I COSMOPOLITANISM and EXCLUSION on the LIMITS TRANSNATIONAL DEMOCRACY in the LIGHT of the CASE of ROMA by Márton Rövid Submit

CEU eTD Collection

Doctoral School ofPolitical School Science,Doctoral Public Policy, Relations International and In partial

fulfilment ofthe requirements degree of forthe ON THE LIMITSON THE COSMOPOLITANISMAND EXCLUSION IN THE LIGHTIN CASE THE OF THE ROMA Zoltán MiklósiZoltán

Central European University Central Supervisor Budapest, Hungary Budapest, TRANSNATIONAL DEMOCRACY Márton RövidMárton Submitted Submitted to , János Kis, Roe Paul 2011 By y committee: i

ofPhilosopDoctor

h y

CEU eTD Collection reference. bibliographical of form the in made is acknowledgment appropriate where except person, by published and/or written previously materials no contains thesis This institutions. that state hereby I

the thesis thesis the contains no materials accepted for any other degrees in degrees other anyfor accepted materials no contains

Statement ii

any

another

other other

CEU eTD Collection the polis. the of marginsthe to strangerracialized the and poor racialized the push and other each reinforce denial and exclusion, social stigmatization, democracy. of forms th transnational of studying emergence the for sufficient the however, nationality,detached; increasingly citizenship, are residency and as regimes citizenship of proliferation the exposes dissertation The identi multiple nation within it accommodate The to states. seek not does but diversity, cultural appreciates polities, re state both refutes ethnic as well dissertation as democracy, The root. take to democracy ca a with coupled have be to Trans democracy. of forms transnational of emergence The determinati about questions fundamental national tran including analysed releva normative the Roma, of case the studying on debate broader The politicallevel marginalization. form current its dissertation Union. within framework forinstance diasporas, ofEuropean and the nations t of autonomy transnational of forms supplementary developing of possibility the thesis national both political equality The solidarity of democratic anti effective for substitute cannot autonomy) communities trans other by non and electoral both state the of of options analysis comprehensive a provides dissertation 'Roma of genesis the Roma, of case the Concerning pcig trans specting study study dissertation

rejects the general vision of deterritorialization of political communities, but embraces embraces but communities, political of deterritorialization of vision general the rejects attachments, as well as hy as well as attachments,

finds that the emergence of transnational solidarities emergence oftransnational in the itself forthefinds that sufficient is not on, citizenship, and territoriality. id ta the that finds

cs o Rm, h thesis the Roma, of case e thesis demonstrates that the EU as a democratic communityunderdeveloped remains democratic a as EU the demonstratesthat . The dissertation argue dissertation The .

and European levels for instance in the form of quotas or reserved seats. reserved or quotas of form the in instance for levels European and - ti tt ad ttls ntos including nations stateless and state - es, voices and ofdissent experimentation, as well as voluntary assimilation. - it can can it trans and bounded tt apoc ta rcgie w ae ebr o oelpig n nested and overlapping of members are we recognizes that approach state is not is

issue' in international politics; develops a normative framework for studying forstudying normative framework a developspolitics; international issue'in stud embraces a dynamic and open conception of culture that lea that culture of conception open and dynamic a embraces h dsrblt ad esblt o tasainl om o dmcay By democracy. of forms transnational of feasibility and desirability the e te omtv re normative the ies - neither protect the rights of rights the protect neither adequate, therefore political special r adequate, electoral forms; and situates Romani Romani situates and forms; electoral . ntoa pltcl n cvc oiaiis tr solidarities, civic and political snational

oiia participation political pacity of authoritative self pacity ofauthoritative - neutral and nationalist conceptions, and argues for a difference a for argues and conceptions, nationalist and neutral

h rlto o pltcl cin n sldrt t self to solidarity and action political of relation the - brid and diasporic identities. diasporic and brid tt frs f oai oiia priiain embracing participation political Romani of forms state s

that Romani self Romani that Abstract

identifies three dimensions of exclusion: ethnic ethnic exclusion: of dimensions three identifies

eac of levance iii of citizenship. These forms of exclusion may may exclusion of forms These citizenship. of - discrimination mea discrimination

nce of different transnational different of nce f oai citizens Romani of it isoa, mirn ad non and immigrant diasporas,

cit - se developments in themselves are not not are themselves in developments se - rule in order for transnational forms of fortransnational order in rule determination (in the form of cultural of form the (in determination - izens, nor counterbalance their state their counterbalance nor izens, rnntoa solidaritie transnational tt frs of forms state ights may be accorded to them o them to ights may accorded be claims claims - centric and global visions of of visions global and centric Such analyses lead to mor to lead analyses Such s ures amongst those advanc those amongst n h bss f formal of basis the on ans

and the consolidation consolidation the and n h contrary, the On democratic - odr tnc and ethnic border

Nonetheless, the attachments is attachments ves room for room ves wti the within s rans - territorial territorial solidarity - border border

Th :

by by ed ed in in n e e - - - - CEU eTD Collection International Relations a Relations International Science Academic of fellowship University the from Ibenefited research doctoral Duringthe University at spent I semester the during supervisor and mentor doctoral whole the committee supervisory the of guidance, and support tireless his institutions. and persons several of support generous the without completed been have not could thesis The myyourall friends, encouragementhas other carried supportand through.you.me Thank Tóth upon reflect critically am parts and I Public Policy,Science, International Relations. and would like to thank all my colleagues who provided invaluable feedback on feedback invaluable provided who colleagues my all thank to like would also for helping me t me helping for grateful for my students at ELTE, Corvinus ELTE, at students my for grateful

of this work this of , the , .

h Rsac Isiue f tnc n Ntoa Minorities National and Ethnic of Institute Research the scholarship of th of scholarship Above all, I would like to thank thank to like would I all, Above . a gaeu fr h spotv aaei evrnet f the of environment academic supportive the for grateful am I s. eerh I am I research. o the broader context of my research. I am particularly indebted to Ágnes Ágnes to indebted particularly Iam research. my of context broader the

I presented presented I improve nd European Studies Department and the Doctoral School ofPoliticalSchool Doctoral theand StudiesDepartment nd European

o their for

Acknowledgments e the style and language of the dissertation the of language and style the

as well as well as Hungarian Institute of International Affairs International of Institute Hungarian at vari at

lo netd o vn Sz Iván to indebted also continuous ous conferences, workshops, and summer schools. I schools. summer and workshops, conferences, ous János Kis János iv

my principal supervisor, Zo supervisor, principal my full doctoral fellowship of Central Europeanof fellowshipdoctoral full

edak and feedback

University and

the Sociology Department of Yale Yale of Department Sociology the

Paul Roe Paul

elényi , and CEU for helping me me helping for CEU and , encouragement

, the other two members two other the , for

being an exemplary exemplary an being . To my family and and family my To at ltán Miklósi, for Miklósi, ltán

, earlier versions versions earlier

h Hungarian the and and

throughout the junior the

to to

CEU eTD Collection Chapter 2 Chapter 1 Chapter Introduction 3 Chapter 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.10 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 ofdissertation Structure perspectivesSources and methodology Objectives and Focus Field ofresearch 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.1 2.6 2.6.7 2.6.6 2.6.5 2.6.4 2.6.3 2.6.2 2.6.1 2.5.4 2.5.3 2.5.2 2.5.1

The emergence ofthe ‘Roma The the issue’ arena in international Congresses World Romani The origins activismThe ofRomani Appellations Roma? Who the are globalAgainst democracy legitimacyThe ofnon solidarityDemocratic post beyond ofliberal critiques nationThe nationSolidarity, culture, Communitarian critiques democracy Cosmopolitan ofpost critiques The of appraisal The transnatio post and Transnational 2 Situating Romani Situating Romani cosmopolitanisms cosmopolitanisms Romani politicalparticipationOptions oftransnational Options ofstate Shifting discourses struggleThe recognition self fortransnational and

The quest forlegitimacy quest The ‘Declaration ofNation’The of Roma role Congress National the The emergence ofnon ofthe notion The role special oftheThe EuropeanUnion inadequacyThe ofthe emergence ofa The transnational advocacy network Fear immigration ofRoma ofRoma: case historical and The context overview challenge oftransnationaThe Analysing claims situating Romani and FrameworkParticipation draftingin EU the Rights Roma onthe ERTF ofthe Charter E The

uropeanForum Roma Travellers and

- bounded political participationbounded representation and

- political cosmopolitanisms

- - state dem state territorial forms of solidarity

nal solidarities nal

minority regime rights

Table of content Table alist critiques

ocracies

l solidaritiesl theory fordemocratic - political and nationalist and perspectivespolitical i

territorial nationterritorial

Strategy Inclusion forRoma

- det

ermination

103 33 27 23 21 17 16 14 12 10 10 98 94 89 84 84 80 78 74 71 70 68 65 65 61 59 57 55 54 51 49 47 42 42 36 7 6 3 1 1

CEU eTD Collection Bibliography Appendix Conclusion 4 Chapter

Cited official documents Cited 2. 1. Perspectives Contributions Summary offindings 4.2 4.1

4.2.4 4.2.3 4.2.2 4.2.1 4.1.6 4.1.5 4.1.4 4.1.3 4.1.2 4.1.1

ERTF Charter on the Rights Ro onthe ERTF ofthe Charter ofNation Declaration Lessons study case ofthe Assessing cosmopolitanisms Romani

Critiques ofexistingCritiques self forms ofRomani ofexistingCritiques pro From cosmopolitan theoryLessons forpolitical European democracy and Lessons ontransnational Lessons oncitizenship solidarityLessonsglobal civilsociety ontransnational and ofthe idea ofnon Critiques ofthe idea oftransCritiques ofthe idea ofRomaniCritiques self ofprioritizingCritiques self the

claims to to claims theories, and again back

- Roma global civilsocRoma

- territorial territorial trans - border national self national border - determination of determination ii ma

determination - - determination border self border iety - determ Roma

- determination

ination

156 155 153 147 147 138 136 132 130 129 125 124 121 119 118 113 112 112 178 167 159 156

CEU eTD Collection Figure 19 Dimensions of inclusion Figure 18 Dimensions of exclusion Figure 17 The bo Figure 16 Citizenship constellations withFigure two residencies,15 Example of two citizenship citizenships, constellations andFigure two nationalities 14 including Nation, state,members territory of Figure 13 Democracy, ci Figure 12 Levels of assessment of RomaniFigure claims 11 Diasporas, Figure 10 Trans Figure 9 Situating Romani cosmopolitanismsFigure 8 Romani cosmopolitanisms Figure 7 The hierarchy of rights Figure 6 Romani participation in the draftingFigure of5 Threethe EU waves Framework of external Strategy pressure for Figure on national 4 Transnational governments norm to socialization tackle theFigure plight in the 3of Genesiscourse Roma ofof EUthe enlargement 'Roma issue' Figure 2 Romani populations in Europe Figure 1 World orders on a continuum ranging from the anarchy of states to globalL state Table 7 Three dimensional typology of democraticTable 6 Two theories dimensional typology of democraticTable 5 theoriesExample of citizenship constellationsTable 4including Example ofmembers citizenship of a minority constellationsTable 3 Trans Table 2 Options of transnational politicalTable participation 1 Options of for state Roma ist

figures - state nationalisms

- and state and stateless nations undaries of demos

tables trans - bounded political participation and representation tizenship, solidarity - migrants, trans

......

...... -

...... nations, non

......

...... iii ......

...... - territorial groups ......

......

...... a minority ......

......

...... Roma Inclusion

......

129 113 107 104 103 102 140 139 134 133 108 145 144 141 135 134 133

98 94 86 82 65 62 55 46 37

CEU eTD Collection MEP MG IRU IR INGO EU ERTF ERRC ERPC ERIO EP CPRSI CoE CEE List ofabbreviations UN RNC PER OSI OSCE NGO MP

ROM

Council ofEurope Council Eastern Europeand Central United Nations United NationalCongressRoma Relations onEthnic Project Open SocietyInstitute Organization forSecurity Europe in Cooperation and Non ofthe Member ofthe European ParliamentMember the within Travellers and Roma ofEurope Council on Experts of Committee Romani Union International relations International non International Un European Roma and European Travellers Roma RightsEuropean Centre Roma PolicyEuropean Coalition Roma Office Information European within Issues Sinti Parliament European and Roma for Organization forSecurity Europe in Cooperation and Point Contact - governmental organization governmental ion

Parliament iv

- governmental organization

Forum

the CEU eTD Collection his or her vote cast at a national legislative ele legislative national a at cast vote her or his N citizens. of liveson the profoundinfluence exert that fluxand actors transnational over control little have states Individual democracies. organized territorially a In Hutchings 1999 contemporary in states of majority the of situation the to less and less approximates it whol and state, given any of position the a of representation accurate been never has sovereignty national of principle The phenomenon. recent very a is organization political of unit key the as state the of generalization the out, pointed have democracy Tying Field the on focuses theory political inter states, of obligations and rights the primarily analyze theories IR While them. phenomena explaining at aim not does ‘ relations international a 1990s, the In particip on democratic result, inequality traditional similar manner, several scholars argue that that argue scholars several manner, similar

of research in the last approximately twenty years, a growing amount of ideas have been advanced advanced been have ideas of growingamount a years, approximatelytwentylast the in

or ’

political the ;

Smith 2000 Smith

erdto o biodi of degradation to the nation the to e fed f eerh mre a te border the at emerged research of field new theory

ation representationation and beyond border state (IR)

theory that was labelled labelled was that theory , the approach of international political theory is theory political international of approach the , ) .

state can be criticized in several ways. several in criticized be can state individual. individual. Introduction versity –

as political scientists would do would scientists political as However, as opposed to to opposed as However,

1 (

Fal ction can have influence on global economic global on influence have can ction ‘ globalization 1995 k international political theory. political international

world ; ed 1995 Held

’ (

Anderson 2002 Anderson undermines the legitimacy of of legitimacy the undermines s s .

f political of o citizen may hope that hope citizenmay o ; As numerous scholars scholars numerous As ‘ cot 2000 Scholte traditional –

rather it evaluates it rather normative, normative, ;

Badie 2000 Badie Similarly to Similarlyto theory ’

political national national ) .

i.e. it it i.e.

