Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

İKİ FARKLI TEK TİPLEŞTİRİCİ MEKANİZMAYA TEPKİ OLARAK İKİ FARKLI SOSYAL HAREKET: MEKSİKA, CHİAPAS’DA ZAPATİSTA HAREKETİ İLE TÜRKİYE’DE KÜRT HAREKETİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRMALI OKUMASI

TWO DIFFERENT MOVEMENTS AS A RESPONSE TO TWO DIFFERENT HOMOGENIZING MECHANISMS: A COMPARATIVE READING OF THE KURDISH MOVEMENT IN TURKEY AND ZAPATISTA MOVEMENT IN CHIAPAS, MEXICO

Journal Name:

  • The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies

Publication Year:

  • 2014
DOI: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.9761/JASSS2506

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
This article is set out to examine the homogenizing nature of two factors: nation-building and globalization and social movements emerged within the regions of two countries, Turkey and Mexico. On the one hand, homogenizing mechanism in Turkey is depicted as the general framework of nation-building, on the other side, the intertwined relationship between patterns of liberal institutionalism, globalization and regionalism is depicted as the mechanisms of harassment of original identities and so-long protected lands. In order to grasp the intertwined relationship between globalization and regionalism, the latter as a mechanism of getting in harmony with the former, a general overview of the literature is presented. One needs to grasp the general framework that forced such a social movement like Zapatista to rebel against the systemic structure and that’s why the paper puts more emphasis on the review of what the scholars with different perspectives think about the globalization and regionalism. As much as the subject concerned, a brief overview of the backgrounds for both the Zapatista and Kurdish movements is given in order to reflect the notion of hegemony prevailing in the milieus that these two social movements emerged. The article lastly focuses on the fact that both Kurdish movement in Turkey and Zapatista Movement in Mexico paved the way for other subaltern identities to speak louder than before. A comparative reading of these two Marxist movements is studied here in order to appreciate de facto contributions made to the democratization of the countries concerned.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu makale Türkiye’de ulus devlet oluşturma ve Meksika’da küreselleşme sürecinin tek tipleştirici etkilerine karşı, her iki ülkenin belirli iki bölgesinde ortaya çıkan iki farklı sosyal hareketi ele almaktadır. Bir yandan, Türkiye’de öne çıkan tek tipleştirici etmen ulus devlet oluşturma mekanizmaları olarak ele alınırken, öte yandan girift ilişki içinde bulunan kurumsal liberalizm, küreselleşme ve bölgeselcilik, orijinal (alt) kimliklerin ve uzun zamandır korunmayı başarmış yörelerin tacize uğramasına ön ayak olmaları bakımından ele alınmaktadır. Bölgeselciliğin küreselleşmeye ayak uydurma mekanizması olarak ele alınması ile, küreselleşme ve bölgeselcilik arasındaki iç içe ilişkiyi anlayabilmek için genel bir literatür taraması yapılmış ve makalenin ilk bölümlerine yansıtılmıştır. Zapatista gibi bir hareketin ortaya çıkışını ve var olan sistemik yapıya karşı başkaldırısını daha iyi anlayabilmek için, bu hareketin ortaya çıktığı alt yapının genel bir çerçevesi küreselleşme ve bölgeselcilik açısından farklı ekollere ait akademisyenlerin şimdiye kadar ortaya koydukları düşünceler çerçevesinde ön plana çıkarılarak ortaya konulmaktadır. Bu iki sosyal hareketin ortaya çıktığı alanlarda tek-tipleştirici güçler ile mücadele argümanının ortaya konulması bakımından, her iki hareketin de kısa bir arka planı, bu karşılaştırmalı konunun gerektirdiği ölçüde ortaya konulmuştur. . Türkiye’deki Kürt hareketi ile Meksika’daki Zapatista hareketinin diğer alt kimliklerin kendini ifade etmesi için açtığı yollar ise karşılaştırmalı bir dille ortaya konulacaktır. Bu iki Marksist hareketin karşılaştırmalı okuması, her iki hareketin dolaylı ya da direkt olarak bulundukları ülkelerdeki demokratikleşmeye sağladıkları katkıların ortaya konulabilmesi açısından ele alınmıştır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-iki-farkli-tek-tiplestirici-mekanizmaya-tepki-olarak-iki-farkli-sosyal-hareket-meksika-chiapasda-zapatista-hareketi-ile-turkiyede-kurt-hareketinin-karsilastirmali.pdf
  • 1
387
401
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

