. Although the congress came to some agreement on the general goals of promoting Buryat traditions, language, religions, and culture, there were disagreements about several of the political and territorial questions. For example, although some delegates hoped for the creation of a larger Buryat territory that would encompass all of Siberia's Buryats within a future Russian state, others disagreed revealing the tension between the desire to promote ethnic identity and the practical need to consider economic and political issues.
The Dissolution of the Buryat Autonomous Okrugs in Siberia: Notes from the Field
This field report comprises observations on the political processes through which the two Buryat autonomous okrugs in Siberia were dissolved into (or, in local political rhetoric, ‘unified’with) the larger territories surrounding them in 2008. The two sections discuss the dissolution decisions as observed by the authors in the course of fieldwork, in Pribaikal’e (Cisbaikal) by Joseph Long and in Zabaikal’e (Transbaikal) by Kathryn Graber. Some joint reflections on these events are given at the end.
In the paper, the author addresses the issue of different ways of understanding the authenticity of the various elements of culture of Western Buryats living in Irkutsk Oblast. Social conditions in which the question of authenticity exist are determined by Western Buryats’ double minority status (compared to the Russian majority and to Eastern Buryats). The problems result from the interruption of the intergenerational transmission as a result of Stalin’s repressions and the process of building a unified communist society. In the policy of ethnic culture revival which Buryat activists and intelligentsia pursue problems of authenticity of tradition appear constantly. The question of authenticity is not only a problem for anthropologists, historians and social activists. First, it is a question of power: who determines how the Buryats’ past looks like determines also their socio-political status in the modern world. Secondly, it is a problem of everyday life, as it determines health and success in this life and after death. However, in situations where the intergenerational transmission has been broken, there is a competition between the authorities that speak about the past – between local knowledge and the ethnographic and historical data.
Language and Ethnic Identity of Minorities in Post-Soviet Russia: The Buryat Case Study
Journal of Language Identity and Education, 2004
While the global ethnic revival, starting in the late 1960s, resulted in minorities’ movements to maintain their ethnic identity closely connected with the revitalization of minority languages, the other ethnic identity pattern in relation to language can be identified from the perspective of a rarely discussed minority group – the Buryats. This paper has found that within the Buryat minority group the assimilation strategy, widespread during the Soviet period, has been replaced by the integration strategy and a combination of strategies. In the latter case, linguistic integration is combined with the economic assimilation and marital separation. Two options have been identified regarding language and identity link among Buryats. First, the native language is considered as a salient feature of the Buryat ethnic identity and it is actually used and maintained. However, more powerful is the trend to abandon the language as an irrelevant ethnocultural identity marker. In general, the native language has for Buryats rather symbolic, unifying value and its abandoning does not affect the ethnic identity itself. Finally, the paper explores external and internal determining factors, which have formed this identity pattern. As external factors we consider the ethnic and language policy of the Soviet Union, modernization, the Russians-dominated majority-minority configuration, and insufficient institutional support of the Buryat language restoration and development. Internal factor is the widespread attitude among the Buryats themselves consisting in negative evaluation of the Buryat language and unwillingness to learn it and to transfer it to the next generations. The Buryat case shows that ethnic identity, in fact, can survive the loss of the indigenous group language, which has been sacrificed to the historical pressures of the last two centuries. It was the only possible ethnic identity pattern not only for the Buryat ethnic group, but also for many other minorities in Russia. Key words: ethnic identity, language, minority, Buryats, Russia
2020
The article studies the economic and social development of the frontier region of Russia – the Republic of Buryatia. Authors analyze the indicators of socio-demographic and socioeconomic aspects of population of Buryatia based on statistical data. Special attention is given to individual social expectations of the republic’s inhabitants: attitude towards job, ideas about a “good life”, near-term plans and long-term aspirations. As the research methods, the authors use economic and statistical analysis and sociological survey (sample of 300 persons). The current socio-economic conditions in the region speak for a tense situation on labor market, especially in rural areas. Low incomes of the population emphasize the importance of employment as a source of means of subsistence, and social objectives and near-term plans of the inhabitants of the region are mainly connected with ensuring financial independence and wellbeing, while family and moral values are secondary. The results of the...