As a a As and and ly ly ; CEU eTD Collection ihn h bod eae on debate broad the Within Focus political theory, itself discourse is inc the but international of questions the in interested people more are only not philosophy, of discipline the from out Breaking democracy. and justice transnational of questions the with dealt have political of number increasing rapidly a decades two last the in that appears theoriescosmopolitan of context coul one of standing ethical Kant, and Leibniz, Erasmus, through Stoics, the with beginning 1990s: and the before individuals political transnational the investigated philosophers Certainly, democracy, authority somet transnational, the analyses theory political international contexts, national in philosophy political of questions fundamental the studies that theory cosmopolitan the deconstructs dissertation the culture, and nation, solidarity, of concepts the studying By 2002 Sikkink 1999 Rucht and Kriesi, Porta, society movements, social transnational of 1999 Straehle and Kymlicka attachments particular and belonging often are theories Cosmopolitan attachments. and solidarities transnational of role the on focuses dissertation the democracy,

( d enumerate several authors. What has changed in the last circa twenty years is the the is years twenty circa last the in changed has What authors. several enumerate d nee, adr ad lsu 2001 Glasius and Kaldor, Anheier, ; - communitarian debate. On the basis of t basis the Ondebate. communitarian Smith 2002 Smith Johnston and ,

and liberty.and ; Miller 1995 Miller ; Germain and Kenny and Germain h dsrblt ad esblt of feasibility and desirability the ,

often described with the ambiguous term of ambiguousthewithterm described often

rtczd o dwpaig h iprac of importance the downplaying for criticized e om of forms new

; in Walzer 1995 )

h fntoig f democracies of functioning the Other scholars, in contrast, cherish the emergence the cherish contrast, in scholars, Other reasin ; 2 hnlr 2004b Chandler

gly forms. taking transnational oiia participati political 2005 ; he case study, a more nuancedtypology more study, a case he Warkentin 2001 Warkentin ; Kaldor 2003 Kaldor ; ms lbl frso justice, of forms global, imes oe ad a 2000 Rai and Cohen transnational n ee a g a even on, ) ; .

Khagram, Riker, and and Riker, Khagram,

and social actors social and ( globalization. ahu 2007 Calhoun

oa civil lobal om of forms national ; Della Della It ; CEU eTD Collection questions: re to aims dissertation the Roma, of case the studying By pre real and ideal between non a studies dissertation of construction to subscribes work Roma of case the studies an to Inorder Objectivesmethodology and attachments, as well non as and civic state both accommodating developed is constellations citizenship of 2 ‘W 1 authoritative of of forms state development (1)

I use I the term term the to refer I ho are Roma?ho the - 3. 2. 1. My thesis is that is thesis My established normative arguments, but established new generates it normative insights.

What is the normative relevance of transnational solidarities for democratic theory democratic for solidarities transnational of relevance normative the is What On what normative grounds and under what conditions can can conditions what under of determination and grounds normative what On Under what fordeterminingparticular boundaries the of demos?

‘trans aly of transnational forms of democracy. However, under certain conditions, trans conditions, certain under However, democracy. of forms transnational of democratic solidarity solidarity democratic ‘ trans s ideal theories ideal ‘ ’ e real existing forms of transnational of existingforms real e Roma -

are addressed inaddressedarechapter. second the border conditions e isiuinls pltcl theory political institutionalist new - the emergence of transnational solidarities in itself does not imply the the imply not does itself in solidarities transnational of emergence the state state ’ -

cate a as world conditions. In other words, the case study not only underpins underpins only not study case the words, other In conditions. world nation Roma, generalRoma, in and of

- 1 da wrd n h fr o cs s case of form the in world ideal . self y rdig cos h normative the across bridging By ’

’

can formscan transnational ofdemocracy justified? be insteadoxymoronofthe

- gory of ethnopolitical practice. The complex questions of terminology and and terminology of questions complex The practice. ethnopolitical of gory often inspired by the groundbreaking work of John Rawls, the Rawls, John of work groundbreaking the by inspired often government government may take hold, which has to be coupled with with coupled be to has which hold, maytake - civic (ethnic, religious, (ethnic, civic solidarities. etc.) in order for order in 3

trans ‘ transnationalnation - border nations border activism and solidarity, the dissertationsolidarity,activism the and

legitimate legitimate ( abc 2008 Bauböck

spond to the following research research following the to spond tudy by moving back and forth forth and back moving by tudy - miia dvd, h present the divide, empirical transnational d transnational ’ - 2 .

bounded and trans and bounded , be justified? be ) .

Going beyond the the beyond Going lis of claims

the emocracies

capacity

- state state self , in in , - - CEU eTD Collection discrimination. Other preconditions include shared discursive spaces, a a spaces, discursiveshared preconditions include Otherdiscrimination. gender and religious, racial, of forms all of elimination the i.e. law, of rule the under Fur decision deliberation, for framework institutional An other. each with resources and power share together; decisions make cooperate; to willing Th membership. for criteria and boundaries its as well as community, the of procedures and norms fundamental desire democratic author of in capacity rooted the have are and they solidarity it justified be can democracy of forms Transnational (2) states. nation within it accommodate to seek necessarily not does but diversity, cultural appreciates respecting ethnic as well develop. to equality the life, of spheres solidarity. democratic anti effective for substitute cannot id own their reaffirm and develop, negotiate, recollect, to opportunity the have should citizens and Romani experimentation, assimilation. voluntary identities, multiple for allows that embraced be shall nation Roma altogether, dismissed be not should nation Roma (3) knowledge,diversity, skillsand minimal democratic and physical and security.economic hroe dmcai sldrt ipis h rcgiin f h eult o ec citizen each of equality the of recognition the implies solidarity democratic thermore, As for the self the for As

to collective self collectiveto and

ocpin f eorc ta rcgie overlapp recognizes that democracy of conception state both reject I dissertation the In

the the - eta ad ainls approaches nationalist and neutral freedom - determination of Roma, my thesis is that the struggle the that is thesis my Roma, of determination s budre ms b sgiiat o t mmes s hy ae o be to have they as members its to significant be must boundaries ese oai eonto srgl am for aims struggle recognition Romani G - rule, being aware of the rights and duties our membership implies, theimplies, membership our duties and rights the of aware being rule, iven the prejudice and discrimination Romani citizens face in various various in face citizens Romani discrimination and prejudice the iven

to identify liveto as and Roma. oneself niy n culture. and entity - iciiain esrs n te osldto of consolidation the and measures discrimination ttv self itative 4

- centric and global visions of democracy, as as democracy, of visions global and centric

- ahr dnmc n oe ocpin of conception open and dynamic a rather ad ru fr a for argue and , aig n gvrac i as required. also is governance and making -

rule. rule. oee, oai self Romani However, both both Democratic solidarity implies a a implies solidarity Democratic

lgl pltcl n social) and political (legal, n ad etd polities, nested and ing trans culture of equality and culture for the recognition of recognition the for - tt difference state - determination - based based

- - CEU eTD Collection expert bodies under the auspices of international organizations, various NGOs, worldwide or worldwide NGOs, various organizations, international of auspices the under bodies expert Ro represent to claim that decades theorists. political is Roma of representation and participation political the Assessing self to solidarity and action political of determi relation the about questions fundamental more to lead analyses Such identities. diasporic and hybrid as well as attachments, national analyzedbeincluding can attachments transnational different of relevance normative the Roma of case the studying By cannot recognition and be should not and disentangled. citi Romani communities. political of nature and boundaries the on debates contemporary of framework the in assessed be can and theory, political international for challenge a poses trans the Why grounds? onwhat and other representatives and legitimate their are Union Who Roma? European for speaks Who the play? bodies should international role what and governments, national and local ‘ policy Roma, of case Inthe Roma congresses,European as self as forums,well platform, them - odr ain challenging nation border ’ -

makers, opinion leaders, politicians, as well as common people. people. common as well as politicians, leaders, opinion makers, into mainstream society? What society? mainstream into nation, citizenship and territoriality. case of case zens can overwrite one’s choice of identity, the struggles for democratic equality democratic for struggles the identity, of choice one’s overwrite can zens Roma? Roma are increasingly perceived as an avant an as perceived increasingly are Roma Roma? A

hese ra dvriy f rnntoa atr ha actors transnational of diversity great

transnational political and civic solidarities, trans solidarities, civic politicaland transnational theoretical issues are raised not only by scholars, but also activists, also but scholars, onlynotby raised are issuestheoretical

h so the ma, speak or advocate on their behalf. Such actors include include actors Such behalf. their on advocate or speak ma, does it mean mean it does - called Westphalian international order. This vision vision This order. international Westphalian called

‘ to integrate them integrate to

- appointed Gypsyappointed Kings. s

mre i te at three last the in emerged

- ’ How can we integrate we can How garde, ? What is the role the is What ? a

el challenge real - border ethnic and ethnic border

As long as non as longAs non - territorial,

for of - -

CEU eTD Collection other documents pertaining to the transnational political participation of Roma. I also also I Roma. of participation political transnational the to pertaining documents other pri is study case The Sourcesperspectives and dialogue.social The theory. political dissertation normative of framework the in Roma of participation political and integrasocial the of questions the systematicallyon reflected scholars few very However, science.anthropology, recently more political and history, 2006 2007 Liégeois assimilation forced malevolent havin roots, historical deep has Roma with preoccupation The 6 5 4 3 here, whose but references bename can found bibliography. the in a reviewed 2007 2001b B Roma researching begun have years recent the in who scientistpolitical of workspioneering theto often andrefer secondary the reviewed literature

B I F Romafrom havebeenbanishedalmost á nprincipalitiesthe Wallachiafromof14 Moldavia theand or instance or inMariaTheresaempire under in Hapsburg soviet thesatellite and severalEuropean Eastern states yNazithe inWorldSecond Warthe regime r á ny ; ) Nidh , , Dupcsik 2009 Dupcsik 2001c ( 2002a nd build on the works of anthropologists and sociologists, all of whom I cannot cannot I whom of all sociologists, and anthropologists of works the on build nd

forms ranging from the adora the from ranging forms thus aims to contribute to onlythus not aims Trehan i , ; ; 2001d

Mayall 2004 Mayall 2002b 4 , enslavement , ; , marily based on an extensive review of official reports, statements and statements reports, official of review extensive an on based marily ( 1998 Willems ) 2001e 2009 , I ,

lona Klímová lona

; , ) 2009 .

2003

The scientific study of Roma has similarly deep roots deep similarly has Roma of study scientific The 5 everyincities15 late European states and , or extermination or , ) ) adPtr Vermeersch Peter and , , Aidan McGarry Aidan , )

in disciplines such as linguistics, art history, sociology, history, art linguistics, as such disciplines in -

Alexander Alexander tion of pure and free and pure of tion to to 6 political theory, political broader political a also and but

th ( 2005

centuryuntil 6

( ( Achim 2004 Achim 2009 , ni 2007

, oiia atvs, aey Zolt namely activism, political ( 2010 2001 ; 1840 2002 sauvages g taken both romantic and and romantic both taken g )

, , Eva Sobotka Sobotka Eva , ;

2003 Clark 2004 Clark th )

, Martin Kovats Martin , and16 ,

2005 to their expulsion their to th

century , ; 2006 Crowe 1995 Crowe ( 2001 .

) ( . I also also I . ( 2001a - Acton Acton 2002 tion tion á 3 n s , ; , ,

CEU eTD Collection However, I am aware of the limitations of m of limitations the of aware am I However, of Englishemergence an speaking, highlyRoma elite. educated also I University, European Central of Program a Access Roma As the at Roma. teacher the on focusing schools summer and workshops conferences, numerous at) 5 the and 2008 8 the observed field; this in Rights NGO key a Roma Centre, European of the world for intern the an in as worked involved I activists. been and gradually scholars have international I studies, doctoral my of course the In members with ofimmigrant who Roma livecommunities in talk and visit to chance the had also I Republic. Czech the in Laben, Nad Usti of ghetto a in ou distinction ethnic such an Later,years.) thoseyears make not did universityI my during found ( origin. Roma of were neighbours our as well as classmates school elementary neighbour mixed a in experiences. personal my by influenced also studyis case The post both beyond goes dissertation the solidarity, democratic of concept the elaborating By chapter first The ofdissertationStructure deliberate. to able be should organizations, Romani grassroots especially parties, concerned all which These politicalprojects dilemmas ofRoma. into integration can turned orpolicy on be options self the of dilemmas normative the analyze and highlight only can t more about segregated and much poorer Roma communities when I worked as a volunteer volunteer communities whenIworkedas Roma a segregated poorer about much and more t - political

pria o tasainl oiaiis s el s their as well as solidarities transnational of appraisal th

European Roma Platform held in Budapest in 2011; attended (and presented (and attended 2011; in Budapest in held Platform Roma European analyses t analyses hood of Budapest, where approximately where Budapest, of hood

he challenges of transnational solidarities for democratic theory. democratic for solidarities transnational of challenges he y own perspective. As a non a As perspective. own y 7

World Romani Congress held in in held Congress Romani World campi nomadi campi

from five to ten to five from

As non As -

determination and soci and determination nationalist - Rom, I have grown up up grown have I Rom, - Roma in Italy in

assisted to the to assisted percent of my of percent However

critiques researcher, I researcher, .

Zagreb in in Zagreb . , we we ,

the the On al

CEU eTD Collection are discussed including both both including discussed are state of options discourses focusing onself chapter third The determination. rol changing of inadequacy the network, advocacy transnational th to contributed that studied are t Next, analysis. normative for relevance profound and direct Roma’ the are discuss It study. case the introduces chapter second The desirable. democracy solidarity, ofdemocratic basis ofmythe concept non and determination, pro levels different five on assessed are participation political of forms and claims political Romani part, first the In democracy. the to study case the links chapter fourth the Finally, religious and immigrants, communities. by advanced claims cosmopoli Romani of interpretations

- presented oa solidarity Roma

are e of the European Union, and the struggle for transnational recognition and self and recognition transnational for struggle the and Union, European the of e

alongside the genes alongsidethe

and clarifies appellations. These are not purely not clarifiesand are appellations. These ethnographic real, - bounded and transnational forms of political participation and representation and participation political of forms transnational and bounded

analyses

a wl a te da o Rmn self Romani of ideas the as well as , viable - other transnational and/or stateless groups including diasporas, diasporas, including groups stateless and/or transnational other ertra self territorial

and legitimate and determination, determination, and situates Romani claims. Romani situates and electoral and non and electoral e

eei: h fa o Rmn imgain te mrec of emergence the immigration, Romani of fear the genesis: is of the the of is including aim ad iut te i te rae setu of spectrum broader the in them situate and tanisms - eemnto. h scn part second The determination.

