• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/17

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

17 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Marx
South Africa, U.S., and Brazil
state organized domination influences mobilization
Kasfir
Uganda and Nubians
Opportunistic elites begin and masses follow because of deeply-felt beliefs
political entrepreneurs, salience of ethnic identity, and incentives to organize influence mobilization
Posner
Chewas and Tumbukas (adversaries in Malawi, Allies in Zambia)
relative size influence
social divisions are a result of political divisions
Barany
Gypsies in Eastern Europe
do not to well because lack of competent leadership, organization, solid identity, ideology, financial resources, symbols
lots of heterogeneity prevents unity and coherence and mobilization
Horowitz
Ethnic parties
where ethnic loyalties are strong parties organize along ethnic lines
Cleavages today because cleavages in past got frozen
Van Cott
Latin America specialist
indigenous party can gain access if dealignment, opening of political sphere, weakness of leftist parties
institutional factors proportional system, cheap ballot access, quotas, decentralization
Chandra
under certain conditions (lack of info) equilibrium between voters and candidates
people vote co-ethnics to get benefits and candidates target co-ethnics to get support
Horowitz (didn't read)
ethnic voting is obvious
Ferree
South Africa -ANC, NNP, DA
"racial heuristics" and level excludability why people vote co-ethnic
Pepinsky
two types of parties in Indonesia (Islam-based, and Pancasila-based)
with lack of info Muslims vote for Islam but when have info do not
Horowitz
ancient feelings will inherently lead to violence
where ethnic divisions salient people will fight
Mueller
Yugoslavia
opportunistic elites and thugs, gangster (masses indifferent)
violence isn't spontaneous, organized by masses
short term gains not ethnic hatreds
ethnicity ordering device more than impelling force
Strauss
Rwanda
Hutus killed Tutsi
did not stem from wide-spread racist culture
spread because wartime power struggles (unclear who next leader would be)
Wilkinson
Hindu-Muslim riots in India
how willing state is to intervene determines how willing rioters are
has to do with democracy
not based on ethnic antagonisms
Fearon/Laitin 2003
civil war multi-variant analysis
insurgency
state structures better predictor of civil war then ethnic diversity
Fearon/Kasaf/Laitin 2007
response to Cederman
ethnic minority rule not associated with conflict
Reilly
Papua New Guinea
because so many groups no single group able to gain power
conflict at local level, but does not spread to national level (because doesn't involve everyone)
arena violence takes place in matters
who controls the state matters