{"id":10801,"date":"2023-03-21T07:00:18","date_gmt":"2023-03-21T06:00:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/?post_type=undoingraceandracism&#038;p=10801"},"modified":"2023-03-21T11:47:39","modified_gmt":"2023-03-21T10:47:39","slug":"far-right-anthropologies","status":"publish","type":"undoingraceandracism","link":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/undoingraceandracism\/far-right-anthropologies\/","title":{"rendered":"Far-right anthropologies"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<style>\n\t.dkpdf-download-icon { height: 1.5rem; }\n<\/style>\n\n\n\n\t<div class=\"dkpdf-button-container\" style=\" text-align:right \">\n\n\t\t<a class=\"dkpdf-button\" href=\"\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/undoingraceandracism\/10801?pdf=10801\" target=\"_blank\">\n\t\t\t<img src='\/wp-content\/themes\/boasblogs\/dkpdf\/download_red.svg' class=dkpdf-download-icon'\/>\n\t\t<\/a>\n\t\n\t\t<!-- <a class=\"dkpdf-button\" href=\"\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/undoingraceandracism\/10801?pdf=10801\" target=\"_blank\"><span class=\"dkpdf-button-icon\"><i class=\"fa fa-file-pdf-o\"><\/i><\/span> Download PDF<\/a> &rarr; -->\n\n\t<\/div>\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">One of the things that surprised me most after I began doing research on European far-right youth activists was my research participants\u2019 statements on how much they <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">love anthropology<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Not Mussolini, not Christianity, not philosophy, but precisely anthropology. \u201cHow dare you?\u201d, I would comment on such statements in my head, assuming that they completely misunderstood what anthropology is about. For how can one <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">love anthropology<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> while <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">hating the Other, <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">or at least certain others? Doesn\u2019t anthropology imply a sort of \u201clove-all-the-humanity\u201d approach, no matter how na\u00efve this may sound?\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Yet as it usually happens in ethnographic work, or at least in meaningful ethnographic fieldwork \u2013 the one that also forces us to turn the gaze towards ourselves and to reflect on our own positionality \u2013 I came to realize that I had to ask a reverse question: How do <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">I <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">dare question my research participants\u2019 inspirations from anthropology? And why should I assume to know what anthropology means to them? After all, I would not make such an assumption about other kinds of claims or practices that anthropologists are trained to try to understand from research participants\u2019 point of view: marriage rituals, values attached to labor, or ideas about God.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201cI simply love Levi-Strauss,\u201d Alberto, an activist from Southern Italy would tell me. In stating his fascination with Levi-Strauss\u2019s travelogues, Alberto expressed the sense of loss that in his view characterizes modern times.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201cI read Gellner and realized what nationalism is about,\u201d Staszek, leader of a befriended Polish movement would declare, emphasizing his distance from ideological positions which fail to acknowledge the constructed character of nations (Later on, he asked me to share with him a copy of Benedict Anderson\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Imagined Communities<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">). Leader of a movement that the Polish liberal press tends to describe as fascist, Staszek has been criticized by his collaborators for his supposedly too inclusive understanding of nation.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201cOne simply cannot understand the far right without anthropology!\u201d Livio, a history student, would exclaim. Expressing admiration for my own professional path, he would explain to me that he temporarily abandoned school to create an independent mountain commune in northern Italy, inspired by what he referred to as \u201cprimitive societies.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">While his university colleague and highly devoted militant, Francesca, would state plainly: \u201cI chose to become a far-right activist because I was always so interested in other cultures, in how differently people may live.\u201d Such comments were often followed by, or even intertwined with, arguments about the need to defend European nation-states from (non-European) migrants, about the danger posed by LGBTQ movements, and, last but not least, about the need to protect the \u201ccultural and racial diversity\u201d of the human world. Yet if to me such statements appeared in stark contrast with claims about anthropology, to my research participants they constituted their logical continuation.<\/span><\/p>\n<figure><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-medium wp-image-10802\" src=\"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/Pasieka_diversity-is-a-value-920x690.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"920\" height=\"690\" srcset=\"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/Pasieka_diversity-is-a-value-920x690.png 920w, https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/Pasieka_diversity-is-a-value-1440x1080.png 1440w, https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/Pasieka_diversity-is-a-value-1536x1152.png 1536w, https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/Pasieka_diversity-is-a-value-2048x1536.png 2048w, https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/Pasieka_diversity-is-a-value-920x690@2x.png 1840w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 920px) 100vw, 920px\" \/><figcaption>\n<p style=\"font-size: 80%; line-height: 125%;\"><em>\u201cDiversity is a value.