; ‘ human rightshuman violations,

Roma issue Roma however, existing forms of Romani self Romani of forms existing 8 - electoral structures. The chapter chapter The structures. electoral

the chapter concludes that chapter the international minority rights regimes, the the regimes, rights minority international global democra global ’ . Five developments Fivedevelopments . hoeia polm o t of problems theoretical es the controversial question of question controversial the es

It identifies and studies three major three studies and identifies It - eemnto, trans determination, he origins of Romani activism Romani of origins he

and social inclusion. social and Next, cy is neither feasible nor feasible neither is cy draws lessons of the the of lessons draws -

problems determination and determination non are identified and identified are - identifies five identifies state forms of state forms of - ransnational odr self border

but have have but ‘ who who - - CEU eTD Collection society, transnat and citizenship civil global solidarity, transnational concerning particular in theory, political for study case

ional democracy. 9

CEU eTD Collection 1.1 global democracy. I which of basis partlyembrac transna of and critiques communitarian nationalist the Second, refuted. and theories) multitude and society civil global theories. democratic importance normative the outline to is chapter this of aim The extremely this found has it do,especia to difficult Internet, the and films media, Western of use and to access important. more becoming Even w China, in forexample, media national and education relative the First, national of expense the at solidarities allegiances. such of upsurge the diagnose authors Several monotheisms) the been have There

Transnationalpost and At least e The challenge of transnational solidarities solidarities transnational of challenge The

the latter. the can approve the legitimacy of non of legitimacy the approve can and are are and

egt f tt i te oilzto o is citizens its of socialization the in state of weight n sclr eg te nentoa wres o wmns movements). women’s or workers’ international the (e.g. secular and

five First, the postFirst, the llyyoung regard with to people

tendencie Third, Idevelop my Third, numerous forms of t of forms numerous for democratic theory democratic for - territorial formsterritorial ofsolidarity – tional solidarities are are solidarities tional

s eraig hl atraie oe o scaiain are socialization of modes alternative while decreasing is - s political appraisal of suchsolidari of appraisal political are foreseen. Chapter 1 Chapter 10 o ransnational solidarity: both religious (think of (think religious both solidarity: ransnational wn

concept - state democracies, state

( disentangled Held 2000,23

here the the soughtauthorities here restrict to

ion of democratic solidarity, on the solidarity,the democratic on of ion

of transnational solidarities for solidarities transnational of

I . ) ties is discussed (namelydiscussed is ties .

– refut but

primarily via public public via primarily

e contest

the former and and former the

visions of of visions

CEU eTD Collection for a global exclusionfor a ofinequalities serio have now we because but problems specific our solve to problem own our as “perceived increasingly are consciousness Fourth 122 Min Prime the than world the about informed li accordingly, is and Russia, in famine a China, North in massacre a Africa, bush a China, in revolution a of issue the in simultaneously himself “interests gen Third symbols traditions and nati different of relevance and meaning the of discussions regular in expressed are communities Second, individuals forplanetarywoul issues possible were it if even that remembered be should it but politics, interstate of coordination the for need post and transnational legal forms of‘globalization’, bureaucratic and economic, Insum, alongside transcending loyaltiesnation the to identification participation, of mechanisms new up open communications developments. global in Fifth rtos I 19, an 1892, In erations. ) - . , transnational awareness and consciousness are coupled with new ways new with coupled are consciousness and awareness transnational , territo

, epe r more are people not −

rial identities and solidarities emerge. “It is a fact that globalization strengthensglobalization the that fact a solidaritiesis “It emerge. and identities rial

n i rlto t te above the to relation in and ny do only . Human rights violations and various forms of social exclusion and ine and exclusion social of forms various and violations rights Human .

to increasingly

- rnntoa frs f wrns eeg, u a ot of sort a but emerge, awareness of forms transnational sals te uooos odtos f ah tt, t state, each of conditions autonomous the establish

( Chandler 2009,53

observer noted that an inhabitant of a village who reads a paper paper a reads who village a of inhabitant an that noted observer aware ehooia dvlpet ad the and developments Technological suffering from a generic generic a suffering from

of - state. ” d continue to flourish to d continue

( einl n goa dvlpet ta i pr in than developments global and regional Brunkhorst 2007,107

) − .

territorially 11 se o a ude yas before years hundred a of ister

s , “and not only because we need each other each need we because only not “and , lack ofcoheringsentiments lack values and eie ad state and defined ” ( Archibugi 2004, 445 ) .

us and legally binding claims binding legally and us

growth of global global of growth - bound kely to be better better be to kely , of he empathy of of empathy he

” n solidarity and lbl moral global participating participating ) - ( onal . a i East in war ed Held 1995, 1995, Held

political

values, quality evious evious , CEU eTD Collection peoples of the worldwho would otherwise ofthe peoples international have the novoice arena. in profit of logics the counterbalancing States United as notion The (1) and approaches to weight different attach philosophers and theorists Political 1.2 Glasius2001 2001 in published was yearbook first The Economics. of School London the at Institute 7 314 powers counter ‘create to thereby and autonomy’ of ‘zones create to or space’ reclaim to struggle ‘the on is emphasis “The law. international and state org and agency political on focus theories Such for. effectively ofpoliticsis institutions called newform and are law a international and exhausted inter of principles established the on depend which institutio political international that suggest theories society civil Global

e fr ntne Falk instance for See a

) (2) . progressive response to economic (or neoliberal) globalization and the hegemony of the the of hegemony the and globalization neoliberal) (or economic to response progressive

The appraisal multitude ) . […] transnational solidarities, whether between women, lawyers, lawyers, planet embodied currently nowhere is but time future women, in exist could which one dreams, and hopes their between of community political invisible the to whether globali with associated solidarities, ‘‘c of varieties other or activists, rights human environmentalists, transnational […] rate them highly. They are are highly.They them rate

7 .

of global civil society emerged in the mid 1990s and was typically conceived typically was and 1990s mid the in emerged society civil global of nentoa NO ad rnntoa sca mvmns ee eadd for heralded were movements social transnational and NGOs International .

( Falk 1995,212 (

1995 of solidarities transnational

)

n te lbl ii Scey erok pbihd y h Goa Governance Global the by published yearbooks Society Civil Global the and

) zation from below from zation .

- maximization and power and maximization centred around the concepts of concepts the around centred 12

anization outside of the mechanisms of mechanisms the of outside anization [have] already transferred their loyalties their transferred already [have] - state politics enshrined in existing existing in enshrined politics state

- o h state’ the to politics; and advocating for the advocatingthe and for politics; transnational solidarities. Two solidarities. transnational n h life the in (1) global civil society civilglobal ” ( Anheier, Kaldor, and Kaldor, Anheier, ( ns and practices practices and ns Chandler 2004a, 2004a, Chandler itizen pilgrim’’ itizen - ol of world

the the ,

CEU eTD Collection nation and corporations (multinational oligarchy an organizations), international and G8, the US, agains ofresistance newmodel a denotes multitude of notion the manner, similar a In (2) ( wit race and gender class, dominant the only represent states repre to purport even not “do states Western Falk, For perpetuated. be will inequality and power of relations an nation of limits territorial the assert theorists These a urge They disempowering. inherently forms such seeing state territorial the of sphere political the in participation any reject categorically often theorists other with (alongside Negri and Hardt limits it placesthe onsu d the thus and people, a and identity, an nation, a to belonging bondage to resistance multitude’s “The domination. T Falk 1995,50 e ocp o mliue is o atr th capture to aims multitude of concept he d set tef na lbl level global a on itself assert - states), and and states), democracya th (NGOs and ht utis mie n a te ae ie h fre ht al fr and for calls that force the time necessary destruction its same the creative at and and Empire antagonistic sustains that an […] Empire, deterri The of positivity. construction historical the of terrain positive really the is faces, myriadits in multitude, the of movement the of develop and the against merely posed system imperial not are They […] nomadism universal the in events, of conjecture the in produced are subjectivities new and struggle of figures New ) .

sent the great majority of women and men on the planet. Moreover, such such Moreover, planet. the on men and women of majority great the sent that democracy and political community can no longer be equated with equated be longer no can community political and democracy that

bjectivity positively their own constituent projects. […] This constituent aspect constituent This […] projects. constituent own positivelytheir — - they are not simply negative forces. They also express, nourish, express, also Theyforces. negative simplynot are they states: “democracy must transcend the borders of single states states single of borders the transcend must “democracy states: — torializing power of the multitude is the productive force force productive the is multitude the of power torializing ” is entirely positive

( ( rhbg 20, 144 2000, Archibugi Hardt Neg and t the 13 e UN).e Empire srgl aant l frs of forms all against struggle e

fih fo sovereignty” from “flight

ri 2001,61 ri –

which is constituted by a monarchy (the (the by monarchy a is constituted which ” revived by Hardt and Negri Negri and Hardt by revived — ( aee a rdcl post radical as labeled Hardt Negri and 2001,361 the struggle against the slavery of of slavery the against struggle the ) .

Without this shift, the dominant dominant the shift, this Without hin their own territorial space territorial own their hin ) esertion from sovereignty and and sovereignty from esertion .

a era from retreat a ,

belonging and and belonging - structuralists) ) . (

2001 makes )

– ”

CEU eTD Collection and that awareness of the Other is all that political engagement can constitute without n without constitute can engagement political that all is Other the of awareness that and So be could actors actors state g hand, other the On universal deconstruct to seeks perspectives as merely ofhegemo project the fact, in and, views or vision shared any assume not does advocating community political emerging an to and phenomenon Conflating order. world political ‘glo of notions the around centred Theories 1.3 ourselves spontaneity the to e ofunpredictable humbled: once equals; as opening to aspire can we governed the solidarityof the on marginalized based politics practical a ‘‘through being and poor the from learning of solidarity hierarchical the offering not societies, postcolonial with share we what on focus They domination. of frameworks -

called post called

The critiques ofpost , do not formu not do , ht id m wrd o ht f tes s o is others of that to world my binds What state. and not polis of or cosmos and community of is concepts traditional in contained Palestinian a or be cannot bond This community. thick and nationality against citizenship, Iraqi against an to me humanity,of citize membership binds What singularities. between [ Dissatisfaction the infinite number infinite the polis, the anyone;or whoever of one, unique each of world the is come to cosmos The international. and national beyond human, and citizen beyond responsibility - structuralists argue that even argue level that structuralists the engagement ofadvocacy at i ‘socialized’ lobal civil society theories society civil lobal ‘ late such radical anti radical such late solidarity

by non — - political cosmopolitanisms ] with nation, state, the international [ international the state, nation, with ]

of encounters ofsingularities

a desirablea newform a e mpirical and normative elements they elements normative and mpirical - “ state norm entrepreneurs norm state ’ conception of solidarity without community: one which which one community: without solidarity of conception

f eeomn o politic or development of nship of the world or of a community but a protest protest a communitya but of or world the of nship bal civil society’ and ‘multitude’ envision a post a envision ‘multitude’ and society’ civil bal ny 14 ncounters’’ ” - , although , politic

( Chandler 2009,64 Chandler al claims. They rather argue that argue rather They claims. al of global agency.

( also cherish also Duffield 2007,234 ur absolute singularity and total total and singularity absolute ur

( ( Risse, Ropp, and SikkinkRisse, Ropp,and 1999 Douzinas 2007,295 l uooy u ised the instead but autonomy al ) .

— ing ] comes from a bond a from comes ]

simultaneously refer refer simultaneously

post ) - . territorial non territorial

s oppressive s oppressive ) .

state ew ) - . - -

CEU eTD Collection utemr, g Furthermore, in making decision and com political a of members deliberation democratic of problems the to eye blind into communities political Dissolving ofpolitics dimension post a values interests and the Moreover, ( peac make association state. the of that behind far lags prevent and plan, anticipate, to ability their crises; However, must democracy a as itself understand to wants that into Habermas politicians (few) intellectuals.and But these groups typical.” not are constella loose the activities, their contest executive business transnational and personnel administrative order global the of elites the “among found selective. is identities’ political of ‘globalization the words, other of metropolises the in concentrated mostly are reality in that NGOs transnati Walzer 2004,181 the postnational networks postnational

decision - oiia con political onal crime onal as Walzer points out, civil socie civil out, points Walzer as also rejects also i a onr tr b cvl a o rdsrbt r redistribute or war civil by torn country a in e c s

ontrasting ‘bad politics’ with ‘good with people’ ontrasting politics’ ‘bad at best best at - making? oa cvl society civil lobal )

. ess a pee re f oe relations, power of free sphere a sensus, and terrorist organizations; and organizations; terrorist and

are are

( Mouffe 2005 the of ‘the people’ of‘the mitigating factors: their activists can do many things, but they can’t can’t they but things, many do can activists their factors: mitigating What institutions makeWhat such institutions could “ “ munity decide on matters of common concern? concern? common of matters on decide munity ( the the Habermas 2001, 81 2001, Habermas politics of self of politics

) theorists .

are benevolent and harmonious. are and benevolent global civil society or multitude multitude or society civil global tion of social movements […] trade unionists and a a and unionists trade […] movements social of tion ty associations “run after problems; they react to react they problems; after “run associations ty

– 15 elc ls porsie ii atr, uh as such actors, civil progressive less neglect -

liquidation the networks of experts and specialists, senior senior specialists, and experts of networks the )

He argues that that Heargues

exaggerat at least distinguish between members and members between distinguish least at

(civil society, multitude) assumes(civil society,that multitude)

[i.e.] a self sucs n sgiiat scale significant a on esources e

n dsead h ant the disregard and

the global role of international of role global the letting the state simply merge simply state the letting - that any political community political any that – effective and rule binding? (

H n toe h tak and track who those and ( 468 eld 2003, 468 2003, eld prosperous Suchapproaches )

amounts to turning a a turning to amounts Who can take part take can Who

. How shall shall How . countries. )

It is to be to is It […] civil […] agonistic posit

”

CEU eTD Collection cultural and political and cultural identities. decisions political interlocking of chains creates (2) states; military legal, nation of capacities political, regulatory the challenges (1) societies economic,and states of interconnectedness increasing the that observes Held the meet sufficient to challenges of‘gl (state national of possibility and desirability the dispute not does that cosmopolitanism moderate a offers Held post that questions fundamental those answer to by The 1.4 particular a of members are who citizens community.” united democratically for space logical non andGrahame ‘output’ the 8 between (2) account; to hold to able principle, in are, they whom makers symmetry the concerning decision thought” between democratic liberal of heart the “at assumptions two fate” of “communities of notion the around centred rather is theory His role his in major state developm empirical are allegiances t view, Held’s In

Although the intensity and consequences of economic globaliz economic of consequences and intensity the Although

- ebr. Te self “The members. - framed democracy. However, such transnational identities and solidarities and identities transnational such However, democracy. framed

Cosmopolitan democracyCosmopolitan - now classic now ( 2000 ( 107 ) ‘ . )

- reinven - e mrec o tasainl oiaiis n te cor the and solidarities transnational of emergence he

aes n decision and makers framed) forms of democracy but he argues that national forms are not not are forms national that argues he but democracy of forms framed) al

theory of cosmopolitan democracy developed by David Held David by developed democracy cosmopolitan of theory

tion’ - eeeta cnet f olcie self collective of concept referential

of political communi 8

( Held 1995,136

ents that provide a provide that ents obalization’. - aes () ewe citizen between (1) takers: 16

) .

