What do you think?
Rate this book
Public Planet Books
Fear of Small Numbers: An Essay on the Geography of Anger
The period since 1989 has been marked by the global endorsement of open markets, the free flow of finance capital and liberal ideas of constitutional rule, and the active expansion of human rights. Why, then, in this era of intense globalization, has there been a proliferation of violence, of ethnic cleansing on the one hand and extreme forms of political violence against civilian populations on the other?Fear of Small Numbers is Arjun Appadurai’s answer to that question. A leading theorist of globalization, Appadurai turns his attention to the complex dynamics fueling large-scale, culturally motivated violence, from the genocides that racked Eastern Europe, Rwanda, and India in the early 1990s to the contemporary “war on terror.” Providing a conceptually innovative framework for understanding sources of global violence, he describes how the nation-state has grown ambivalent about minorities at the same time that minorities, because of global communication technologies and migration flows, increasingly see themselves as parts of powerful global majorities. By exacerbating the inequalities produced by globalization, the volatile, slippery relationship between majorities and minorities foments the desire to eradicate cultural difference.
Appadurai analyzes the darker side of suicide bombings; anti-Americanism; the surplus of rage manifest in televised beheadings; the clash of global ideologies; and the difficulties that flexible, cellular organizations such as Al-Qaeda present to centralized, “vertebrate” structures such as national governments. Powerful, provocative, and timely, Fear of Small Numbers is a thoughtful invitation to rethink what violence is in an age of globalization.
Appadurai analyzes the darker side of suicide bombings; anti-Americanism; the surplus of rage manifest in televised beheadings; the clash of global ideologies; and the difficulties that flexible, cellular organizations such as Al-Qaeda present to centralized, “vertebrate” structures such as national governments. Powerful, provocative, and timely, Fear of Small Numbers is a thoughtful invitation to rethink what violence is in an age of globalization.
176 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2006
41 people are currently reading
721 people want to read
About the author
Arjun Appadurai
58 books103 followersArjun Appadurai is an Indian-American anthropologist recognized as a major theorist in globalization studies. In his anthropological work, he discusses the importance of the modernity of nation states and globalization
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 35 reviews
Want to read
August 10, 2017the third try and the language stills too difficult! I should give up :|
November 29, 2022
All modern nations, Appadurai says, attribute their sovereignty at least in part to "some sort of ethnic genius" - that is, a national identity or spirit - a belief that can all too easily lead to a simplified worldview and then to genocide. (pp. 3–4) In the age of globalization, states have particular fears about "about their own minority or marginality (real or imagined)," and since there is no way to kill globalization, minorities instead become the victims of "ethnocide". (pp. 43–44).
A social identity is "predatory" if it relies on the elimination of someone else's identity. I read this book in 2009 and wrote about this idea in 2022.
When I first read this, my question was whether the majority's perception of threat can ever be well-founded. If a lone terrorist, or a handful of terrorists, doesn't count, what would? Doesn't an army of terrorists present a credible threat? But I think that hypothetical question is a deflection from the point. The question isn't so much whether a majority can ever be existentially vulnerable, but how a majority generally behaves when it is not at risk.
A social identity is "predatory" if it relies on the elimination of someone else's identity. I read this book in 2009 and wrote about this idea in 2022.
When I first read this, my question was whether the majority's perception of threat can ever be well-founded. If a lone terrorist, or a handful of terrorists, doesn't count, what would? Doesn't an army of terrorists present a credible threat? But I think that hypothetical question is a deflection from the point. The question isn't so much whether a majority can ever be existentially vulnerable, but how a majority generally behaves when it is not at risk.
Read
September 12, 2020In this book Appadurai delves into the question Why has the age of globalization also been an era of ethnocide? To which his main argument is that modern nation states presupposes the idea of ethnic genius, the sons of soil approach which is endemic to all sovereignties. And it is this which creates the us versus them discourse in countries. The us being the majority and them being the minorities.
The majority believes that nation is synonymous with the majority and the minorities prevent the nation from becoming pure/ whole as imagined by the majority. In his words, the minority is seen as an obstacle to "a pure and untainted national ethnos." And hence the minority is increasingly marginalised and also demonised.
The majority also fears that if the minorities are not eliminated they (majority) will one day become minorities themselves- and this they use to excercise violence on the minorities. Hence the fear of small numbers leads to ethnocide and genocide of the minorities. A very interesting example he cites is the Punjab crisis. Most of us know about militancy in the state which led to all kinds of prohibitive laws but very few know about the human rights abuses and the reason behind the turmoil in the state.