\u201d Tableau from Museum of Anthropology and Ethnology in Florence. \u00a9 Agnieszka Pasieka<\/em><\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In this blog entry, I approach anthropology as a far-right emic concept and try to de-\/re-construct its different meanings and usages. Rather than proposing an anthropology of racism, I focus on the usage of anthropology by the far right to justify their ideas of \u201crace\u201d and \u201cculture.\u201d In particular, I am interested in how far-right activists employ for this purpose a set of ideas they define as \u201canthropological\u201d: views on (ethnic, religious) identities and ideas on what defines human (moral) beings. I draw here on the research with several European far-right movements (in Italy, Poland and Hungary) that I have been conducting since 2016. While a detailed description of the movements goes beyond the scope of this short entry, I shall emphasize that they all put forward a radical nationalist vision which blends nativist, identitarian conceptions with a critique of capitalism; and that while members\u2019 professional paths are quite diverse, students and university graduates are among the most numerous.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In spring of 2021, Facebook profiles of my Italian research participants filled with the images of and commentaries on their new idol: a female American soccer player, Carli Lloyd. The player became known after she refused to \u201dtake a knee\u201d during the performance of the U.S. national anthem, as many athletes chose to do as a gesture of protest against anti-black police violence. In defending her act of refusal and praising her nonconformism, Italian<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">activists did not challenge the existence of racism. Instead, they claimed that racism is \u201ctoo serious a problem to be tackled by stupid performances\u201d and &#8211; in criticizing the spread of the practice among European athletes &#8211; they emphasized that racism is an American problem.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In the same period, in response to a wave of events in support of Black Lives Matter, they organized a series of flash mobs throughout Italy during which activists gathered around an important monument (usually consisting of a standing figure or figures). The performances were accompanied by three kinds of slogans: #ItalianCultureMatters, #OurCitiesRemainStanding (<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">#LeNostreCitt\u00e0RestanoInPiedi<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) and #WeRemainHumans (<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">#RestiamoUmani<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">). The connection thus established &#8211; between the national culture, the refusal to kneel in opposition to racism, and the quality of being human &#8211; well exemplifies a tendency of the far-right to, in their words, \u201canthropologize\u201d political debates. The Italian far-right\u2019s attempts to defend their nation from \u201cfalse\u201d accusations of racism (it\u2019s an American problem!) or from being \u201cneglected\u201d (the way they use the hashtag #Italian Culture Matters cannot but be seen as a variant of #All Lives Matter) are thus closely linked with ideas about human freedom, supposedly threatened by various new totalitarianisms. The slogan \u201cWe remain human\u201d refers to a quotation from George Orwell\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">1984<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: \u201cIt&#8217;s not so much <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">staying alive<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, it&#8217;s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">staying human<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> that&#8217;s important.\u201d In a commentary on the critical reactions to the female athlete\u2019s refusal, one of the activists concluded that they represent not an attempt to impose an ideology or to generate and promote specific ideas about how the world works, but a project of \u201cperverse anthropology\u201d that aims \u201cto shake human nature, starting from a psychological and social blackmailing\u201d and challenging one\u2019s right to act in accordance with one\u2019s beliefs.<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">They referred to the argumentation of the player, who explained that since she came from a military family she could not kneel during the anthem.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The second example refers not to a single occurrence but to annual celebrations my research participants engage in. With the veneration of concrete individuals and collectivities, far-right militants put forward their own project of identity politics, which they oppose to the \u201cleft-liberal\u201d one, that in their view \u201conly deals with selected minorities.\u201d Consider these two statements by one of my research participants, circulated via social media and well representative of her milieu:<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201cPeople means identity, land, roots, belief.\u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n<p><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Identity means customs, language, story, tradition.\u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n<p><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Land is Homeland, blood and work, seeds and life, love and sacrifice.\u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n<p><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Homeland is the home of those who worked that land, in the name of those who blessed it (\u2026) Homeland is the land of resistance. Against the horror of Israel, honor to the struggle of the Palestinian people!