- ties. politica ation are highly debated. highly are ation

reason for going beyond the model of model the beyond going for reason

csooia tere overlook. theories cosmopolitan l n outcomes; and - eemnto dmrae a demarcates determination - voters

that he derives from from derives he that

rosion of national national of rosion See for instance Hirst instance for See n te decision the and and and ,

do not play a a play not do n cultural and 3 reshapes (3) attempts attempts - -

CEU eTD Collection euae, epe ut ae ces o ad ebrhp n dive in, membership and to, access have must people regulated, all us affect that for contemporary life of mediating of capable person citizen cosmopolitan a become to learn must state a of citizen “each that believes Held civil society. in spheres public critical to response in and elections through accountable democratically are with institut representative global militaryissues, or ecological instance to regard for level, global the at made be to have decisions Where them. by affected are that those by essentially made are decisions means autonomy democratic of principle decision in autonomy democratic of principle the establish and rights collective argues Held delimited territory etc.) policies, ofdecision (decisions, embededdness 2002 institutions. democratic global) a that solidarities transnational Both 1.5 communities

) dtce fo communities from detached , post Communitarian critiques ”

( - ed 00 30 2000, Held oiia ad eortc cosmopolitanisms democratic and political

” o csooia dmcai lw hc wl isiuinlz idvda and individual institutionalize will which law democratic cosmopolitan for ( 30 ( Habermas 1999 ) ms of power are to become accountable and if many of the complex issues complex the of many if and accountable become to are power of ms . (

- Held 1995,224 oal, ainly rgoal ad globally and regionally nationally, locally, ) .

oe rcsl, e niae mlil ctznhp “f many “if citizenship: multiple envisages he precisely, More between national traditions, communitie traditions, national between ) re .

rnntoa atcmns r perceived are attachments Transnational ) insufficient . -

makers and their constituents their and makers ( hnlr 2004a Chandler 17

o upr fntoa tasainl lt alone (let transnational functional support to

are criticized for relying on too too on relying for criticized are ) lcig tik communicative ‘thick’ lacking , - –

ions will be created which created be will ions

r t b democratically be to are ultimately the people in in ultimatelyapeople the s and alternative forms forms alternative and s elitist - s political rse maki ( Calhoun ng. The The ng. thin –

CEU eTD Collection Furthermore, deliberative democracy requires a high level of level high a requires democracy deliberative Furthermore, another, one t understand i.e. 231 2007, the with them equip and procedures, attachments Strong (1) (2)socialpolitical justice action, (3)political stability.and s Accordingly, relation in later liberalto nationalis well and identity human understanding in and life, political of functioning the in community of importance the emphasize that approaches all to referring i.e. communitarian, critiques such action collective robust for necessary support broad the generate trade a posit and attachments thi contrast critiques Such ident common has this provided identity national that argue nationalists Liberal own. our from differs life of way and religion descent, ethnic whose and meet, never probably will know, not do we whom others st welfare A transfers. welfare and taxation redistributive uphold and install to namely justice, social for necessary also is Solidarity (2) be will citizens fellow their that reasona and exploitative and mean is that manner a in behave people as making decision democratic 239 2004, must -

being. In this sense, communitarianism can be compatible with liberalism, as discussed as liberalism, with compatible be can communitarianism sense, this In being. trust that others genuinely that are trust willing consid to ble ble a to minimumcertain extent ) ) . O . .

n atclr cletv pltcl d political collective particular, In n the other hand other the n rn cmua i communal trong motivate / ek rnntoa sldrt wt thick with solidarity transnational weak / n ity and trust, and that no other social identity in the modern world modern the social identityother in no that and ity trust, and hey common language a speak can - off between the inclusiveness of institutions and their ability to to ability their and institutions of inclusiveness the between off ,

strong solidarity is required for the acceptance of majoritarian of acceptance the for required is solidaritystrong ett is dentity

m. individuals to participate in democratic discourses and and discourses democratic in participate to individuals compet

need to rest assured that structural majorities will not not will majorities structural that assured rest to need ( Bader 2007,114 ate requires us to make sacrifices for anonymous for sacrifices make to us requires ate encies – 18

allegedly

lbrto i fail ol i participants if only feasible is eliberation

necessary for such participation such for necessary er one’s interests and opinions and one’sinterests er – ) .

seta fr 1 public (1) for essential trust.

( Kymlicka 2004,239

( On On ae 20, 113 2007, Bader the the

/ strong national national strong / one hand, people hand, one

( - ( Kymlicka regarding regarding Williams ) . )

I call call I

CEU eTD Collection 147 democratic stable genuinely a have to order in principles, core upon agreement moral substantive a citizens, an liberaldemocracythat argument needs Rawls’ John develop diversity of degree the to limit a liberal of stability the preserve is there democracy, to liberal of presupposition a is necessary pluralism Although institutions. democratic is identity shared of sense a Finally, (3) 2004, 238 confessional and groups kin of level the beyond emergency) of times in motivate to able been has generate donot relations solidarity automatically. all the of by principle determined solely be cannot polities democratic of boundaries the Consequently, In brief ) .

More precisely: dmcai ctznhp eurs oe ot f oiaiy n sae identity. shared and solidarity of sort some requires citizenship democratic , ) .

( social This regul to agency, political of conscious to subject structures good. ongoing common existing, Sec as interdependence. a relationships the at of consciousness aimed agency those a on depends transformation political that guarantee intentional hum no which over exercise is communities into however, transformed be relationships, will relationships social of facticity The have will responding them, to nopurchase making of or them accepting idea either board, on take the to bound are people because other that arguments possible, be will deliberation democratic no met, convi as up dressed interests to (or convictions recognizes community political the that valid facie prima are that principle s everyone is necessary is What Williams 2007, 243 Williams - affected

order rather than a contingent and unstable modus Vivendi modus unstable and contingent a than rather order

- neet. aig omn rbes n big nwnd n social in entwined being and problems common Facing interests. ongoing sacrifices ongoing ) . n, hy ut mgn ta te eainhp cn e made be can relationships the that imagine must they ond,

democracy can withstand. Political liberals draw upon and upon draw liberals Political withstand. can democracy dual act of imagination of act dual hould be able to distinguish between appeals to to appeals between distinguish to able be hould

(as opposed to episodic humanitarian assistance humanitarian episodic to opposed (as 19 —

because the principle invoked is indeed one indeed is invoked principle the because

— ( and appeals that are to purely private private purely to are that appeals and Miller 2009,208 Miller ation aimed at some common good common some at aimed ation tos. nes ht odto is condition that Unless ctions). overlappingconsensus : First, agents must develop a a develop must agents First, : ) .

groups ( Rawls 1993, 1993, Rawls

( n beings an Kymlicka

among among

CEU eTD Collection Communitarian critiques typi critiques Communitarian in results interconnectedness t hand, other the On 34 events global basis,very ona oreven world follow clos people other with communicate and identify would world the in people minorityof small very a only authorit with public a define institutions legal since public juridical global no there is only not words, other In would citizenship parties trans solidarity. transnational of practices and manifestations political pre Most whereas exists; already it form embryonic in that argue and possible empirically and conceptually both demos global In morally tolerable is history ethnic particular of kind what and much how specifically, more and, future and past between balance sensible and fair “a find to is challenge real The liberal, of history the and nademocratic history, without culture political of concept viable no be can

) sum - .

political solidarity is required for democratic citizenship and willingly recognize that that recognize willingly and citizenship democratic for required is solidarity political national (European, global (European, national communitarian thinkers (as opposed to many nationalist politicians) do not claim that claim not do politicians) nationalist many to opposed (as thinkers communitarian Erpa cut, etc. courts, European , to poig ap cn be can camps opposing two , in tttos hp iette, cultures identities, shape stitutions tions istions inevitably in embedded ” still ( 782 y to act globally, there is no sociological global public either “because “because either public global sociological no is there globally, act to y he proponents of transnational f transnational of proponents he be ) .

codn t te psiit o ‘mosbls’ iw h nto of notion the view ‘impossibilist’ or ‘pessimist’ the to according missing. al dsis uh rgesvs, future progressivist, such dismiss cally ) democratic institutions were created (e.g. created were institutions democratic ) , the ), h cniuu srnteig f rnntoa solidarities. transnational of strengthening continuous the

itnuse: ompltn fn te mrec o a of emergence the find cosmopolitans distinguished: utrl preconditions cultural

2 particularist ethnic histories ethnic particularist 0 ,

and solidarities. solidarities. and orms of democracy argue that growing that argue democracy of orms Their main main Their ely

f rnntoa democratic transnational of ”

( claim is rather that even if if even that rather is claim They even acknowledge acknowledge even They Grant and Keohane 2005,Keohane Grant and - retd views oriented ” ( Eur Bader 1997,780 opean political opean

required and and required

orientation . “ T here ) .

CEU eTD Collection commitment to democratic to commitment equalityjustice generate social and community just a of feeling fellow the sustaining for attachments communal particular of importance the emphasize Communitarians solidarity. democratic so between debate The the ofprogress in form example socialopportunities welfare to and member of each to supposed also are they but members, other the of membe each to has only Not decisions. make to and concern communicate to able and willing be must community democratic a of members the out point rightly thinkers communitarian (Liberal) 1.6 Koenig inco is demos global nation. reinforc be to had and democracy to transition the sustain to enough not rightssovereignty”However, “dryHabermas popular ofhuman and were the argues that ideas irrelevant gender perspective and religious racial, of forms all of elimination foundations contract, social imagined by cit ties each communal of equality ascribed the bypassing recognizing precisely is democracy modern of promise The

Solidarit

- Archibugi 2010,78 .

f qa sau o al iies rlgos lnusi, utrl ifrne are differences cultural linguistic, religious, citizens, all of status equal of ( esy 07 170 2007, Pensky y, culture, nation culture, y, herent and and herent - called communitarians and liberals revolve around the sources of of sources the around revolve liberals and communitarians called oiia allegiances political ) .

ive taxation. as a political project project political a as )

. The consolidation of democratic solidarity requires the the requires solidarity democratic of consolidation The . zn ne te rule the under izen

with each other, to deliberate on issues of common of issues on deliberate to other, each with

are are – transferred

even if it requires financial for sacrifices requires even it if recognize and endorse the equal access equal the endorse and recognize neither feasible nor desirable nor feasible neither

of law. law. of - based discrimination. discrimination. based r accept the equal political status political equal the accept r s

sufficient political cohesion. rm srpie o voluntary to ascriptive from ;

w In the framework of an an of framework the In h ereas liberals posit that posit liberals ereas d by ed h ie of idea the

From the the From ( List and and List

CEU eTD Collection the the of notion the around centred argument functionalist The transform the backgroundfor cultural “a provides thus destiny and past common a with people common fragile otherwise the stran amongst solidarity imaginary an of consists nation the words, other In worthwhile autonomy, liberal which within context a provide can therefore and meaning with choices our invests culture setting, modern a in Even meaning. a libera The ofthe democraticconstitutionalprocedures stat principlesand abstract the of adoption the for condition enabling an like something constitute together that commitments interpretative and experiences, historical shared vocabularies, of sorts specific the with individuals provides culture Accordingly, hermeneutic conception of conception hermeneutic ation ofsubjects into citizens l ideal of autonomy is based on individual choice. However, life choices must have must choices However,life choice. individual on based autonomyis of ideal l

the notion of a common ancestry, language and history, only the consciousness of consciousness the history, only and ancestry,language common a of notion the around crystallized consciousness, national a Only community. of form mediated polit legally and new, the of awareness the territories state the of inhabitants the in inspired first which nation, the of idea modern the by filled was gap This rights. sovereignty human ofpopular dry theand than ideas hearts minds and their vivid s more appealed people’s convictionsand was shape to enough powerful and that idea an for called mobilization political this [However] citizens. of rights political and liberal basic into is, that rights, civil and rights human into subjects of rights the sovereignty, popular to royal from shift the With [..] another. one to strangers been previously had who persons between solidarity of relation a time first the for possible «made »nation the Belonging to 1999, 111 commun political single a of citizens into subjects makes people, same” “the to belonging ( Kymlicka 1995 ity - 113 od o raoal cooperation reasonable of bonds –

into members who can f can who members into ) .

) .

culture

” (embraced by Habermas and liberal nationalists alike) nationalists liberal and Habermas by (embraced ( Habermas 1999,109 22 e

( Pensky 2000, 68 eel responsible for one another one for responsible eel

h fedm o ae ie cho life make to freedom the ( nation esy 00 66 2000, Pensky ) .

has to be distinguished from from distinguished be to has ) .

background knowledge, knowledge, background ) ee transformed were gers that cements cements that gers .

The myth of a a of myth The

( Habermas trongly to tronglyto cs i ices, ically ically s .

CEU eTD Collection institutions and the opportunity to debate the features of shared identity; and ca and identity; shared of features the debate to opportunity the and institutions public open urge revisable; and chosen as understood be identity personal that require rights; multicultura posit that views culturalist conservative from distinguished be must arguments nationalist liberal Such l f practices and policies the neutrality, liberal of banner identity collective self national of justice the for argue to self situated of idea the used Raz and Margalit thinkers, communitarian earlier on Relying exchange, whenitsocial and individual fails, the may harmed be 1984 formingin constitutive attachmentsin importance of the the liberalism. with coupled often is observation hermeneutical a Such of‘ relevance democracy? Does 1.7 formsof alternate identity accommodating more or ‘thinner’ become to expected are which identities, of transformation iberal principles require principles usiberal to th level

)

. The critiques ofnationalist liberal critiques recognizing the social and hermeneutic and social the recognizing

In a similar manner, Taylor argues that that argues Taylor manner, similar a In

Sandel argues that liberalism rests o rests liberalism that argues Sandel list) theorists argue for cultural accommodation within th within accommodation cultural for argue theorists list) the The disse The deep allegiances

rmc o cletv oe idvda rights. individual over collective of primacy

( aglt n Rz 1990 Raz and Margalit rtation advocates a a advocates rtation

( ’ Frost219 2010,

and culturaland differences. - determination where there is a strong an strong a is there where determination e

playin transnational ) . ) g field 23

. role of culture rule out transnational forms of forms transnational out rule culture of role

ylca eosrtd that demonstrated Kymlicka n a mistake a n

recognition of our identity proves healthy to to healthy proves identity our of recognition

( Kymlicka 1995

avo approach dividual identity and interestsdividual identity and u n view of the person the of view n red the dominant majorities, thus majorities, dominant the red

(

Taylor 1992 that recognizes the polit the recognizes that nhoooia ciiu of critique anthropological ) iea ntoait (or nationalist Liberal .

e framework of human of framework e

fe udr the under often d e d ) .

