English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Contemporary Russia is considered one of the most multiethnic countries in the world. Consequently, questions such as “how to recognize ethnicity?” can give rise to serious problems. The Russian census is the focus of this discussion. When the fi rst All-Russian Census was conducted in 2002, a number of groups demanded that their ethnicity be recognized. The second All-Russian Census was conducted in October 2010. Similar to the previous one, although on a smaller scale, this census process caused a controversy regarding the recognition of ethnicity. The governments of ethnic republics, especially Tatarstan, widely appealed for the integration of the nations. The director of the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology in Moscow, V. Tishkov, emphasized the respect toward self-defi nition. Moreover, he insisted that a double-ethnic affi liation like “tatar-bashkir” should be recognized as an answer to the census. In this way, he attempted to adhere to every person’s opinion. However, in recent years, Tishkov has been actively arguing the importance of the unifi cation of the “Russian nation [Rossiiskii narod]”. Contrary to Tishkov’s ideas, ethnic intellectuals such as Tatar historian D. Iskhakov have attempted to prove the validity of the unifi cation of the nation. He insists that the integration and formation of the Tatar nation was completed on the basis of high culture, which was developed in the context of the standardization of Tatar language, rising rates of literacy, and activization of transmigration from the nineteenth to twentieth centuries. He regarded each group’s movement for independence from the Tatar nation as a process of the nation’s breakdown and a result of the Soviet legacy. In reviewing these ideas, we can see that they both, at fi rst, denied the Soviet ethnic policy. Tishkov criticized it by stating that the Soviet ethnic policy created a fi xed ethnic framework and the hierarchies in it. Iskhakov considered the Soviet ethnic policy to be

Varied Perceptions of Ethnicity in Contemporary Russia: The Case of Tatarstan in the All Russian Census of 2010