\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n<p><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201cOn 29 November 1864, a camp of Cheyenne and Arapaho got attacked by 700 American soldiers. \u2026 Native Americans were exterminated indiscriminately; many of them were mutilated and scalped. This episode is remembered as the massacre of Sand Creek.\u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n<p><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">There exist roots and identities, there exist the tie of soil and blood between man and his land; the tie that makes honorable people willing to die for this land.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">While accusing the \u201cliberal left\u201d of a selective definition of the category of \u201cminority,\u201d far-right activists I studied across Europe respond to it with a selective understanding of (honorable) \u201cnative peoples\u201d whose resistance is to be venerated. The far right\u2019s models for identity politics fall into two categories. The first includes victims of \u201cimperialist politics\u201d: Palestinians, Native Americans, the Irish Republican Army, and Cuban revolutionaries (the Cuban revolution is defined not as a communist but as a national one). The second includes Christian communities in religiously mixed regions, such as Armenia, Kosovo and Syria, which tend to be defined as \u201cpersecuted\u201d and \u201cforgotten.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This somewhat romantic vision of identity &#8211; which blends Herderian views of culture with elements of anthropological approaches to ethnicity &#8211; is first of all communitarian, in contrast to the individualist view supposedly promoted by the \u201cliberal left.\u201d It features the rights of \u201cpeoples\u201d (and their \u201ccultures\u201d) against the rights of the \u201cabstract man.\u201d In presenting themselves as real defenders of cultural diversity, militants simultaneously present themselves as offering an alternative to the \u201cfake\u201d radicalism of the left: its incapacity to embrace universal concerns, such as the right to belong, celebrate one\u2019s ancestry, or work in the place of one\u2019s birth. In making such claims, they refer to anthropology in two ways. First, to emphasize the <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">universal<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> importance of identity and the fact that people are ready to die for it; second, to highlight the value of <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">particular<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, idiosyncratic identities that are to be preserved and which are, in their view, threatened by mass migration. In challenging the idea of societies becoming more diverse due to migratory flows, they consider the limited mobility to be a guarantor of the maintenance of cultural diversity and, to paraphrase Francesca, \u201cmany different ways in which people may live.\u201d At the same time, while discriminating against Moroccans or Syrians living in Italy, the far right admires them as representatives of \u201cstrong cultures:\u201d that is, cultures that migrants are proud of and to which they remain attached.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The third example also refers to a regular occurrence \u2013 the annual March of Independence organized by Polish far-right groups each November in Warsaw. After the event, organizers tend to respond via official statements and social media against the accusations of racism directed at them by the press and\/or political authorities. The reasons for that are usually the banners they carry during the march and which feature slogans such as \u201cPoland for Poles.\u201d In responding to the recurrent accusations, members of one of the organizing groups stated: \u201cNation is a community of culture, not of blood. As nationalists and as Catholics, we affirm: a black person can be a Pole!\u201d They further referred to their official declaration, which states: \u201cIn condemning biological racism, we postulate the maintenance of ethnic homogeneity, which helps to guarantee peace and stability\u201d.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Quite unsurprisingly, however, claims regarding desired ethnic homogeneity lay close to those characteristics of (cultural) racism. For Polish far-right activists, it is likely easier to accept (one) black football player as a Polish citizen while Ukrainian migrants may be continually discriminated against, derided due to what the far right describes as \u201clower\u201d cultural competence and described as threatening to ethnic stability and as a potentially insurgent force. Any discussion about migrants and refugees among far-right activists in Poland touches upon assimilation and the primacy of Polish national culture. Such arguments allow us to understand why an analysis of nation-states as <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">projects<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">products<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, such as Gellner\u2019s one, may be inspiring in shaping far-right movements\u2019 agenda towards and discourse on ethnic \u201cothers.\u201d In his major work, Gellner (1983) emphasized the importance of homogenous \u201cHigh Culture\u201d and the role of assimilationist policies in shaping nation-states, and, simultaneously, a likely push for political sovereignty by the excluded groups in case of the failure of assimilationist policies. In short, while \u201cconstructivist\u201d understandings of nation clearly contrast with \u201cprimordialist\u201d ones, they may be equally exclusivist: \u201ccommon culture\u201d may be as powerful tool of exclusion as the idea of \u201ccommon ancestry.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">As these few examples demonstrate, the term <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">anthropology<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> appears to have quite different meanings to the militant far-right activists. \u201cAnthropology\u201d may stand for a certain vision or constitution of humanity; it may provide models of social coexistence through accounts of \u201cprimitive societies\u201d; it may offer tools for understanding the reproduction of cultural difference. \u201cAnthropology\u201d and \u201canthropological,\u201d declinated in all possible ways, seem to have entered the far-right vocabulary (even if different far-right dictionaries may define it differently).