Journals / Hitit Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2013 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 2

-

SAMMY SMOOHA’NIN ETNİK DEMOKRASİ MODELİ ÜZERİNE

Pages
53–84
Publication Date
2014-03-28
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The significance of the study is that it is the first academic research on the model of the ethnic democracy in the political science literature in Turkey

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In the study, Sammy Smooha's model of ethnic democracy is analyzed.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The assumptions of the model are examined, the differences of the model from the models of democracy and authoritarian regimes are specified from the point of view of Smooha and based on Smooha's classification among democratic and authoritarian regimes, the critiques toward the model and the responses of Smooha to the critiques are evaluated and whether the model is a proposal of an authoritarian regime is identified.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The significance of the study is that it is the first academic research on the model of the ethnic democracy in the political science literature in Turkey
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ethnic Democracy · Citizenship · Herrenvolk Democracy

Abstract

In the study, Sammy Smooha's model of ethnic democracy is analyzed. The assumptions of the model are examined, the differences of the model from the models of democracy and authoritarian regimes are specified from the point of view of Smooha and based on Smooha's classification among democratic and authoritarian regimes, the critiques toward the model and the responses of Smooha to the critiques are evaluated and whether the model is a proposal of an authoritarian regime is identified. The significance of the study is that it is the first academic research on the model of the ethnic democracy in the political science literature in Turkey

Özet

Çalışmada, Sammy Smooha’nın etnik demokrasi modeli incelenmektedir. Modelin varsayımları ele alınmakta, Smooha’nın gözünden ve onun demokratik ve otoriter rejimler sınıflandırmasına bağlı kalınarak modelin demokrasi ve otoriter rejim modellerinden farkına yer verilmekte, modele yönelik eleştiriler, Smooha’nın eleştirilere cevapları değerlendirilmekte ve modelin otoriter rejim önerisi olup olmadığı tespit edilmektedir. Çalışmanın önemi, Türkiye’deki siyaset bilimi literatüründe etnik demokrasi modeli üzerine yapılan ilk akademik araştırma olmasıdır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇAKMAK, D. (2014). -. Hitit Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 2, 53–84. https://ajindex.com/articles/102611

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (3)

  1. BENVENISTI,M.(1987), 1987 Report: Demographic, Economic,Legal,Social and Political Developments in the West Bank, Boulder-Colorado: Westview Press. BIEBER,F. (2005), “Serbia in the 1990s: The Case of an Ethnic Semi-Democracy”, The Fate of Ethnic Democracy in Post Communist Europe (ed.S. Smooha& P.Järve), Budapest: Open Society Institute, (pp.166-189). BISHARA,A.(2004), “Israel, Palestine and the Question of Citizenship”, http://www.sant.ox.ac.uk/events/ lecturesarchive/Bishara.pdf (erişim: 08.12.2013). BRUBAKER,R.(1992), Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany,Cambridge-Massachussets: Harvard University Press. COLLIER,D.&LEVITSKY,S. (1997), “Democracy with Adjectives:Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research”, World Politics, vol.49, no.3, (pp.430-451). CURIS,R. (2005), “A Model in the Making: The Case of Kosova”, The Fate of Ethnic Democracy in Post Communist Europe (ed.S. Smooha& P.Järve), Budapest: Open Society Institute, (pp.190-208). DAHL,R.A. (1971), Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition, Connecticut: Yale University Press. DANEL,A. (2009), “A Methodological Critique of Ethnic Democracy”, Journal of Israeli History, vol.28, no:1, (pp.37-54). DI PALMA,G. (1990), To Craft Democracies: An Essay on Democratic Transitions, Berkeley-California: University of California Press. DIAMOND,L.& LINZ,J.J.&LIPSET,S.M. (1989), “Preface”, Democracy in Developing Countries: Latin America (ed. L.Diamond&J.J.Linz&S.M.Lipset), Boulder-Colorado:Lynne Riener Publishers. DOWTY,A. (1999),“Is Israel Democratic? Substance and Semantics in the ‘Ethnic Democracy’ Debate”, Israel Studies, vol.4, no.2, (pp.1-15). EHRLICH,A. (2004), “Israel, Religion and Peace”, Islam, Judaism and the Political Role of Religions in the Middle East, (ed. J.Bunzl), Gainesville-Florida: University Press of Florida, (pp.166-190).
  2. FREEDOM HOUSE (2013), “Freedom In the World-Democratic Breakthroughs in the Balance:Selected Data From Freedom House’s Annual Survey of Political Rights and Civil Liberties”,(ed. A.Puddington), http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/FIW%202013%20Booklet.pdf(erişim: 08.12. 2013). FUKUYAMA,F. (1992),
  3. The End of History and the Last Man, New York:Free Press. GHANEM,G., ROUHANA,N.N&YIFTACHEL,O. (1998), “Questioning ‘Ethnic Democracy’: A Response to Sammy Smooha”, Israel Studies, vol.3, no.2, (pp.253-267). GAVISON,R. (1999), “Jewish and Democratic? A Rejoinder to the Ethnic Democracy Debate”, Israel Studies, vol.4, no.1, (pp.44-72). HOLLIDAY,G. (2005), “Fro