The majority believes that nation is synonymous with the majority and the minorities prevent the nation from becoming pure/ whole as imagined by the majority. In his words, the minority is seen as an obstacle to "a pure and untainted national ethnos." And hence the minority is increasingly marginalised and also demonised.
The majority also fears that if the minorities are not eliminated they (majority) will one day become minorities themselves- and this they use to excercise violence on the minorities. Hence the fear of small numbers leads to ethnocide and genocide of the minorities. A very interesting example he cites is the Punjab crisis. Most of us know about militancy in the state which led to all kinds of prohibitive laws but very few know about the human rights abuses and the reason behind the turmoil in the state.
July 14, 2020
This book had been on my list for a long time and turned out to be a tad disappointing. Mostly, I think this was because I had read about Appadurai's key arguments in various other texts already (for thesis research at the time) and the essay form of this book actually added little of substance to what I had then already read elsewhere. What also didn't help for me personally was that I combined reading this book with another one, sometimes losing the line of argumentation because of long breaks in reading.
While I'm not entirely convinced by Appadurai's attempt to answer the question why majorities may (viciously) attack minorities (maybe the book was also too short?), his book to me still offers important insights, particularly regarding the link between the - often merely perceived - threat of minorities and transnational terror movements and organisations, and how 'little stories' become ways of reinforcing dominant discourses on fear. He also highlights that violence makes groups rather than the other way around, a perspective on (communal) violence that is common in academia, but not heard enough outside of it. It is perhaps a little bit dated by now, but still worth the read.
While I'm not entirely convinced by Appadurai's attempt to answer the question why majorities may (viciously) attack minorities (maybe the book was also too short?), his book to me still offers important insights, particularly regarding the link between the - often merely perceived - threat of minorities and transnational terror movements and organisations, and how 'little stories' become ways of reinforcing dominant discourses on fear. He also highlights that violence makes groups rather than the other way around, a perspective on (communal) violence that is common in academia, but not heard enough outside of it. It is perhaps a little bit dated by now, but still worth the read.
January 31, 2022
Many will find this to be a challenge to read, even for an essay that was penned during the nascent days of the globalization as IR and peace study academics were coming to grips not only with the phenomenon but also with how and why these fractionalization tendencies occurred in nation states.
Appadurai is a minority POC author - and this shows in how he frames the conversation on what he terms as small numbers - in essence, the very limited difference or tipping point if you will, that enables for majoritarian parties and states to commit the violence atrocities that they do, especially in the context of the post 9/11 world.
Though published in 2004, many of his observations and theories hold true today even in the changed world.
Appadurai is a minority POC author - and this shows in how he frames the conversation on what he terms as small numbers - in essence, the very limited difference or tipping point if you will, that enables for majoritarian parties and states to commit the violence atrocities that they do, especially in the context of the post 9/11 world.
Though published in 2004, many of his observations and theories hold true today even in the changed world.
June 26, 2025
To moje pierwsze zetknięcie z naukową literaturą antropologiczną (forma eseju nieco upłynnia sposób czytania i odformalnia język). Wiele sformułowań brzmi dość egzotycznie i postmodernistycznie, ale większość przekazu jest zrozumiała. Książka porusza wiele wątków dotyczących poszukiwania źródeł współczesnych konfliktów na tle narodowościowym, głównymi zaś tezami jest upatrywanie przyczyn konfliktu w marginalizowaniu spraw mniejszości w procesach społecznych i prawnych, hegemonii Stanów Zjednoczonych (najlepsze fragmenty) oraz prawicowym populiźmie.
Autor podaje szereg przykładów historycznych (ideologia nazistowska) oraz trwających po dziś dzień (konflikt Indii i Pakistanu). Najważniejszą tezą książki jest fakt, że "świat jest pełen gniewnych mniejszości z potencjałem organizacji komórkowej. Zauważyliśmy już tę umiejętność u Sikhów, Basków, Kurdów, Tamilów ze Sri Lanki i innych gnębionych mniejszości, które stały się diasporycznymi społecznościami globalnymi. Nie sądźmy więc, że to w DNA islamu tkwi coś, co wytwarza umiejętność transformacji mniejszości".