failing to see see to failing ncompassing ll for social for ll

( Sandel Sandel ical ical CEU eTD Collection vn n h cs o ehial quasi ethnically of case the in Even trust. and priority in and overlapping multi e Most justice) social of realization that ironical is It pre the translating instruments as institutions wi collective a possessing supposition the on based are arguments Communitarian its beliefs about form trustworthiness f removed and complex too are operations a trust civic strengthening of goal their achieve identifications co nationality itself in nationality - lingual xisting nation xisting

compatriots usi o ter aiu proa ad omn rjcs I an If s not projects. common are these which in one but associations, and communities without world a not is and it personal various vision; latter nearlythe more resemble does, perhaps would, world postnationalist their of in others with affiliate pursuit and associate individuals which in world social diverse richly a of vision alternative an and attachments partial troublesome of emptied heroic some between opposition the on turn not does institutions democratic postnationalist or cosmopolitan for argument The

. and assumes a cohesive,assumes a qu liberal democratic principles (individual freedom, deliberative democracy and and democracy deliberative freedom, (individual principles democratic liberal -

States that seek to impose a particular understanding of identity are unlikely to identityunlikelyto understandingof particular are impose a to thatseek States xs wih n un otiue o h persis the to contribute turn in which exist ubordinated nation the to ubordinated

Kymlicka and other and Kymlicka multi ld mn sbainl n tasainl ns The ones. transnational and subnational many clude deli - s tates do tates

cannot be based onthe based be cannot - es ii tut n sldrt. Widely solidarity. and trust civic vers tnc Or tahet, eain, n olgtos r manifo are obligations and relations, attachments, Our ethnic. l ro t ay oml p formal any to prior ll

not

meet the above discussed communitarian c communitarian discussed above the meet

asi ( prominent i prominent McBride 2010 - homogen - homogenous national culture national homogenous - state rom the citizenry for them to be in a position to to position a in be to them for citizenry the rom - 24

formed will into action. into will formed requirements of common languaofcommon requirements

nd solidarity.nd (

McBride 2010,161 u societies, ous deologist ) .

ltcl ntttos ad depict and institutions, olitical

that ompltns vso o a world a of vision cosmopolitanism s

of Moreover

the demos is a collective agent collective a is demos the

multiculturalism t s doub is it diver ec o dvre national diverse of tence ) .

gent understandings of of understandings gent (

Kymlicka 2004 However, national fl o ht extent what to tful

pca status special riteria: they riteria: ge, motivation,ge,

argue that argue governments “ t ything, a a ything, here is no is here )

these

are are the ld, or ’

CEU eTD Collection Mostovsuggests en and based be can decisions policy which on question, in issues the on stance collective coherent a generate to able being as same the not dem argue authors Several identity co as a so much interest cross might “U as well as values, political and moral from arising feeling l attachments, national on focusing By of plurality a only mechanisms and , responsiveness democratic ensuring for available mechanisms pro this constraining and shaping in role but constructin to, respond to will popular unified

bn pcs a pooe conta promote can spaces rban ocratic solidarity ocratic g collective decisions and taking collective action, each performing its particular particular its performing each action, collective taking and decisions collective g and public goods public and pursu in individuals interdependent among interactions reiterated of out grows commitment this allegiances, of “precondition” a being than rather resistance citizen strengthens and processes democratic supports choosers interdependent as individuals for respect en with democraticpracticesassociated ofsocial and choice valuesto with associated an in membership through example, (for interdependence political and social, economic, of layers multiple through linked be to likely future a or future common potentially a and k are things, doing of ways “normal” as well as interests, and and claims concerns about arguments another’s one understand to willingness and Ability ties. cultural long require not do life public in degree lesser or greater participate and goods public enjoy we which through polities to allegiances can delivercan responsiveness this

ey elements of political allegiance. These can be based on a common present common a on based be can These allegiance. political of elements ey that - based as well as identarian divides thus enable a sense of, not a common a not of, sense a enable thus divides identarian as well as based

. “Sharing a common identity and exhibiting some affective bonds are are bonds affective some exhibiting and identity common a “Sharing .

that mmon world mmon problemsand common communal attachments in themselves are not are themselves in attachments communal

( Mostov 2007, 141 t mn srnes hr Arendtian where strangers among ct agd uoen no) Cmimn t principles to Commitment Union). European larged ibera ” l nationalists downplay the importance of fellow of importance the downplay nationalists l

es A te eo i pua, o o ae the are too so plural, is demos the As cess. ( only 25 McBride 2010,166

o skew to acted

) .

plurality of democratic institutions for for institutions democratic of plurality ” ( ed relationships of social choice. Yet Yet choice. social of relationships ed List and Koenig and List social contact social ” ( Hayward 2007,194 ) .

- shared histories or deep deep or histories shared - sufficient to maintain to sufficient Archibugi 2010, 84 2010, Archibugi

» and living together living and od ad deeds and words ing individual individual ing ) .

to a a to ) « . .

CEU eTD Collection the the ( 2 institutionalization and enterprisecapitalist the around shape taken had that systems intermeshing functionally are labo consciousness of division the solidarity, organic Durkheim religious shared when era, modern the in coherence and integrity their maintain could societies how precisely labo of development the on literature extensive the disregard to appear thinkers nationalist communitarian Furthermore, accommodatio political the Indeed sense. sum, In supplying necessary the variety of requirements selection insatiable the satisfies which productivity, it, expands egalitarian, solidarity makes It differentiation. functional of that process the in destroyed society class premodern of solidarity solidarity communicative the without replaces integration “Democracy social of forms new represent Brunkhorst Polanyi 1944 Polanyi ) .

differentiation system offunctional and al oay wie aot h ‘ the about writes Polanyi Karl u dissolved in in dissolved r ,

and the constructi the and “ unleashes, by guaranteeing basic rights, the freedom potential of subjective subjective of potential freedom the rights, basic guaranteeing by unleashes, m rud that argued odernization processes are intrinsically hostile to holistic cultures in the emphatic the in cultures holistic to hostile intrinsically are processes odernization argues that functional systems li systems functional that argues

) ( ; Durkheim and Coser 1984 Coser and Durkheim

and ethnic background ethnic and nolonger assumed. be could whereas Parsons and Luhmann relate the destruction of organic solidarity to to solidarity organic of destruction the relate Luhmann and Parsons whereas h nw tutrs f society of structures new the

of purposive modern modern the bureaucratic state apparatus. Weber understood this process as theprocessas this Weberunderstoodapparatus. statebureaucratic the s oite bcm mr cmlx eovn fo mcaia to mechanical from evolving complex, more become societies as on of welfare states from above. from states welfare of on ” - capitalist s capitalist ( rational ecorational 96 ) .

disembedding s

( Luhmann 1982 n ) ocieties, the integrative role of role integrative the ocieties, .

nomic administrativenomic and action […] u Ac ke the market economy or sovereign state power state sovereign or economy market the ke 26 i cutrcig n rpaig collective replacing and counteracting is r cording to Weber to cording

of all cultural groups can only be achieved be only can groups cultural all of akd y h dfeetain f h two the of differentiation the by marked ’

f aiaim fro capitalism of ; Parsons 1971

The found The ,

the

organizational

(

rnhrt 05 83 2005, Brunkhorst ers traditional forms of life of forms traditional

) clua life cultural m ucinl ytm by systems functional .

of sociology studied studied sociology of law and and law

( Habermas 1987,

cores of the of cores division of division - worlds was ) .

CEU eTD Collection (1) forthe preconditions consolidationemergence and ofsuchsolidarity? the are what (3) required; is solidarity of kind what (2) democracy; for required solidarity resp steps, three in developed is position own My nationalist rejection. their outlinedavoidingis solidarities transnational with for the refuting disentangled far so chapter The 1.8 may have be once practices and beliefs own de a adopting of capable are groups those as insofar arguments communitarian above the solidarity self democracies representatives indirect contemporary in However, equalitypolitical participation. political are citizens the if

As noted above, communitarian thinkers communitarian above, noted As Democr ,

and trust. trust. and liberal liberal atic solidarity beyond solidarity atic post , mer and and mer

which

and areand en).” en).” motivated The republic The nationalist

outlined outlined ( Pensky 2000,71 niiul cnie tesle ctzn i they if citizens themselves consider Individuals oes h mnmly eurd ee o mtvto, competency, motivation, of level required minimally the lowers partly embracing the the embracing partly willi

no matter how foundational those beliefs and practices may be (or be maypractices and beliefs those foundational how matter no

to take part in public affairs public in part take to ng acceptto unfavo n disproved and and liberal liberal and an

c – onception of actively participating citizens citizens participating actively of onception

is thus is )

- political andpolitical perspectives nationalist rightl 27 communitarian communitarian challeng latter

post ypoin both their post their both rable majoritarian decisions.rable .

- In the following, the In centered, reflective attitude toward their their toward attitude reflective centered, onding to three questions: (1) why is is why (1) questions: three to onding - ed by a liberal conception according to to according conception liberal bya ed oiia co political t out that democracies can only work onlycan democracies that out t

and - ue is rule have the have critiques - political appraisal as well aswell as appraisal political mpltn theories; smopolitan

xrie va elected via exercised a third way of dealing dealing of way third a

competencies f cosmopolitanism of believe in their their in believe

–

implied in in implied

for such for

and and :

CEU eTD Collection 38 injustice” or oppression to opposition in and or justice liberation of name the in solidarity Political from political both delineated solidarity. ethnic and ( representelect requires democracy attend” to entitled are all expect that assemblies through policy maximalist and law of making the the in involved directly be to whereas “citizens packages”; policy different a offering parties between to limited is role citizen’s “ordinary view, minimalist the to According maximalist a and minimalist a words, other In of interests which 9 forefront certainmay in the situations to come and community. solidarityand Americans Asian instance, Ethnic loyaltyand values, shared not oridentity political experiences are th which on and members the links that bond the of source the injustic the of appreciation

2) MillerL contrasts ) .

ht id f oiaiy s eurd o democracy? for required is solidarity of kind What uh oiaiy mle ietfcto wit identification implies solidarity Such

“ solidarity democracy it s constituency atives. - democratsand R b cnrs, s ae o sae iett and identity shared on based is contrast, by ,

“unites individuals based on their sh their on based individuals “unites promotes welfare by ensuring that political decisions track the aggregate the track decisions political that ensuring by welfare promotes citizens citizens

(

ilr 00 146 2010, Miller

Ethnic Ethnic es to which they may be subject be may they which to es ” may well diverge greatly in their values, yet still feel a sense of sense a feel still yet values, their in greatly diverge well may 9 a sense of belo of sense a

(

Miller 2009, 205 - democrats democrats –

and , ( in general in 2009 ) . nging to a po a to nging

) 28 Nonetheless .

) te lived the h .

ocpino eorc a e contrasted. be can democracy of conception

, fade awayfade others. in

identity based are litical community litical even ,

d (

Gould 2007, 156 2007, Gould with and others of situation eortc solid Democratic commitment to a political cause political a to commitment ey can develop trust, concern, trust, develop can ey /or

mnmls cneto of conception minimalist a (

– Blum 2007,63 omn expe common

solidarity is contextual, it contextual, solidarityis

and choice periodic a ) .

arity

By definition, By ( motivation Scholz2007, ) ine. For riences. .

must be be must

an to s

CEU eTD Collection (ii) (ii) willingness the accordingand act to values its principles. to and groups. it limitin to commitment shared a have cooperate; T proce norms and fundamental the implies, membership the duties and rights the community, political a of part (i) government. conscious, common solidarity Democratic democratic maintain and solidarity: so of the think generate to sufficient not are themselves constitutions however, constitution; a in community democratic the of institutions and principles the out lay usually democracies bounded State reciprocity compromise and to scope greater allows time over stability Moreover, consistently.behave to expected be can decisions, participants serve point forfuture and points one can takenas reference at decisions of manifestations

he boundaries of the demos must be significant to its members as they as members its to significant be must demos the of boundaries he kept in check by general rules than to use governmental power to exploit or oppress rival rival oppress or exploit to power governmental use to than rules general by check in kept Democratic solidarity can only be be only can solidarity Democratic eortc solidarity Democratic

In brief

identity.

make decisions together decisions make ( i

) tbe ( stable, i) , democratic solidarity sense ofbelon , democratic a implies dures community, ofthe boundaries as its of as and well criteria membership. political solidarity political Democratic Democratic

i ant e iie t either to limited be cannot i isiuinlzd (i institutionalized, ii)

is supposed to to supposed is

( Miller 2009, 209 oiaiy tm fo a eie o olcie self collective to desire a from stems solidarity ;

. g the powers of their their of powers the g

share power and resources with each other each with resources and power share The stability of demos fost demos of stability The active active be be and 29 ) v .

stable )

conscious inclusive - called Stalin adoptedconstitution called 1936. in

a opsd o cainl ephemeral occasional, to opposed as , a shared commitment commitment shared a (self ad v egalitarian (v) and , . Citizens must be aware of being of aware be must Citizens . ging to - )

government ers trust and sincerity since since sincerity and trust ers a self

have - ruling community ruling community , i.e. i.e.

to to to be willing to to willing be to

om f self of form - prefer to see to prefer . justice rule, i.e. i.e. rule, They m They

r a or ust ust (i) (i)

CEU eTD Collection Democratic solidarity implies that members of the demos manifest some degree of mutual mutual of degree some manifest demos the of members that implies solidarity Democratic law democrat the of entity abstract more and larger the to confession, “t law. the subjectedto those all i.e. decisions, binding (i obligations] is the and l solidarities [identities, transnational more towards shifts nontrivial achieving for bottleneck solidarities democratic transnational develop national to centuries words, other In executing laws. the binding making concern, commonof issues about deliberating permit (ii education. on based those include exclusion of forms Transgressed of voice present yet not or suppressed of course the In feeling. fellow a implies also solidarity Democratic political power” and life public in participate to abilitythe from excluded are »fellows«their when umbrage take they support. v ransfer their binding loyalties from pre from loyalties binding their ransfer i ) ) — ” Democracy Democratic solidarity can only emerge in the framework of democratic of framework the in emerge only can solidarity Democratic

( hte truh vr dsrmnto o truh aia ieute i sca r social in inequities radical through or discrimination overt through whether Pensky 2007,170 “Democr

entails the the entails hr is there atic citizens must have sufficient empathy and respect for other citizens that that citizens other for respect and empathy sufficient have must citizens atic

The desire ofself The

( Schwartz 2007,133 ack of ack appropriate institutiona ) .

iteration rights democratic democratic institu - based inclusion based

ewe dmcai isiuin ad identities. and institutions democratic between dmcai iteration “democratic - rule rule institu its and

other otnos contestation continuous n institutions and - ) modern attachments of family and clan, region and and region clan, and family of attachments modern .

people finds people 30 tions and identities and tions

of all those who are addressed by political political by addressed are who those all of Democratic solidarity calls on citizens to to citizens on solidarity calls Democratic l designsl tions aretions mutually constitutive.

ant e ue ot “h main “The out. ruled be cannot

its way its s ae rlgo, elh gne, and gender, wealth, religion, race, ”

” (

ehbb 2004 Benhabib (Bader 2007, 120) towards broader horizons of of horizons broader towards

, therefore the, therefore emergence of into democratic procedures democratic into ic polity under the rule of rule the under polity ic

decisions and laws, and laws, and decisions institutions )

the .

esources esources

hitherto hitherto

It took took It that . CEU eTD Collection f oiia pwr wees h lte age ht outy gltra, deliberative in egalitarian, democracy robustly of forms that participative argue latter the whereas power; political of control, distribution, the in and opinion, public forming in participation to claim elitis or minimalist with contrasted be can conceptions republican or maximalist equality, political Concerning equality are everyone to applying laws general in grounded be to have duties These duties. and rights general equal have must ec and democracies, modern In 2007, 141 pla game a in participants as or responsibilities, and rights equal of bearers as practices, political and social in partners equal as another one demos. the (v) social to excluding b havestates modern indubitablywhole, the On beyondcitizens endo and class native social or economic their of independent positions, and offices at chances same sphere, social the In feasible.

