Which school of though better explains the causes of ethnic violence? Introduction The nature of ethnic violence has been always generating debates among scholars coming from the fields of comparative politics and international relations. The question discussed in this post will contrast several types of arguments, the rationalist argument that sees the ethnic conflict as a rational result of group and individual behavior (Steinberg 1981; Glazer & Moynihan 1975) with the premordialist argument that observe the ethnic violence as an inevitable clash based on innate antagonisms of contending groups (Smith 1986; Kaplan 1993), the constructivist, and the symbolist politics. I will try to project which of the theory provides a better answer to the questions: whether conflicts among different ethnicities are natural phenomena or and what are the factors that trigger the escalation of ethnic violence? Rational choice theory perceives ethnic conflict
Comentarii
Trimiteți un comentariu