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">No matter which understanding we take, it is easy to dismiss it as hypocritical. For how else would one approach the far right\u2019s defense of cultural difference in a manner which does not revoke but rather reconfigures cultural and racialized hierarchies? Or, how would one approach a defense of humanity which seems have little to do with people\u2019s rights? In short, it is easy to dismiss this set of ideas as a deeply illiberal project, the understanding of which seems to be quite straightforward: it places community above the individual, foregrounding the fundamental value of collective identities and attachments, and implicitly ranking \u201cpeoples\u201d in relation to the presumed strength of their \u201cculture.\u201d\u00a0 As Douglas Holmes\u2019s (2019: 83) observes when writing on new expressions of fascism, it is \u201can illiberal anthropology that can colonize just about every expression of identity and attachment \u2026 From the motifs and metaphors of diverse folkloric traditions to the countless genres of popular culture.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Yet what if, instead of dismissing it, we placed this far-right engagements with anthropology under closer scrutiny? Not only because a better knowledge of \u201ctheir\u201d understanding of anthropology may provide us with tools for \u201cundoing racism\u201d but because it tells us something more about \u201cour\u201d anthropology (and, sadly, at times challenge the boundary between \u201cour\u201d and \u201ctheir\u201d ideas)? Such knowledge should force us to recognize the anthropological dimension of the arguments the far right puts forward, that is: to acknowledge the weakness of anthropological theorizing on culture, especially in relation to racism: to reconsider the relationship between illiberal ideas and anthropology; and foster a reflection on ethical implications of our engagement with far-right anthropologies. In the conclusions, I briefly address these three issues.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">First, the way the notions of \u201crace\u201d and \u201cculture&#8220; are employed by the far right demonstrate the continuous operating of the racial categories within the discourses on culture, putting into question the arguments regarding the discourses of culture as replacing those on race (e.g. Stolcke 1995) as well as in the debates on \u201cracism without race\u201d and \u201ccultural-differentialist racism\u201d (e.g., Balibar 2008; Taguieff 1990). While a new wave of research on race as \u201cabsent presence\u201d in Europe brings about highly inspiring theorizing on the continuous processes of racialization (e.g., M\u2019charek and Schramm 2020; Balkenhol and Schramm 2019), these efforts do not seem to be matched by theorizing on culture (Visweswaran 1998). Meanwhile, after several decades of attempts to discard the concept all together, it appears clear that it is hard to \u201cwrite against culture\u201d without actually having a strong concept of culture. And more precisely: it is hard to deconstruct a homogenizing \u201cculture talk\u201d when ignoring the complexity of \u201cculture-as-meaning-making\u201d (cf. Abji, Korteweg and Williams 2019).\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Second, a reflection on how a specific anthropological idea of culture travels, also into the far-right territories, should prompt a reflection on other troubling similarities and affinities. A growing number of scholars has been pointing this out. In her research on Brexiters, Ana Balthazar (2021:338) notes affinities between right-wing voters\u2019 and anthropological discourses\u2019 on saving traditional forms of life from the \u201cever\u2010expanding capitalist institutions.\u201d In discussing the relationship between anthropology of populism, William Mazzarella (2019) and Jean-Pierre Olivier de Sardan (2015) talk, respectively, about a \u201cpopulist stance\u201d and &#8222;populist attitudes\u201d inscribed into anthropological practice. More generally, an engagement with far-right anthropologies &#8211; similarly to the research on other \u201cnon-sympathetic\u201d subjects \u2013 may constitute an important contribution to an understanding of the anthropology\u2019s \u201clove-hate\u201d relationship with liberalism (Ansell 2019).<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">I would like to conclude with one final point which pertains more to methodology than to theory. In the opening words, I talked about ethnographic fieldwork as a way of turning the gaze towards ourselves by which I mean inculcating an openness to encountering irony, surprise, complicity, tools for self-criticism, to name but some. It is a problem hard to ignore for an anthropologist studying people who claimed to have fallen in love with anthropology. However, my push for an engagement with far-right anthropologies makes evident a tension marking such a stance, or rather: indicates both affordances and potential traps that adopting such a methodological stance entails.