Democratic solidarity is rooted in the recognition of the the of recognition the in rooted is solidarity Democratic nmc S onomic.

welfare opportunities and

) inequalities with respect to individual rights, political participation individual respectinequalities equal with to access and rights, political .

“Democratic wments. wments. hotly debated. equalizing their opportunities opportunities equalizing their rc equali trict approaches t

cnmc qaiy ees o qaiig h well the equalizing to refers equality Economic qal gi equally ( oeah 2011 Gosepath four spheres of equality may be distinguished: legal, political, social political, legal, distinguished: be may equality of spheres four social cohesion is a product of the recognition that citizens give to to give citizens that recognition the of product a is cohesion social

y s ald o i te ea shr o ii fedm al citizens all freedom: civil of sphere legal the in for called is ty Te omr doae t advocates former The . td n mtvtd iies should citizens motivated and fted

( Brunkhorst 2007,106

ag ad ope soc complex and large ) .

n h ohr pee, h n the spheres, other the In 31 ( Gosepath 2011 een the most successful democratic polities in polities democratic successful most the een

e acrig o h sm rules same the to according yed ) . a citizens hat

political equality political ) ieties .

r nihr eial nor desirable neither are

have approximately the the approximately have

should tr ad esr of measure and ature - en o wlae of welfare or being

ae h same the have of members of members of and exercise exercise and ”

( Mostov ,

and and CEU eTD Collection Common p Common fundamentalism impedes emergence. its fell their difference of of recognition values and preferences different the account minimal equal other a Furthermore, community members ofits and spaces discursive Self community. the to makers decision of accountability the and community, the by makers decision of authorization legitimate the Self institutions, solidarity democratic practiced. be cannot and identities democratic (3) community’sthe material met and basic are needs that there members’ are that such wealth, that of outflow excessive the prevent to and community, the of boundaries its ofor community ofthequestion in force by domination the freedomfrom “theimplies former A r citizen’ each as well as democracy, However, O equired forthe development ofbasicequired th n iia pyia ad cnmc security economic and physical minimal members” whereas the latter entails “the capacity to generate sufficient wealth within the within wealth sufficient generate to capacity “the entails latter the whereas members” What are the preconditions for the for preconditions the are What - rule requires the creation of institutional st institutional of creation the requires rule cnrr, hy a hne te emergence the hinder may they contrary, e

re nesadn ec other each understanding - political political utr o eult ad diversity and equality of culture

within y n ea ad oiia trs Te as hv to have also They terms. political and legal in ly –

ethnic, ethnic, which i which institutions are

prerequisite ( national, clan national, William ndividuals can participate in deliberation over the good of t goodof thedeliberationover in participate ndividualscan

democratic skills andknowledge. right s are mutually constitutive. In the absence of democratic of absence the In constitutive. mutually are

emergence of democratic solidarity? democratic of emergence

hvn a omn language) common a (having s 2007, 249 - s rule also depends upon the existence existence the upon depends also rule

ad uis r vital. are duties and s f eortc solidari democratic of , etc , 32 is

lo eurd o dmcai solidarity. democratic for required also ructures capable of securing the rule of law, of rule the securing of capable ructures

–

s eurd Ctzn ms rcgie each recognize must Citizens required. is r consolidation or

) attach .

ment is not required for democracy.for required not is ment w citizens. ow

ty; whereas any form of of form any whereas ty;

f eortc solidarity. democratic of A

specific , accept accept sufficient resources h poeue of procedures the As T oleration and and oleration

n tk into take and noted noted dcto is education of shared shared above, The The he

CEU eTD Collection h Uie Ntos eonzs 9 sover 192 recognizes Nations United The 1.9 nation the and be to democracies are democracy between link inherent an is there state both of solidarity,democratic Ican of myconception outlined Having democracy of forms ( transnational of emergence the facilitate may Internet, in networks communication capitalism democraticconsciousness has the of emergence The ( self exercise members which through institutions the finance to realist of conceptions internal. than external rather that noted be to has It belonging mutuallyterritories” to exclusivestate as people by inhabited places all marks map political modern [This] lines. black by other Mondri a resembles and simplicity of quality “a has world the of conception this illustrates, nations. bounded territorially distinct, into humanity of division the i.e. order, Warkentin 2001 Warkentin 2007,249 Williams

The legitimacy ofThe legitimacy non ( - nesn 1991 Anderson centric (sometimes called realist) called (sometimes centric ) ( . ax 1950 Marx

an ) . the world are the worldare

enclosed into enclosed into global democraticstructurea painting. States are marked by different colors and separated from eachseparated from and colors bymarked different are painting.States most most - Accordingly, ) state democracies state ) f present of , .

ala, xesv commer extensive railway, otmoay ehooia invtos sc a social as such innovations, technological Contemporary not

rooted in a rooted a in theory ofdemocracy. - a sae ae o dmcai. hi svriny is sovereignty Their democratic. not are states day the state the in tts elcig h so the reflecting states eign 33 and globalist and

( Bauböck 2005,1 - centrism of the so the of centrism technological prerequisites technological

concepti

e n ipoe mas of means improved and ce now .

- )

tt; ( state; - . refute refute

ue n self and rule ons of democracy of ons - called Westphalian a Westphalian called

- the ald Westphalian called 1.10 lrt ta almost that clarity main ) , such as print print as such ,

s Bauböck As state - protection” protection” arguments - framed : (1 : .9 nd )

CEU eTD Collection form minority form (trans state one than more of territory the on located are nations Furthermore, some stateless. states, many are than so there are nations most nations fact, more possible. boundaries not is nations bounded territorially distinct, into humanity of division The neither is world nordesirable. feasible of conception a Such state. own its having of form the in determination argument, nationalist the to According (1) grounds.liberal O solidarity. of role solid hermeneutic and social the to referring grounds state the to democracy tying for argue may one above, discussed As assimilation who ofthose areor forced perceived belonging as not nation. the to be can boundaries membership the Alternatively, nation of trinity the restore to seek movements disaster is borders state and boundaries national between desirable not is project nationalist universal The one of members nation specific live: only always will ethno some there remain where territory a delimit to possible not simply is it cases, most It ethno every of program nationalist universal the of realization the limit nations of number great the does only Not ne ne arity. In the previous section I argued that this position confuse position this that argued I section previous the In arity. may also also may

of nations most of the time do not coincide with state boundaries. As a matter of matter a As boundaries. state with coincide not do time the of most nations of - argue nations within a state state a (sub within nations

for

- nation having its state, but also the territorial enmeshment o enmeshment territorial the also but state, its having nation bounding democracy to states to democracy bounding - state nations). state 34

- vr ethno every state “corr

ihr Te tuge for struggle The either. - territory by changing state boundaries. state changing by territory

ected” on

- national minorities.national

- (1) prone. -

ain a te ih t self to right the has nation by the extermination, expulsion expulsion extermination, bythe (non omn ainl utr and culture national common

- Irredentist and secessionist and Irredentist nati state - liberal s

democratic with ethnic with democratic n iea nationalist liberal on ) nationali ons), while others while ons),

h congruence the

st and (2 and st f nations. f The - ) CEU eTD Collection positive liberties of its subjectspositive ofits liberties that may be exerci were it if even illegitimate be would rule authoritarian and foreign that fact the by example, for shown, is government well and security, freedom, instrumental only not is community political governing self a in membership which for tradition, republican the from emerges argument third A protection effective and against aggression outside from security domestic citizens their offer can states only by and maintained states, and created orders legal within only guaranteed be can rights social basic individual for necessity functional well its and autonomy in sovereignty state of value moral the grounds argument liberal second A autonomy. individual of value basic the from derives which value, s attributed be can liberties fundamental their of exercise the in form individuals 2007 ( order. global normative supra and etc.) village, city, brief In intr and political should Why order. instrumental political the realize to unable be states sovereign global as established not are that communities normative a of blocks building only the be explainwhyshould fail to states thirdand the second whilesocieties, ofmodern conditions order Westphalian n However, 2 ) Li ) beral political philosophers offer three argument three offer philosophers political beral .

is, tts a b cnevd s soitos f hi ctzn. l ascain that associations All citizens. their of associations as conceived be can states First, , the , insic values ofself re are no reasons to exclude well exclude to reasons no are re n o tee he agmns s ufcet o upr te omtv bs o the of base normative the support to sufficient is arguments three these of one . The first leads to a strange anarchic utopia that is far removed from the from removed far is that utopia anarchic strange a to leads first The . - en i cmlx oen societies. modern complex in being

- government - - en bt sas a nrni value. intrinsic an also is but being state (e.g. the the (e.g. state

( Bauböck 2007, 89 sed in an enlightened way and secured all the negative and and negative the all secured and way enlightened an in sed

( Baubö

invoked in support of the secondinvoked support ofthe argument. in European Union) European - established s established 35 ck 2007,90 ck

) .

s for the moral value of states of value moral for the s ly important for securing individual individual securing for important ly

ub ) niiul li Individual ?

- state (regional, municipal, local,municipal, (regional, state political communities from the the from communities political

h ihrn vle f self of value inherent The ete ad lis to claims and berties ome moral ome

( Bauböck

- -

CEU eTD Collection h global the powerful a necessarilyimply and democ Global have global political democratic community? a sovere of distribution vertical the of limits the are What 1.10 of second kind a decentralization, and centralization both is need we “what sovereignty: of distribution ma would vertically. dispersed and divided be can defensible longer no is the Pogge that suggests global to stateof states Walzer identifies structure

egalitarian demos would deliberate and decide on certain common matters. It would not not would It matters. common certain on decide and deliberate would demos egalitarian Against global democracyAgainst global .

- ke the st the ke away decentralization order from level ay ol ipy ht global a that imply would racy

n alct ohr optnis o ainl n local and national to competencies other allocate and seven constellations ate the dominant political unit political dominant the ate

( ( concentration ofsovereignty global politicalsystem ofthe level one at 2004 Pogge 1992 Pogge

) world .

state as it is possible to shift only limited comp limited only shift to possible is it as state ) .

on As the history of federalist regimes show, sovereignty show, regimes federalist of history the As a continuum a hr ae no are There the now dominantlevelthe state” ofthe 36 ,

conscious, stable, institutionalized, inclusive institutionalized, stable, conscious,

( 60 )

. ranging from the conception rangingof an conception the from

Accordingly, he proposes the vertical the proposes he Accordingly, ignty? Is it possible and desirable to desirable and possible it Is ignty? such oe ucin woe exercise whose functions core

ees in levels ( 58 etencies to etencies

) a .

federal federal archy archy , CEU eTD Collection o aoih oeegt. ( sovereignty. abolish not organizations financial and political ( sovereignty. state of name the in act that governments ( under communities. political other all Hardly any of notion society. international of powers lesser the all over power great single a of hegemony the conceptualizes empire, multinational ( serving acrossoperating bordersand constraints strengthen onstate to the action. i iv Acrig o h cnet f nrh o sae, hr ae o fetv aet ecp the except agents effective no are there states, of anarchy of concept the to According ) Te federation The ) (i)anarchy of single head” single head” states global state

cosmopolitan theori cosmopolitan Figure organizations could lead to lead to could “terrifying despotism” international 1

(ii) states (ii)states World orders World on orders a plainly f nation of with iii Atr ht a lrlt o itrainl soitos s added is associations international of plurality a that, After ) refer

st argue -

tts niin a ntd tts f h World. the of States United a envisions states led Kant Already s organizations a Romana Pax international international associations

continuum (iii) states (iii)states to centralized rule of the whole rule centralized ofthe world. to are added, with a kind of authority that limits but does does but limits that authority of kind a with added, are with and s

for a world government at the price of elimination of ofelimination price the at government world a for

ranginganarc the from

a sc a itrainl eie ( regime. international an such was ttd ht “a that stated federationof states (iv)

( ii Kant 1983[1784],310

) Next, Next, ) hy of to state global states

multinational cosmopolitan the plurality of international international of plurality the empire (v)

commonwealth )

. (vi)global

state

( vi

v ) The The ) ) The The

CEU eTD Collection competent executivecompetent branch governmen national bindingfor be would decisions whose competencies, usual the with justice criminal of court a of construction the second, level;national electionsthe above direct through parliament world who but nationality, their through mediated be longer no would organizations world in membership whose citizens,” “world of status political new a of creation the first, goals: specific three pursue cosmopolitans Contemporary created were non order democraticcosmopolitan a if democracy of itself very of the idea contradiction a be would “It cosmopolitan the introduce to willing states democratic of C development” of ( paths and cultures political traditions, constitutional different between community political global single be would citizenship of change and emigration particular, In decision and interest common 232 1995, demo global of societies” civil and states democratic “enlightened pioneering the I (1) properly. function would not unlike (1) is constellation a such However, Bauböck 2007 ontemporary cos ontemporary n order to establish global democratic institutions, consensus institutions, democratic global establish to order n - making )

on (i) on ) .

( the normative framework within which to deliberate together about a global a about together deliberate to which within framework normative the Buchanan and KeohanBuchanan and mopoli s s el fnly dsatig h U Scrt Cucl n aor of favour in Council Security UN the dismantling finally, well; as ts - (ii) voluntarily, that is,voluntarily, coercively” that tan thinkers rather advocat rather thinkers tan h cmo dmi a te pr the as domain common the

(

Archibugi 1995 , s el s paeu cmeiin an competition “peaceful as well as e 2006,416 e ly to be established, and and established, be to ly

) 38 a in representation popular have instead would .

) e a voluntary and growing confederation confederation growing and voluntary a e .

( 231

) democratic law democratic pr ujc o gl of subject oper .

impossible must be reached be must (2) even if established, it established, if even

in the context of a a of context the in

d mutual learning learning mutual d ( Held 1995, 1995, Held bl collective obal cracy

amongst ( 229 Held

) a .

