Example Of A Sociological Analysis

Ethnic nations are those where a group of people share common primordial backgrounds such as religion, culture and language. If a minority successfully integrates into a society it can create a sense of a social nation. The minority ‘adopts the society’ of the majority. Ethnicity is then taken as a way of identifying oneself based on what they can relate to and what makes them different from other people. People take pride in their ethnicities and go as far as living according to the beliefs of their ethnicities through ethnic boundary markers. Historical events have demonstrated how conflicting it can be to belong to certain ethnicities. Society has targeted certain ethnic groups and has destroyed them for their beliefs and customs. It has …show more content…
When categorizing people into certain groups based on interests and beliefs, it is very easy to come across very aggressively. People must have the open mindedness and many perspectives to not see conflict within ethnic groups. When ethnicities undergoes negotiation in communities or nations, certain actions are taken in order to ensure protection, alliances, and a secure ground where members can defend their beliefs. When ethno-political entrepreneurs-political, military, and religious leaders-promote a world view through the lens of ethnicity and use war, propaganda, and state power to mobilize people against those whom perceive as a danger, ethnicity is perceived as the source of conflict (Guest, 245). Historical events have proven the conflict that emerges from different ethnic groups that perceive everything in different lenses. Those groups who are causing the most conflict or are seen as the “problem” are typically eradicated and are established as the foundation of all issues in that society. An example of this would be the Rwandan genocide. In 1944, the East African country of Rwanda suffered a catastrophic genocide involving the Hutu and Tutsi. Apparently, Hutu and Tutsis took definition only in relation to state power; as they did, the two groups inevitably developed their own distinctive cultures- their own set of ideas about themselves and one another- according to their respective domains. Those ideas were largely framed as opposing negatives: a Hutu was what a Tutsi was not, and vice versa (Gourevitch Rwanda, 48). National leaders usually cause splits in societies through identifying one group superior than the other. Tutsis were considered to be the most influential in Rwandan society while Hutus were excluded. In addition, identity cards in order to distinguish both groups were made. Both groups ended up being completely distinct through culture,

Show More