Autor podaje szereg przykładów historycznych (ideologia nazistowska) oraz trwających po dziś dzień (konflikt Indii i Pakistanu). Najważniejszą tezą książki jest fakt, że "świat jest pełen gniewnych mniejszości z potencjałem organizacji komórkowej. Zauważyliśmy już tę umiejętność u Sikhów, Basków, Kurdów, Tamilów ze Sri Lanki i innych gnębionych mniejszości, które stały się diasporycznymi społecznościami globalnymi. Nie sądźmy więc, że to w DNA islamu tkwi coś, co wytwarza umiejętność transformacji mniejszości".
Read
September 28, 2024Intro and chap 4
January 1, 2014
The problem identified, explained and exemplified in the book is an important one. Minorities are being hated all across the world today. Minorities, by definition and some implication are a weak entity, the concept having developed out of census work. So isn't it ironical that the same minorities are being feared and consequently hated ?
For Appadurai the answer lies in the very globalization that hasn't been yet critically analyzed from the point of view of the kind of violence that it helps plan, organize and carry out by the cellular organizations as against the State who should ideally be the monopoly over violence according to Max Weber.
The examples cited come from almost all over the world which could make it accessible to an even larger audience. The book is good in the sense that it is neither too deep in theory nor in ethnographic description and charts the middle which makes it accessible to a diverse range of readers. But that is also what is a little disappointing about it. The entire discussion about the world wide nature of a growing sense of anti-americanism is very appealing intuitively but the evidence seems anecdotal. The book also lacks detail in terms of explaining the economic side of globalization that plays a role in the kind of violence that the same phenomenon is able to carry out. The book is a great read because of the rhetoric and metaphors at play. But because there are so many case studies, one finds a lack of theoretical discussion about issues like say terrorism which have a very specific set of contexts and issues. Lastly, the discussion about the positive characteristics of the same side of the phenomenon in the example of collaborating NGOs could have been discussed in further detail. Again, it the very end where the author almost just introduces the theoretical underpinnings of the undertaken and leaves the reader asking for more.
The reader who knows Appadurai from having read Modernity at Large will be a tad disappointed. But that doesnt mean that this book shouldn't be read. The well-respected academic has pointed us to a very interesting and important side of globalization that not many of us are aware of.
Reference: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20371187
For Appadurai the answer lies in the very globalization that hasn't been yet critically analyzed from the point of view of the kind of violence that it helps plan, organize and carry out by the cellular organizations as against the State who should ideally be the monopoly over violence according to Max Weber.
The examples cited come from almost all over the world which could make it accessible to an even larger audience. The book is good in the sense that it is neither too deep in theory nor in ethnographic description and charts the middle which makes it accessible to a diverse range of readers. But that is also what is a little disappointing about it. The entire discussion about the world wide nature of a growing sense of anti-americanism is very appealing intuitively but the evidence seems anecdotal. The book also lacks detail in terms of explaining the economic side of globalization that plays a role in the kind of violence that the same phenomenon is able to carry out. The book is a great read because of the rhetoric and metaphors at play. But because there are so many case studies, one finds a lack of theoretical discussion about issues like say terrorism which have a very specific set of contexts and issues. Lastly, the discussion about the positive characteristics of the same side of the phenomenon in the example of collaborating NGOs could have been discussed in further detail. Again, it the very end where the author almost just introduces the theoretical underpinnings of the undertaken and leaves the reader asking for more.
The reader who knows Appadurai from having read Modernity at Large will be a tad disappointed. But that doesnt mean that this book shouldn't be read. The well-respected academic has pointed us to a very interesting and important side of globalization that not many of us are aware of.
Reference: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20371187
May 17, 2018
Top notch!
April 22, 2024
The "small numbers" of the title refers to minorities. Why, in the age of globalization, is there an at times genocidal fear of minorities on the part of majorities? Arjun Appadurai states his basic thesis on page 43:
People imagine themselves as members of nation states. They take the security and power of the nation state for their own security. But globalization unsettles all such traditional structures. More and more peoples lives are shaped by transnational forces which we do not even have the language to understand. Thus the individual not only cannot be sure of her own place in the world, she cannot be sure of the place of the imagined community with respect to which she defines herself. In flux of globalization in which everything recognizable melts, this threat to the idea of nation feels existential. Confronted with such existential anxiety, human beings become vindictive and cruel, and lash out at those communities that both present the most immediate challenge to the total power of the nation and are most totally vulnerable to its wrath.
I think that this expresses the main thrust of the book. Appadurai also discusses at length the way that ideas of majority and minority have to be constructed by the administration of modern states and the way that economic interdependence and the importance of non-state actors present an increasing challenge to the idea of the autonomous nation-state. All of this is illustrated with examples from South Asia.
