首页> 外文期刊>European Review of History: Revue europeenne d'histoire >Subjects, citizens and others: the handling of ethnic differences in the British and the Habsburg Empires (late nineteenth and early twentieth century)
【24h】

Subjects, citizens and others: the handling of ethnic differences in the British and the Habsburg Empires (late nineteenth and early twentieth century)

机译:主题,公民及其他:处理英帝国和哈布斯堡帝国(19世纪末和20世纪初)的种族差异

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This article focuses on the role of ethnic inclusions and exclusions in administering citizenship and nationality within the British and the Habsburg Empires. The analysis discerns three ways of dealing with ethnically heterogenous populations. One follows the nation-state model and aims for internal ethnic homogeneity and legal equality. This model coined developments in Canada and Hungary. The second obeys an imperialistic pattern and implements legal discrimination between different ethnic groups. It played a decisive role in East Africa and in Bosnia to a certain degree. The third model follows a statist logic and enforces either supra-ethnic neutrality or a politics of recognition. It was most influential in Austria and India. In the British as well as in the Habsburg context ethnic differences gained significance around 1900. This ethnicising of law and administrative practice produced different results, though, in both cases, mainly due to the empires' divergent political structures. Whereas within the Habsburg Empire the three models were juxtaposed, British law and administration came to be dominated by the imperialistic pattern of ethnic discrimination against 'non-white' subjects. Thus, the customary distinction between a politically inclusive nationalism in Western Europe and an ethnically exclusive one in the continent's Eastern half - sometimes linked with the difference between ius soli and ius sanguinis - cannot be upheld.
机译:本文重点介绍在英国和哈布斯堡帝国中,族裔共融和排斥在管理公民身份和国籍方面的作用。分析确定了处理异族人口的三种方式。一种遵循民族国家模式,旨在实现内部种族同质和法律平等。这种模式创造了加拿大和匈牙利的发展。第二种遵循帝国主义的模式,在不同种族之间实行法律歧视。它在东非和波斯尼亚发挥了决定性作用。第三种模式遵循国家主义逻辑,并实行超种族中立或承认政治。它在奥地利和印度最具影响力。在英国以及哈布斯堡王朝背景下,族裔差异在1900年左右变得越来越重要。尽管在这两种情况下,法律和行政实践的族裔化产生了不同的结果,但这两种情况主要是由于帝国的政治结构不同所致。在哈布斯堡帝国中,这三种模式并列在一起,而英国的法律和行政则由帝国主义对“非白人”族裔的种族歧视模式所主导。因此,不能坚持西欧具有政治包容性的民族主义与非洲大陆东部一半的族裔专有的民族主义之间的习惯区别,有时这种区别与乌里索里乌斯乌里乌斯和乌伊斯桑吉尼斯之间的区别有关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号