BOALS, Kay. (1973). The Concept ‘‘Subordinate International System’’: A Critique. In Regional Politics and World Order”, edited by Richard Falk, and Samuel Mendlovitz. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
BULMER, Victor. (2001). “Debate Regional Integration in Latin America and the Caribbean”, Bulletin of Latin American Research, Vol. 20, No.3, pp. 360 – 369
BURFISHER, Mary E.,ROBINSON, Sherman and THIERFELDER, Karen. (2003). “Regionalism: Old and New, Theory and Practice”, presented at the The International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium Conference Capri, Italy
BUZAN, Barry. (2000). The Logic of Regional Security in the Post-Cold War World. In The New Regionalism and the Future of Security and Development, edited by Bjo¨rn
BUZAN, Barry.,OLE Waever. (2003). Regions and Powers. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
CANTORI, Louis., SPIEGEL, Steven. (1973). The International Relations of Regions. In Regional Politics and World Order, edited by Richard Falk, and Samuel Mendlovitz. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
FARRELL, Mary, Bjo¨rn Hettne, LANGENHOVE, Luk Van.(2005). Global Politics of
Regionalism: Theory and Practice. London: Pluto Press.
FAWCETT, Louise.(2003). The Evolving Architecture of Regionalism. In The United Nations and Regional Security: Europe and Beyond, edited by Michael Pugh, and Waheguru.Sidhu. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers
GAMBLE, A., Payne, A. (2003). “The World Order Approach”. In F. Soderbaum & T. M..Shaw (Eds.), Theories of New Regionalism: A Palgrave Reader. New York: Palgrave
Two Different Movemennts As A Response to Two Different Homogenizing Mechanisms: A Com… 401
GILBERTH, Chris.,OTERO, Gerardo. (2001). “Democratization in Mexico: The Zapatista Uprising and Civil Society”, Latin American Perspectives, 7-29
HEMMER, Christopher., KATZENSTEIN,Peter. (2002)Why Is There No NATO in Asia: Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism. International Organization 56:575–607.
HETTNE, Bjo¨ rn.(2005). Regionalism and World Order. In Global Politics of Regionalism: Theory and Practice, edited by Mary Farrell, Bjo¨rn Hettne, and Luk Van Langenhove. London: Pluto Press.
HETTNE, Andra´s Inotai., OSVALDO, Sunkel. (2005). New York: St. Martin’s Press.
HOSONO, Akio., NISHIJIMA, Shoji. (2003). “Regionalism in Latin America: its background”, Prospects for Closer Economic Relations between Latin America and Asia, Unpublished work
JOHNSTON,Josee.,LAXER, Gordon. (2003). “Solidarity in the Age of Globalization:
Lessons from the Anti-MAI and Zapatista Struggles”, Theory and Society, 39-91
JOHNSTON, Josee.(2000).“Pedagogical Guerillas, Armed Democrats, and Revolutionary Counterpublics: Examining Paradox in the Zapatista Uprising in Chiapas Mexico”, Theory and Society, 463-505
KATZENSTEIN, Peter. (2005). A World of Regions: Asia and Europe in the American
Imperium. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
KİRİŞÇİ, Kemal. (2011), “The Kurdish Issue in Turkey: Limits of European Union Reform”, South European Society and Politics, 335-349
KUTSCHERA,Chris.(1994). “Mad Dreams of Independence: The Kurds of Turkey and the PKK”, Middle East Report, 12-15
LAKE, David.,PATRICK, Morgan. (1997). The New Regionalism in Security Affairs. In Regional Orders: Building Security in a New World, edited by David Lake, and Patrick Morgan. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
LEMKE, Douglas.(2002). Regions of War and Peace. New York: Cambridge University Press.
RIVAL, Laura. (2007). “Indigenous People, Poverty and Human Development in Latin
America“, Development in Practice, Vol.17, No.6, pp. 820-823
SCHIMMELFENNIG, Frank.(2003). “Costs, Commitment and Compliance: The Impact of EU Democratic Conditionality on Latvia, Slovakia and Turkey”, Journal of Common Market Studies, 495-518
SHOLK, S. Richard.(2007). “Resisting Neoliberal Homogenization: The Zapatista Autonomy Movement”, Latin American Perspectives, 48-63
SOMER, Murat.(2004). “Turkey’s Kurdish Conflict: Changing Context, and Domestic and Regional Implications”, Middle East Journal, 235-253
YEĞEN, Mesut.(2007). “Turkish Nationalism and Kurdish Question”, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 119-151.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com