CONFLICTING REMEMBRANCE: The Memory of the Macedonian 2001 in Context
Journal
/
Date Issued
2023
Author(s)
Chupeska, Ana
Abstract
The Republic of North Macedonia’s post-2001 model of dealing with cultural
diversity places the state among the more liberal ones and not among
the states which tend to homogenize their culturally diverse population.
In other words, North Macedonia’s institutions acknowledge the fact of
societal multiculturality and it is reified and materialized in a concrete
political system. In this text, I discuss the normative multiculturalism
of a non-territorial kind in North Macedonia as based upon three pillars:
group-specific rights and guaranteed representation; power-sharing and
consociation; as well as concrete interventions in the symbolic order.
All the three pillars in fact answer the question of why the normative
solution proposed after the conflict functions in terms of the substantive
democratic inclusiveness of minor communities within the political
system, which indeed manifests via the norm that stimulates the need of
everyday dialogue among the communities. Secondly, the pillars allow also
for foundational power-sharing institutions without exhibiting any kind of
territorial division, and with that the unity of the state is guaranteed (contrary
to many examples of ethno-federalist power sharing arrangements). Thirdly,
they allow a cultural autonomy for different cultural groups defined by the
use of the unique mechanism of the reductive veto
diversity places the state among the more liberal ones and not among
the states which tend to homogenize their culturally diverse population.
In other words, North Macedonia’s institutions acknowledge the fact of
societal multiculturality and it is reified and materialized in a concrete
political system. In this text, I discuss the normative multiculturalism
of a non-territorial kind in North Macedonia as based upon three pillars:
group-specific rights and guaranteed representation; power-sharing and
consociation; as well as concrete interventions in the symbolic order.
All the three pillars in fact answer the question of why the normative
solution proposed after the conflict functions in terms of the substantive
democratic inclusiveness of minor communities within the political
system, which indeed manifests via the norm that stimulates the need of
everyday dialogue among the communities. Secondly, the pillars allow also
for foundational power-sharing institutions without exhibiting any kind of
territorial division, and with that the unity of the state is guaranteed (contrary
to many examples of ethno-federalist power sharing arrangements). Thirdly,
they allow a cultural autonomy for different cultural groups defined by the
use of the unique mechanism of the reductive veto
Subjects
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
Name
20152.pdf
Description
The Republic of North Macedonia’s post-2001 model of dealing with cultural diversity places the state among the more liberal ones and not among the states which tend to homogenize their culturally diverse population. In other words, North Macedonia’s institutions acknowledge the fact of societal multiculturality and it is reified and materialized in a concrete political system. In this text, I discuss the normative multiculturalism of a non-territorial kind in North Macedonia as based upon three pillars: group-specific rights and guaranteed representation; power-sharing and consociation; as well as concrete interventions in the symbolic order. All the three pillars in fact answer the question of why the normative solution proposed after the conflict functions in terms of the substantive democratic inclusiveness of minor communities within the political system, which indeed manifests via the norm that stimulates the need of everyday dialogue among the communities. Secondly, the pillars allow also for foundational power-sharing institutions without exhibiting any kind of territorial division, and with that the unity of the state is guaranteed (contrary to many examples of ethno-federalist power sharing arrangements). Thirdly, they allow a cultural autonomy for different cultural groups defined by the use of the unique mechanism of the reductive veto
Size
798.49 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum
(MD5):4f26a936197d2915d80c750982b23ff2