CEU eTD Collection permanent minorities permanent one that so preferences distinct with groups insular and discrete into divided be not should demos m to submitting imp risks the accept to willing be will minorities that humanity whole the among F population authority the how doubtful it but is sacrosanct, not else somewhere with constituency combined a forming by delegate a elect only could Slovakia and Zealand, New India nearly190 delegates, to suppose and into humanity (i) impart an in needed is what that suppose might we rights, human protecting or war, of forms certain prohibiting those as such rules, of body a on agreement substantial already is there “where However, greenhouse gases. themselves globalwould subject authority a div to more in humanity as such issues, of range limited very a on for As (ii) or global democracy to be possible, there must sufficient convergence of convergence sufficient must there possible, be to democracy global or As

for oe usata gop awy ls ot n mjrt voting. majority a in out lose always groups substantial more

(

determining the determining Habermas and Cronin 2006, 143 2006, Cronin and Habermas ( the normative framework, framework, normative the Miller 2010,150 a global assembly were to have 1000 members, Chin members, 1000 have to were assembly global a of a body composed according to any any to according composed body a of equal constituencies equal ajoritarian decision procedures decision ajoritarian

ial judicial body to apply these rules to particular cases, not a series of series a not cases, particular to rules these apply to body judicial ial

( ( Miller 2010, 149 2010, Miller Christiano 2010,130

scope ) . 170, the USA to 45, whereas countries such as Norway, Ireland, Ireland, such as Norway, countries 45,whereas USAto 170, the

of .

global democracy, consensus is likely to be to likely is consensusdemocracy, global If we follow the logic of one of logic the follow we If

many people would be prepared to put themselves under themselvesunder put preparedtobe would many people ) hr i ulkl t b cness n o t divide to how on consensus be to unlikely is there .

Certainly the principle of equal constituency sizes is is sizesconstituency equal of principle the Certainly preventing wars of aggression of wars preventing ) ) . .

39 It is very improbabl very is It

(

Miller 2010, 145 2010, Miller formula isive issues issues )

e - . a would be entitled to over to entitled be would a

derived from the size of of size the from derived one person

In other word other In that national governments national that such as the reduction of reduction such as the

hr sol nt be not should There

and crimes against crimes and interests and belief and interests - vote one vote

reache s, the global the s, sd by osed d only d - value

CEU eTD Collection may look very different forelitesmayvery forth and different look social universality greater into other solidarities particularistic from escaping of idea the to […] connections belongings particular beyond reach to capacities differential people give thinking. are others what understand to are people if globe, speeches” pamphlets, newspapers, “books, emerge, to parties political global for order In 2010, 152 repres to room candidate symbolic. and expressive entirely be its democracy, (2) the of because ofthe partiesinterests involved” inconsistent and biased be to out turn might which decisions democratic political the that one recognizescommunity indeed is invoked principle the (because valid facie prima are that requir deliberation democratic words, other In powerpoliticsclassical “ instrumental beyond Understanding control. popular and deliberation democratic for room limited very a the to individuals connected society parties political global if Even »ae« compr »naked« a Even if consensus if Even

) to support. If the global assembly is kept to a reasonable size, there would be no be would there size, reasonable a to kept is assembly global the If support. to .

- rational agreements would be difficult, as well as democratic deliberation, thus deliberation, democratic as well as difficult, be would agreements rational

n te iegn pltcl fiitos f h ctzny f ot states most of citizenry the of affiliations political diverging the ent quality is bound to b to bound is quality ms formation omise ) and appeals that are purely private convictions (or to interests dressed dressed interests to (or convictions purelyprivate are that appeals and ) could be could ” ( Habermas 2001,109

reached on the normative framework and the scope of global of scope the and framework normative the on reached

( mre aog dooia lns n a es goa civil global dense a and lines ideological along emerged Miller 2010,Miller 151 e poor. e

It is unclear on what basis would citizens decide decide citizens would basis what on unclear is It ctivities of the global legislative power legislative global the of ctivities ol sml rfet ak h esnil featu essential the back reflect simply would ose with fewer resources fewer ose with Popular control Popular ( 40 il 81 132 1861, Mill ) global discursive places discursive global es distinguishing between appeals to principle principle to appeals between distinguishing es .

) .

over democratic decisions would would decisions democratic over However, )

must reach all corners of the the of corners all reach must ” ( Calhoun 2003,Calhoun 537

“differential resources resources “differential are needed. The same The needed. are , there would be be would there ,

( e of res Miller which ) .

CEU eTD Collection neither is democracy nordesirable. feasible global however, legitimate; and real are democracy of forms state critiques. nationalist liberal and nationalist, liberal, their as well as multitude) and post of normativethe importance dissertation: the of problem theoretical central the of review critical a provided chapter This accepted. convictions) as up

- oiia apasl f rnntoa sldrte (uh s hois f lbl ii society civil global of theories as (such solidarities transnational of appraisal political

Having developed my own conception of democratic solidarity, I argued that non that argued I solidarity, democratic of conception own my developed Having

( ilr 09 208 2009, Miller

transnational theory. fordemocratic solidarities

) .

On a global level level global a On 41

few such principles principles such few I refuted both the the I refutedboth (multicultu could be be could ralist) - CEU eTD Collection crossed the crossed the 2002 Subcontinent Indian the to evidence) linguistic on 9 embracing potentially nation dispersed stateless a form people Romani that argue activists and scholars Several 2.1 of the relevan profound and direct have but problems purelyethnographic not are These appellations. clarifies and Roma” study.case the introduces chapter This fromtaxes collected “the so 11 Egypt.Roma to 10 ofRomani (e.g. dialect Bulgaria).and Romania in Spain) in Gitanos or Hungary in Romungro (e.g. extent large a to culturally and linguistically assimilated have groups Some customs. different developed 2002 t from Europe, throughout settled and area the fled Balk the in fought being was war while 1500, and 1350 Between

The first evidence of Romani presence in Europe is from 1283 in a document from Constantine referring to referring Constantine from document a in 1283 from is Europe in presence Romani of evidence first The there that noted be to is It

) ) . . Who the Roma? are ‘

10 Roma Roma issue Different The case of of case The

It is assumed that Roma left India in different waves from around 1000 AD and and AD 1000 around from waves different in India left Roma that assumed is It Bosporus

dialects have emerged; the subgroups converted to different religions, and and religions, different to converted subgroups the emerged; have dialects ’

in the the in international arena.

ce for normative analysis. The bulk of th of bulk The analysis. normative for ce into Europe in the the in 13 late Europe into - - calledT andEgyptians are alternative ethnomythologies, for instance some communities trace the roots of roots the trace communities some instance for ethnomythologies, alternative are 12 million people from all over the world tra world the over all from people million 12

oma: context and historical ove historical and context oma:

It discusses the controversial question of “who are the are “who of question controversial the discusses It Chapter 2 Chapter sigani”.

42 th

century.

he Mediterranean to Scandinavia to Mediterranean he ( hoge 1997 Gheorghe

e chapter analyses the analyses chapter e whereas ans, many Romani speakers Romani many ans, cing their origins (based (based origins their cing ; u 2001 Guy tes tl speak still others rview ; Hancock

( genesis Matras a CEU eTD Collection employment, self including culture shared (iii) kinship; and descent ancestry, common (ii) and dispersion; Europe, to migration origin, Indian discussed above the (i) academia: in constructed M co Roma Vlax a studyof anthropological his of basis the on arguesStewart Michael diaspora. Romani the to debated nation Roma the with identify or to belong not do groups Romani allegedly certain that argue and diaspora a such constitute people Romani that dispute activists and scholars some However, by existe the created is unity ethnic of illusion “The marker. ethnic important an is Roma of discrimination of idiom the and sharing of ethos brotherhood the things, doing of way Gypsy the th individualism, to refers Stewart instance For worldview. or mind of state character, spirit, distinctive a of basis the on constructed be also ethnicitycan Roma (iv) Gypsyinstitutions ofElders such as the Law the orGypsy Council council, ( funera death, marriage, hygiene, cooking, food, clothes, virginity,puberty, baptism, childbirth, pregnancy, to relating customs and laws behaviour; of codes and rituals dress, ayall ayall ( a y lso 2002 Blasco y Gay ( – 2004

for instance for The Gypsies of Europe have not thought of themselves as a diaspora population, population, diaspora a as themselves of thought not have Europe of Gypsies The India display but fact. this in nointerest ancesto their that know they Thus significant. is present the in action joint in rooted identity an only Forthem is Gypsies. ordinary for so not this imagined, and felt genuinely the is Gypsies to the of return origin ethnic common to the chance the by happy quite blessedand homeless are until They homeland. exile of existence an out eking

nce ofnce common threat a

( knowledge of a dialect of Romani, ideology of travelling, distinctive habitat, habitat, distinctive travelling, of ideology Romani, of dialect a of knowledge ) mmunity dialectHungary a ofRomani):do speak (who in 1996

distin ) . () ial, eeec t te itr ad rsn preuin and persecution present and history the to reference Finally, (v) ; guishes five components on the basis of which Gypsy ethnicity is is ethnicity Gypsy which of basis the on components five guishes –

whether Gitano, Kale, Manouche, Sinti, and Traveller groups belong belong groups Traveller and Sinti, Manouche, Kale, Gitano, whether ; kl 1997 Okely -

racism ; twr 1996 Stewart ” 43 ( Acto

( n and Gheorghen and 2001,59 Stewart 1996,92 ; ilm ad uasn 2000 Lucassen and Willems thus. […] thus. i sne f gltraim and egalitarianism of sense eir rs are said to come from come to said are rs )

While for intellectuals for While

Romani Kris Romani ) .

ls; special ls; ) . It is is It . ).

- CEU eTD Collection onais r mr rgd n eti cutis i Blai alm Bulgaria in countries: certain in rigid more are boundaries identify persons of number the with overlap usually complicate further To differences. ofthose aware not village. one (sub within even hand, important, other the on emerged; have solidarity Romani of nation assess to success ofthe It the is difficult term pejorative appellations as cigány, cikan the of dissemination the on agreed and hymn, a flag, national a adopted America North and Asia as well as Europe Eastern and Central held Congress Roma World first the to back nation activism. civic and political permeate conceptions and definitions Academic andand (speakingHungarian) Boyash andofHungarianRomanian). old an dialect V Hungarian), only (speaking Romungro country: their in live communities 13 12 label authorities Italian instance, For well. as communities sedentary embrace nowadays Voy categories legal and occupational administrative, Furthermore, of way th noted be to has It third one only Hungary ( in whereas Roma, themselves identify also Roma as perceived Szelényi and LadányiSzelényi and 2001

AllfromthemderivedGreek aretheof meaning term ‘athinganos’ outcast. o isac i Hnay ey e gj (o Rm) r aae f h fc ta tre ifrn Roma different three that fact the of aware are Roma) (non gajo few very Hungary in instance For g, aiat, oai r ehiie udr h ubel tr of term umbrella the under ethnicized are Nomadi Camimanti, age, - building project unifying various ethnic groups under the label label the under groups ethnic various unifying project building s uh i te otx o scooia rsace o ofca cnue) Te ethnic The censuses). official or researches sociological of context the (in such as ie ol fv pret f l ‘ all of percent five only life, at although in several countries Roma are still associated with an itinerantan with associated still are Roma countries several in although at perceived

matters

group of those stigmatized as stigmatized those of group ) .

, the group of those who identify themselves as themselves identify who those of group the , 13 s oa s uh ihr hn h nme o toe who those of number the than higher much is Roma as

Howev , Zigeuner, tzigane, zingaro. Roma er, 44 in 1971 near London. Delegates from Western, from Delegates London. near 1971 in - building. On h mjrt (non majority the ’

ae oai o semi or nomadic have ‘ cigány ‘ Roma the the ’ ,

one hand, transnational forms transnational hand, one ‘ such ’ lax Roma (speaking both Romani both (speaking Roma lax - - tsigane

oa scey s generally is society Roma) s tre quarter three ost gop ifrne remain differences )group 12 o elc sc typically such replace to

as Travellers, Gens du du Gens Travellers, as ‘ Roma ’ , etc. In etc. , - nomadic lifestyle. lifestyle. nomadic The roots of the the of roots The ’ ‘

Roma ‘ can be traced traced be can Roma

general, the general, s

f those of ’

’ do not not do ,

self thus - CEU eTD Collection capitalism had dram had capitalism s state from transition the that documented and accepted widely similarly is It historical haveand deep roots epistemic Physical beyond. and Europe contemporary in racism and prejudices of range alik scholars and Activists language Romani observation ofcertain the taboos and or Cant of knowledge employment, self occupation, caravan with identified rather are Roma all, at relevant not is colour skin UK, the as such countries, heterogeneous more In marker. homogenous a is colour skin largelydarker thus minority ethnic visible only ethnically the form Roma Hungary, in instance, For contexts. national and local on depends are Roma the who to answer common the Accordingly, nom Roma European Eastern (sedentary) immigrant 1988 every the within occurring racism or domination gender and cultural/social of modes on based is concept Spivak’s marginalizationis destructiondistortingofsubalternreality. ofwayone’salways theunderstanding and unde of ways western of domination 14 it, hide nor it, of rid get neither can they and identity ascribed an is it many For upon. down st being means contexts most in Roma being brief, In housing), and education even and physical violence. anti of strengthening the with coupled to conditions living class working decentfrom sank and income of sourcestable and legal their lost Roma of masses companies, 200 Wilkens

Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, postcolonial theorist evoked the term of 'epistemic violence' which refers to the to refers which violence' 'epistemic of term the evoked theorist postcolonial Spivak, Chakravorty Gayatri ) adi. adi.

forms of anti of forms 5 ; zlni n Ldni 2006 Ladányi and Szelényi Pierre Bourdieu Pierre atic consequences for most Roma most for consequences atic

- Roma violence are persistent in both Eastern and Western Europe Western and Eastern both in persistent are violence Roma e argue that persons perceived ‘ perceived persons that argue e

( ’s notion of symbolic violence accounting for the tacit almost unconscious unconscious almost tacit the for accounting violence symbolic of notion ’s Clark 2004 Clark sadn i cnrs o non to contrast in rstanding

the margins of society. Their massive impoverishment was impoverishment massive Their society. of margins the - Roma sentiments, leading to increased segregation (in (in segregation increased to leading sentiments, Roma ; Hancock 2002 45 ) .