I found the book still relevant and engaging. My main criticisms are that Appadurai could have fit together his discussions to make the general structure of his argument clearer and that his conclusions are, regrettably, not especially surprising.
But what is the special status of such scapegoats in the era of globalization? After all, strangers, sick people, nomads, religious dissidents, and similar minor social groups have always been targets of prejudice and xenophobia. Here I suggest a single and simple hypothesis. Given the systemic compromise of national economic sovereignty that is built into the logic of globalization, and given the increasing strain this puts on states to behave as trustees of the interests of a territorially defined and confined "people," minorities are the major site for displacing the anxieties of many states about their own minority or marginality (real or imagined) in a world of a few megastates, of unruly economic flows and compromised sovereignties. Minorities, in a word, are metaphors and reminders of the betrayal of the classical national project. And it is this betrayal--actually rooted in the failure of the nation-state to preserve its promise to be the guarantor of national sovereignty--that underwrites the worldwide impulse to extrude or to eliminate minorities.
People imagine themselves as members of nation states. They take the security and power of the nation state for their own security. But globalization unsettles all such traditional structures. More and more peoples lives are shaped by transnational forces which we do not even have the language to understand. Thus the individual not only cannot be sure of her own place in the world, she cannot be sure of the place of the imagined community with respect to which she defines herself. In flux of globalization in which everything recognizable melts, this threat to the idea of nation feels existential. Confronted with such existential anxiety, human beings become vindictive and cruel, and lash out at those communities that both present the most immediate challenge to the total power of the nation and are most totally vulnerable to its wrath.
I think that this expresses the main thrust of the book. Appadurai also discusses at length the way that ideas of majority and minority have to be constructed by the administration of modern states and the way that economic interdependence and the importance of non-state actors present an increasing challenge to the idea of the autonomous nation-state. All of this is illustrated with examples from South Asia.
I found the book still relevant and engaging. My main criticisms are that Appadurai could have fit together his discussions to make the general structure of his argument clearer and that his conclusions are, regrettably, not especially surprising.
April 12, 2019
Fear of Small Numbers, Arjun Appadurai
The central question that Arjun Appadurai tries to address is this: what prompts the modern nations to unleash terror among the national minority?
Through the theoretical framework of globalization, Appadurai avers that globalization has highlighted strange ambiguity and pathologies within the modern nations. Globalization can be defined as the free flow of finance capital, better methods of statecraft and preservation of human rights; at the same time, however, globalization has also resulted in the migration of people from one community to another, from one nation to another. The presence of the migrant/refugee/minority violates the sacrosanct space of the nation. They appear as impediments towards attaining the national purity. Hence, the smaller the number, the greater the virulent attack on the minority to create a homogenous unit of the nation.
In a liberal democracy, the figure of the individual is an important one. It is not the collective but the subjective stance of the individual that determines his/her politics. The importance of the number ‘one’ is a point that Appudurai highlights. The suicide bomber is his classic example who all by himself has the power to unleash a reign of terror. In fact, terrorism, according to Appadurai, is the flip side of globalization.
The central question that Arjun Appadurai tries to address is this: what prompts the modern nations to unleash terror among the national minority?
Through the theoretical framework of globalization, Appadurai avers that globalization has highlighted strange ambiguity and pathologies within the modern nations. Globalization can be defined as the free flow of finance capital, better methods of statecraft and preservation of human rights; at the same time, however, globalization has also resulted in the migration of people from one community to another, from one nation to another. The presence of the migrant/refugee/minority violates the sacrosanct space of the nation. They appear as impediments towards attaining the national purity. Hence, the smaller the number, the greater the virulent attack on the minority to create a homogenous unit of the nation.
In a liberal democracy, the figure of the individual is an important one. It is not the collective but the subjective stance of the individual that determines his/her politics. The importance of the number ‘one’ is a point that Appudurai highlights. The suicide bomber is his classic example who all by himself has the power to unleash a reign of terror. In fact, terrorism, according to Appadurai, is the flip side of globalization.
May 26, 2019
Why is the U.S. and the world where it is right now? Appadurai explained it all back in 2006. And the reasons aren’t hard to comprehend, just hard to accept: globalization has driven us mad, our senses of identity have been corrupted/exposed, and violence has been given a freer hand.
This is a brilliant and crucial book, not flawless but so extremely valuable in spite of any slight missteps. ESSENTIAL READING.
This is a brilliant and crucial book, not flawless but so extremely valuable in spite of any slight missteps. ESSENTIAL READING.
