EthnicgroupAnethnicgroupisagroupofhumanbeingswhosemembersidentifywitheachother,usuallyonthebasisofpreferentialendogamy(marryingwithinasocialgroup)and/orapresumedorrealcommonancestry.[1][2]Ethnicidentityisfurthermarkedbytherecognitionfromothersofagroup'sdistinctiveness[3]andtherecognitionofcommoncultural,linguistic,religious,behavioralorbiologicaltraits,[1][4]realorpresumed,asindicatorsofcontrasttoothergroups.[5]Ethnicityisanimportantmeansthroughwhichpeoplecanidentifythemselves.Accordingto"ChallengesofMeasuringanEthnicWorld:Science,politics,andreality",aconferenceorganizedbyStatisticsCanadaandtheUnitedStatesCensusBureau(April1-3,1992),"Ethnicityisafundamentalfactorinhumanlife:itisaphenomenoninherentinhumanexperience."[6]However,manysocialscientists,likeanthropologistsFredrikBarthandEricWolf,regardethnicitymoreasaproductofinteraction,ratherthanreflectingessentialqualitiesinherenttohumangroups.[7]Processesthatresultintheemergenceofsuchidentificationarecalledethnogenesis.Membersofanethnicgroup,onthewhole,claimculturalcontinuitiesovertime,althoughhistoriansandculturalanthropologistshavedocumentedthatmanyofthevalues,practices,andnormsthatimplycontinuitywiththepastareofrelativelyrecentinvention.[8]AccordingtoThomasHyllandEriksen,untilrecentlythestudyofethnicitywasdominatedbytwodistinctdebates.Oneisbetween"primoridalism"and"Instrumentalism."Intheprimordialistview,theparticipantperceivesethnictiescollectively,asanexternallygiven,evencoërcive,socialbond.[9]Theinstrumentalistapproach,ontheotherhand,treatsethnicityprimarilyasanad-hocelementofapoliticalstrategy,usedasaresourceforinterestgroupsforachievingsecondarygoalssuchas,forinstance,anincreaseinwealth,powerorstatus.[10][11]ThisdebateisstillanimportantpointofreferenceinPoliticalscience,althoughmostscholars'approachesfallbetweenthetwopoles.[12]Theseconddebateisbetween"constructivism"and"essentialism."Constructivistsviewnationalandethnicidentitiesastheproductofhistoricalforces,oftenrecent,evenwhentheypresentthemselvesasold.[13][14]Essentialistsviewsuchidentitiesasontologicalcategoriesdefiningsocialactors,andnotthemselvestheresultofsocialaction.[15][16]AccordingtoEriksen,thesedebateshavebeensuperseded,especiallyinAnthropology,byscholars'attemptstorespondtoincreasinglypoliticizedformsofself-representationbymembersofdifferentethnicgroupsandnationsinthecontextofdebatesovermulticulturalismincountriesliketheUnitedStatesandCanada,andpost-colonialismintheCaribbeanandSouthAsia.[17]DefinitionSociologistMaxWeberonceremarkedthat"thewholeconceptionofethnicgroupsissocomplexandsovaguethatitmightbegoodtoabandonitaltogether."[18]Inanycase,Weberproposedadefinitionofethnicgroupthatbecameacceptedbymanysociologists[citationneeded]:[T]hosehumangroupsthatentertainasubjectivebeliefintheircommondescentbecauseofsimilaritiesofphysicaltypeorofcustomsorboth,orbecauseofmemoriesofcolonizationandmigration;thisbeliefmustbeimportantforgroupformation;furthermoreitdoesnotmatterwhetheranobjectivebloodrelationshipexists.[18]AnthropologistRonaldCohen,inareviewofanthropologicalandsociologicalstudiesofethnicgroupssinceWeber,claimedthattheidentificationof"ethnicgroups"bysocialscientistsoftenreflectedinaccuratelabelsmorethanindigenousrealities:...thenamedethnicidentitiesweaccept,oftenunthinkingly,asbasicgivensintheliteratureareoftenarbitrarily,orevenworseinaccurately,impos...