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">By &#8222;traps&#8220; I mean first and foremost a kind of misplaced progressivism that engagement with the far right can sometimes foster: on the one hand, for instance, through the possible argument of an obligation to empathize with the fears of &#8222;economically dispossessed&#8220; and &#8222;politically disenfranchised&#8220; people, or, on the other, through the overemphasis on the similarities between &#8222;us&#8220; and &#8222;them&#8220; &#8211; who also read, and read anthropology for that matter! In fact, however, it is precisely this particular distinction that is problematic: in my view, what a good analysis of the far right should challenge is a clear distinction between the &#8222;suffering masses&#8220; and the &#8222;leader-intellectuals&#8220; who speak on their behalf. In order not to fall into such traps, I think it is necessary to better recognize and more clearly state the possibilities and limits of research on the far right &#8211; and of any ethnographic research for that matter. That is, how this research foregrounds the need for an openness to self-criticism and self-irony that can serve to reflect not only on our positioning or beliefs, but also on the theoretical apparatus we use. My arguments for a more thorough engagement with &#8222;far-right anthropologies&#8220; should not be understood, therefore, as a statement about blurred or fuzzy boundaries, but rather as a call to sharpen them.<\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><b>References<\/b><\/p>\n<div style=\"text-indent: -2em; padding-left: 2em;\">\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Abji, Salina, Korteweg, Anna, and Lawrence Williams. 2019. \u201cCulture Talk and the Politics of the New Right: Navigating Gendered Racism in Attempts to Address Violence against Women in Immigrant Communities\u2019.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 44(3): 797\u2013822.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ansell, Aaron. 2019. \u201cAnthropology of liberalism.\u201d 10.1093\/obo\/9780199766567-0216.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Balibar, \u00c9tienne. 2008. \u201cRacism Revisited: Sources, Relevance, and Aporias of a Modern Concept.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">PMLA<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 123(5): 1630\u201339.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Balkenhol, Markus and Katharina Schramm. 2019. \u201eDoing race in Europe: contested pasts and contemporary practices.\u201d <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Social Anthropol<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">ogy 27: 585-593.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Balthazar, Ana Carolina. 2021. \u201cEthnography of the Right as Ethical Practice.\u201d <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Social Anthropology<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 29 (2): 337\u201338.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Gellner, Ernest. 1983. <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Nations and Nationalism. <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Oxford: Blackwell.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Holmes, Douglas. 2019. \u201cFascism at Eye Level: The Anthropological Conundrum.\u201d <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Focaal<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 2019 (84): 62\u201390.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">M\u2019charek, Amade, and Katharina Schramm. 2020. \u201cEncountering the Face\u2014Unraveling Race.\u201d <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">American Anthropologist<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 122 (2): 321\u201326.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Mazzarella, William. 2019. \u201cThe Anthropology of Populism: Beyond the Liberal Settlement.\u201d <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Annual Review of Anthropology<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 48 (1): 45\u201360.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Olivier de Sardan, Jean-Paul. 2015. Methodological populism and ideological populism in anthropology. In: Epistemology, Fieldwork, and Anthropology, ed. J-P Olivier de Sardan, pp. 133\u201365. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Stolcke, Verena. 1995. \u201cTalking Culture: New Boundaries, New Rhetorics of Exclusion in Europe.\u201d <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Current Anthropology<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 36 (1): 1\u201324.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Taguieff, Pierre-Andre. 1990. \u201cThe New Cultural Racism in France.\u201d <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Telos <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">83: 109-122.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Visweswaran, Kamala. 1998. \u201cRace and the Culture of Anthropology.\u201d <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">American Anthropologist<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 100(1): 70\u201383.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p><em><strong>Dr. Agnieszka Pasieka<\/strong> is a sociocultural anthropologist whose research explores the role of nationalism and religion in political mobilizations and social activism. She is currently a visiting professor at the University of Bayreuth and a research fellow at the University of Vienna. She is the author of Hierarchy and Pluralism: Living Religious Difference in Catholic Poland (2015). Her new book project focuses on transnational activism of radical nationalist movements in contemporary Europe.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":21,"featured_media":0,"menu_order":0,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"autor":[635],"class_list":["post-10801","undoingraceandracism","type-undoingraceandracism","status-publish","hentry","autor-agnieszka-pasieka"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/undoingraceandracism\/10801","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/undoingraceandracism"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/undoingraceandracism"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/21"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/undoingraceandracism\/10801\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10807,"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/undoingraceandracism\/10801\/revisions\/10807"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10801"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"autor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/autor?post=10801"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}