January 24, 2024
Banger. Very solid argument about the limitations of Spengler’s and Huntington’s morphologies of cultures and civilizations. Heartwrenching description of American anxiety about our global image circa 2004 and an incisive description of how we live the minority-identified individual but, as liberals, hate the fact of minority as such.
Four stars for introducing strong arguments that touch a broad range of topics and to which I will certainly refer in the future.
Four stars for introducing strong arguments that touch a broad range of topics and to which I will certainly refer in the future.
January 11, 2025
This book is short but dense. I struggled to stick with it at times due to the effort it took my old brain to follow it. When reading scientific papers my brain usually has to "zoom in" to understand it but with anthropology (or whatever) it takes more of a "zoom out" that's not as easy for me.
It was worthwhile to read though and I came away with some new ways of thinking about a few things.
It was worthwhile to read though and I came away with some new ways of thinking about a few things.
Read
June 12, 2019Deze man verzint letterlijk woorden waar je bijstaat. Zijn hele boek is gebaseerd op zijn eigen ideeën met maar heel weinig referenties naar anderen.
January 11, 2022
Bardzo dobra, choć autorka twierdzi, że nie istnieje coś takiego jak lewicowy ekstremizm. Polemizowałabym.
January 19, 2025
**4.5, really succinct observations about globalizations and terrorism
June 9, 2009
Though, I do not agree with everything Appadurai observes and theorizes in this essay, I do believe that it is interesting geopolitical perspective. In the face of globalization, and an economic system that awkwardly fits the current political system, we are faced with more internal/"domestic" conflicts. Appadurai provides some interesting insights into the modern concept nationhood, wherein the national character is defined around its majority. Also, importantly, Appadurai foresees the eventual out-dated conclusion of nation-states (already fast-approaching). As terrorism has become more prevalent, the world has fallen into a propensity to "hate from afar." This long-distance hatred has brought on conformity, a denigration of a lifestyle -- what Appadurai calls "civicide", and, eventually, and violence. There is room optimism for this academic. As the vertebrate (the nation-state) faces off against the cellular (i.e. terror cells), the weight and hope of the tilt may rest in grassroots globalization, or cellular utopian groups. Citizens and activists became greater players in the geopolitical chess-match. It is a dense read, at times, but left plenty of inspiration and desire for reflection.
December 19, 2018
Es una especie de ensayo que intenta explicar por qué se le teme y ataca violentamente a las minorías (musulmanes, judíos, indígenas, etc.) y por qué este proceso se agudiza en la globalización.
Aunque fue escrito en 2006, es terrorífico lo bien que podría explicar lo que está pasando con Trump en el poder, y lo peor: lo que puede pasar si se sigue "regando" la semilla ideológica del odio contra migrantes, por ejemplo. Da una especie de "receta" para el genocidio y lo de Trump encaja en cada rubro. El horror.
Retoma el concepto clave de la sociología moderna: la incertidumbre. Ese miedo que tenemos del "otro", del diferente. Ese que no conocemos y que ciertos sistemas llenan de prejucios y ataques justo para que les temamos, para que nos sintamos amenazados por ellos.
No sé si cuenta como spoiler, pero "la incertidumbre cobra fuerza siempre que hay movimiento de personas a gran escala".
Aborda el terrorismo como máximo ejemplo de miedo al otro. El último capítulo habla del miedo que globalmente le tenemos a USA y por qué se da esta relación amor-odio.
Aunque tiene conceptos muy interesantes, la lectura no es sencilla. Su argumentación tampoco es muy fina. Da muchas vueltas, es repetitivo en algunas partes y falto de profundidad en otras.
Aunque fue escrito en 2006, es terrorífico lo bien que podría explicar lo que está pasando con Trump en el poder, y lo peor: lo que puede pasar si se sigue "regando" la semilla ideológica del odio contra migrantes, por ejemplo. Da una especie de "receta" para el genocidio y lo de Trump encaja en cada rubro. El horror.
Retoma el concepto clave de la sociología moderna: la incertidumbre. Ese miedo que tenemos del "otro", del diferente. Ese que no conocemos y que ciertos sistemas llenan de prejucios y ataques justo para que les temamos, para que nos sintamos amenazados por ellos.
No sé si cuenta como spoiler, pero "la incertidumbre cobra fuerza siempre que hay movimiento de personas a gran escala".
Aborda el terrorismo como máximo ejemplo de miedo al otro. El último capítulo habla del miedo que globalmente le tenemos a USA y por qué se da esta relación amor-odio.
Aunque tiene conceptos muy interesantes, la lectura no es sencilla. Su argumentación tampoco es muy fina. Da muchas vueltas, es repetitivo en algunas partes y falto de profundidad en otras.
February 8, 2017
Excelente estudio de la manera en que la globalización ha reconfigurado, ampliado o disminuido la noción que se tiene de la identidad, y la creación de los grupos de "ellos" y "nosotros".
Las minorías -tan necesarias y tan odiadas- son los elementos de estudio, y el autor cuestiona el porqué del miedo tan irracional de las potencias mundiales a esos numero pequeños. Cómo tres o cuatro individuos le pueden partir la tranquilidad a Estados Unidos, por ejemplo.
En su argumentación Appadurai, privilegia ante todo las estructuras culturales, la autodeterminación y la exoistencia de dos paisajes en la realidad social mundial: el vertebrado (el sistema) y el celular (lo "extra-sistemico").
Muy recomendado.
Las minorías -tan necesarias y tan odiadas- son los elementos de estudio, y el autor cuestiona el porqué del miedo tan irracional de las potencias mundiales a esos numero pequeños. Cómo tres o cuatro individuos le pueden partir la tranquilidad a Estados Unidos, por ejemplo.
En su argumentación Appadurai, privilegia ante todo las estructuras culturales, la autodeterminación y la exoistencia de dos paisajes en la realidad social mundial: el vertebrado (el sistema) y el celular (lo "extra-sistemico").
Muy recomendado.
February 7, 2008
globalization => expansion of social uncertainty => fundamentalism & the "narcissim of small differences"=> violence
As for the capacity for violence itself, well that's always been there, but Appadurai makes an elegant explanation of the current forms and targets of violence- from the intense, almost intimate violence between neighbors (as in Rwanda) to the evolution of "long distance hatred" (al qaeda types).
A wonderfully straightforward book (looking at YOU Derrida) rooted in the actual, factual real world as opposed to the sterilized, idealized, generalized world of humans that most philosophers deal in.
As for the capacity for violence itself, well that's always been there, but Appadurai makes an elegant explanation of the current forms and targets of violence- from the intense, almost intimate violence between neighbors (as in Rwanda) to the evolution of "long distance hatred" (al qaeda types).
A wonderfully straightforward book (looking at YOU Derrida) rooted in the actual, factual real world as opposed to the sterilized, idealized, generalized world of humans that most philosophers deal in.
February 15, 2015
Las posiciones de este antropólogo hindu son muy interesantes porque afrontan el problema de la violencia terrorista, pero en general de la violencia en las sociedades contemporáneas desde una perspectiva que enriquece el debate al evitar caer en polaridades fáciles. Su tesis se centra en que estamos ante organizaciones celulares vertebradas, que plantean el problema de lo local contra lo global en una perspectiva diferente a los estados nación. Desde ahí abre un análisis que explica mucho de lo que está pasando a partir de las tensiones que se generan entre los centros globales y las condiciones locales.
July 7, 2023
Appadurai stipulates that the reason minorities are typically victimised despite being powerless is that they call into question the idea of national homogeneity and thus undermining the entire nation-state mythos. This is especially salient in our time where the state must advertise corporate globalism while simultaneously shunning the intensification of human inward migration. This leads to a situation where the state, which depends on this mythos for its own legitimacy, must constantly enact Othering strategies in order to make that fuzzy line between “us” and “them” more solid.
February 10, 2014
An in-depth analysis of the tension between minority and the majority in the era of globalization, it's impact on nation states with regards to its policies towards the minority. It's an excellent socio-political analysis to understand the changing/changed nature of violence. The only thing that needs to be taken with a pinch of salt is the Appadurai's fondness of a certain type of political parties particularly while referring to India.
January 25, 2011
good times reading about genocide. was initially confused about how this would relate to a class titled 'theories of communication' but there's some interesting stuff in here. some of the real-life examples were a bit redundant but overall it was certainly thought provoking.
August 12, 2014
Really challenging just because of the difficult language, but worth a shot. About why minorities are formed and why we hate them so much and why this has intesified with globalisation. Everyone who wants to discuss immigration policy needs to read this first.
May 14, 2008
Mi reseña en Letras Libres:
http://www.letraslibres.com/index.php...
http://www.letraslibres.com/index.php...
October 17, 2010
I don't know if I can read this author's incomplete analysis without developing a hernia.
December 23, 2010
An invaluable resource in understanding xenophobia in the modern world.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 35 reviews