‘ ih h clas o piaiain f state of privatization or collapse the With nomads

( - ( western ways of knowledge production. The The production. knowledge of ways western Ivanov 2003 Ivanov igmatized, discriminated, discriminated, igmatized, RyderGreenfields 2011 and ’

; and put them in caravans in in caravans in them put and Gypsy Heuss 2000 –

i.e. who are perceived Roma Roma perceived are who i.e. ’

(cigány, cikán, etc.) face a face etc.) cikán, (cigány, ; Ringold, Orenstein, and Orenstein, Ringold, ; - day social spaces. social day Kóczé 2011 , symbolic, and symbolic, , n important n caim to ocialism and and ) ) . .

looked looked ( campi Spivak –

CEU eTD Collection h floig a rcptlts h etmtd boue n rltv nme o Romani of number in populations Europe. relative and absolute estimated the recapitulates map following The rich heritage, a entails cultural cu Music Roma, being hand, other the On it. change nor

Figure stoms, traditions, language, 2

Romani in Europe populations 46

a, oah Sno o Manoush or Sinto, Boyash, ian, or gastronomy.or

also also

CEU eTD Collection all. admi an mainly is ‘Roma’ that argues movement, Romani international the of figure key a Gheorghe, Nicolae 2007, 11 Gypsie Sinti, which of designations, other include to understood be should it that effect the to official note bya followed ‘Roma’ term the and use to bodies activists scholars, of practice the become and has ‘Roma’ it years, to the ‘Gypsies’ Over ‘Travellers’. and ‘nomads’ from 1995 around shifted usage where reports te the brought after 1989 that upheaval geopolitical was It the founded. had Roma even that by organizations used was ‘Gypsy’ term the so known, scarcely was it 1980s the before However, ‘Roma’. First the above, noted As 2.2 oai ilcs 'oa ol mas hsad' n i nt n tnnm Te adjective The ethnonym. an not is and 'husbands' means only 'Roma' dialects, Romani /fe (masculine Romni Rom/ word the use and language, Romani the of dialects various the of more or one speak, to used that argue scholars Some

Appellations ) .

( label as others by defined are they since treatment racist or discriminatory of experience the share who people the all and identities to process ongoing a of an is Itrights. and programsfunds, benefit definition from to supposed is groupwhich target the on based be to has making policy public However, realities. categoriza of forms Imbuingsuch groups individuals. and different variety hugeaof together pulls which categorization of act very the by constructed is category Roma The Gheorghe 2011 rm ‘Roma’ to the fore. This was reflected in the European institutions’ texts and institutions’texts European the in reflected wasThis fore. the to ‘Roma’rm nistrative and institutional term that serves the needs of policy making above above making policy of needs the serves that term institutional and nistrative l d hs a cn e automatical be can way this ed

tion with institutional power means to reify rather fluid belongings and and belongings fluid rather reify to means power institutional with tion

h tr sol apy ny o hs gop wo ihr pa, or speak, either who groups those to only apply should term the ol Rm Cnrs are o te ismnto o te term the of dissemination the on agreed Congress Roma World ) . minine singular) and Roma (plural) as an ethnonym. In some some In ethnonym. an as (plural) Roma and singular) minine

rae cnet f oa ht nopse te vernacular the encompasses that Roma of concept a create 47

, n Taees r js a few a just are Travelers and s, y eeie b te ocp o Roma of concept the by redefined ly Gypsy

or Tsigan . All who had been been had who All .

( Liégeois –

CEU eTD Collection peltos nld Sni i Germ (in Sinti include appellations groups Other distinguish to prefer Vlax themselves from R contexts several individuals us Never theby self who those accept pejorative considered often now are They exonyms. be to them believed have may the majority where countries new to Roma by along carried been have may and societies majority They terms. umbrella worldwide as used sometimes also are etc.) Cingene, Ciganyok, Zigeuner, Cikani, Zingari, Tsigane, (Gitanos, 'Gypsies' words The nouns the than application Alexander 2005,31 ethnonymic wider so is 'Roma' much word The 'Rom/Romni/Roma'. a however, has, 'Romani' various reasons specifi in that mind in bear should we However, ‘Roma’. term the use to prefer bodies international most zingari, cigány, appellations contexts place labellingtakes ethnic Inbrief, France,(England, Australia, NorthAmerica, Basque country,Scandinavia). USA), the and America, Latin Portugal, Spain, (in Kale France), (in Manush theless, they are embraced by many who reject the term 'Roma,' with some groups or or groups some with 'Roma,' term the reject who many by embraced are they theless,

which are which ing these terms interchangeably ing terms these cnet ti ubel tr my agnlz te oc o toe who those of voice the marginalize may term umbrella this contexts c -

igitcly assim linguistically prefer not be labelled ‘Roma’. be not prefer ) .

considered Roma (by international organizations) but have other self other have but organizations) international (byRoma considered - appellation 'Roma'.appellation s in specific contexts and reflects power relations. In most most relations.In power reflects and contexts specific in s ltd ougo r uiin omnte i Hungary in communities Musician or Romungro ilated n, uti, oten tl, egu, rne etc.), France, Belgium, Italy, Northern Austria, any, or ienr ae eaie onttos ta i why is that connotations, negative have zigeuner oma and call call and oma themselves ‘cigány’.

48 ( me Klímová

ie as ue a a adjective an as used also times - Alexander 2005,31

ee rgnly ond by coined originally were

) .

and and For example, For example,

Romanichal Romanichal

( Klímová –

for for in - - CEU eTD Collection draw on the mythdraw onthe world boostcredibility its to outside and the with tried or work, have to some though myth, of realm the to families belong part, their for 'kings', gettingGypsy taxes. collecting order, keeping of charge take to someone wanting princes 'chieGypsy used. occasionally'lord' was Scotland in lieutenant. by led be to claimed France century society, surrounding imitate, and to, adapt to effort an In sparse. of history The 2.3 relations. i become has it which through processes the analyze and practice ethnopolitical of category a as ‘Roma’ to refer I study case the In 15 youthGypsy periodicals, Yugoslavia Bulgaria, 1920s the By Popovand 2004,72 later centuries Gyps Empire Ottoman the in that given Peninsula Balkan grassroots first The

More preciselyMoreand Slovenes”it was“KingdomCroats calledthetime. of that Serbs,

- - The originsof

and possessed civil consciousness and ab and consciousness civil possessed and both for personal ends a ends personal for both

–

Common equivalents in Hungary and Poland were were Poland and Hungary in equivalents Common

unlike the Gypsies in Central and Western Europe who achieved this status much status this achieved who Europe Western and Central in Gypsies the unlike fee mta a mutual offered

( Marushiakova and Popov 2004, 74 Marushiakova Popov and 2004, - Roma 30s Romani organizations of more collective form started to function in in function to started form collective more of organizations Romani 30s ) Roma .

R organizations is not linear and the organizations' roots, though deep, are deep, though organizations'roots, the and linear not is organizations 15 omani activism Rmna n Gec. hs organiza These Greece. and Romania ,

organizations emerged in the first half of the 20 the of half first the in emerged organizations ssac i scns ad death, and sickness in ssistance

nd in an effort to elicit respect from those around them them around those from respect elicit to effort an in nd comtes comtes

siuinlzd n etece i international in entrenched and nstitutionalized or 49 dues;

) ility to fight for their rights their for fight to ility .

fs' could be created or appointed by local bylocal appointed or created be could fs' later the terms changed to to changed terms the later e hd ii rgt sne h 15 the since rights civil had ies

voivode, vajda, wojt vajda, voivode, r promot or tions tions

( Liégeois207 2007, Ro

ulse ter own their published mani d h euain of education the ed th

( rus n 15 in groups century on the the on century Marushiakova Marushiakova capitaine and and ) vataf, .

- and

to th th

CEU eTD Collection often headed by non by headed often the of institution ‘ the on, Later Gypsies. the for privileges granting into rulers European t according leaders their presenting of case a is This Egypt”. Little of “princes other and Panuel”, and Mihali Andrash, dukes the Sindel, “king their noted sources historical the century 15th the in Europe Western to came Gypsies kn well is which phenomenon, a is population) surrounding the of so the of institution T 1920s. the the massive in abolitionGypsies. 1840s 1850s. is among and The It resulted the of migration until Roma Romania, of principalities founding the Moldavia, and Wallachia In politics. Gypsy of landscape the changed migration 19 the of half second the In kin next Inthe idea. 1936 support forhis seek England to trave and Uganda) (namely Africa in be should state the that idea the support to began he trip his After Ganges). river the of shores the along (somewhere trave Kwiek II Michal sta own their have could Gypsies the so se Kwiek Jozef king Gypsy elected newly the 1934 In state. the for territory for search in taken state, independent an about ideas the to wa dynasty Kwiek The Gypsies Gypsy kings Gypsy his id his nt a delegation to the United Nations to ask for land in Southern Africa (namely Namibia) Namibia) (namely Africa Southern in land for ask to Nations United the to delegation a nt Kelderara ea is related to the so called ‘ called so the to related is ea

( Marushiakova and Popov 2004, 76 Marushiakova Popov and 2004,

’

settled in Poland that the idea about a Gypsy state occurred for the first time in time first the for occurred state Gypsya about idea the that Poland in settled appeared in in appeared - called called - Gypsies l s something totally new in the in new totally something s led to India in order to specify the location of the fu the of location the specify to order in India to led ‘ the the th Gypsy kings Gypsy

century and the first decades of the 20 century, ample waves of waves ample century, 20 the of decades first the and century who were responsible to the state for co for state the to responsible were who Polish Commonwealth in the 17th the in Commonwealth Polish –

Gypsykings Kalderash ’

(or rather an imitation of an institution for the sake sake the for institution an of imitation an rather (or Romanestan e hr. t h sm tm te ‘alternative’ the time same the At there. te o the general terminology in order to mislead the mislead to order in terminology general the o ) .

50 and

’

from dynasty (or rather family) Kwiek. The The Kwiek. family) rather (or dynasty from

lx Rom Vlax

history

(land of the Roma). Initiatives were were Initiatives Roma). the of (land g, heir to Joseph, Janusz Kwiek, sent Kwiek, sent Janusz g, Joseph, to heir

of Roma of communities l led to Czechoslovakia and and Czechoslovakia to led – 18th c 18th own in history. Since the Since history. in own . It was closely related related closely was It . the from taxes llecting entury ture Gypsy state Gypsy ture -

ee enslaved were . It was most most was It .

king king CEU eTD Collection From the 1960s, the UN has inspired the creation (although often only on paper) of a number a of paper) on only often (although creation the inspired has UN the 1960s, the From 2.4 activismRomani paralyzed moder nascent the left Roma of extermination and persecution systemic The War. World Both Alexander 2005,15 th in place took never congresses such Romani However, international congresses. attend to delegates Romani for grants travel obtain to planned and country, every in societies affiliated pan and committees international form to an decided Union of The Congress. form the in body international permanent a creating of Union ofRoma fathered Romania leadersidea in General the ofthe period, In interwar the Gy the where Italy) by occupied time that (at Abyssinia in land some for asking Mussolini to delegation a cultura and standards living improving of goals the Although culture. national promoting and bycreating state a to right the with nation of organizationsgoal, Along as a the passports. workedtowards legitimization Roma this with issuing the with Roma for status international recognized a win least alternativelyat or to reparations, Holocaust bycollective gained be to moneythrough and UN T mostly Middle some also NorthAmerican but Eastern and members. European enlisted organizations.These structures and instruments discourse, UN through Roma world's of he main goal of the early organizations was to establish a Romani state with the help of the the of help the with state Romani a establish to was organizations early the of goal main he

nentoa Rmn ubel ognztos ht atd o dac te neet o the of interests the advance to wanted that organizations umbrella Romani international

national and international Romani political aspirations were crushed during the Second Second the during crushed were aspirations political Romani international and national The W orld psies could have their own state have their could psies R ) omani .

C for over a decade after the war for over decade a ongresses

ad oa ulfig f h Rm wr usually were Roma the of uplifting moral and l ( 51 Marushiakova Popov and 2004,77

( Klímová itra p interwar e - Alexander 2005,15

of international Romani international of eriod

) .

( Klímová - Romani Romani ) .

n - CEU eTD Collection declared that “Alldeclared R hearts” becau Roma are there where everywhere is state “our phrase the and different across identities way)Romani (our drom” Romano“amaro based of principlethe was concept leading The countries. communal of variety a encompass to name official the const was ‘Roma’ term the Hence label. ethnic new a of dissemination the on agreed and hymn, a and flag national a adopted Congress Romani World First the of delegates The Indian governmentthe Klímová Rom International America. North and Asia as well as Europe Eastern and Central Western, from participants attracting London, near 1971, Wo First the into crystallized attempts these 1970s the By aspirations Alexander 2005,16 nationalist the to secondary remained always have they declared, movement theystillthough Gypsies.arethe activeamong Pentecostalinthe Laterdifferent the churchon particular. Evangelicalin interestlost t churches 17 Eastern from which of out 2 (Yugoslavia Europe countries, Czechoslovakia)andand observers” 8 from delegates listed congress the of “documents that argues Popov 16 towards progress"own path their out seek to right the have people Roma "The Congress: the up summed slogan single A annually. celebrated be to henceforth Day, Roma become should opened, had Congress established were add In

The first congresses were organized « organized were congresses first The Marushia whereas participated, countries 14 of representatives Klímová, and Acton to According ition, commissions for social affairs, war crimes, language standardization and culture culture and standardization language crimes, war affairs, social for commissions ition,

( - auhaoa n Ppv 04 78 2004, Popov and Marushiakova Alexander 2001, 158 2001, Alexander ( Fosztó 2003, 112 2003, Fosztó

) oma brothers”oma are a ognzto ta hd en fou been had that organization (an .

( Fosztó 2003,112

( Liégeois 214 2007,

) , 16

and it was funded by the World Council of Churches of Council World the by funded was it and

with the support of Evangelical churches working among the Gypsies, the among working churches Evangelical of support the with The Congress was formally organized by the the by organized formally was Congress The ) .

It was also decided that 8 April, the da the April, 8 that decided also was It

( Liégeois 2007,213 ) .

) 52 .

Expressing a powerful feeling of unity, they they unity, of feeling powerful a Expressing (

) 2004, 78 2004, » .

( Marushiakova and Popov 2004, 79 Marushiakova2004, Popov and ) . dd n ai i 1965) in Paris in nded

) rld Romani Congress held in April in held Congress Romani rld .

se R se omanestan is in our in is omanestan te on which the which on te heworldRomani )

( Acton and and Acton ( Klímová ructed as ructed oa and kova Comité 17

and -

CEU eTD Collection h ft o te oa ne te ai eie ad h polm rltd ih reparation with related problems the and regime, Nazi the under Roma the of fate the topic fordiscussion The AssociationPeoples. main support ofthe forThreatened w the with the 1981 In UN system to them enable to time con to time from (NGOs) organisations brings nongovernmental which together category, 'Roster' the in status observer granted was IRU 1979, in result, a I hand, other “mother the was India and relations On India. and Roma ofthe between recognition mutual reinforcement the by marked was Congress Romani World second The Congress Romani World second the organized IRU Hence congress. new a hold to 1977 in founded the organization, new a by over taken was Slobodan role president, Berbersiki, ofits the After death the o Councilca an on Council Social and Economic the to contribute to able being as them recognises it and field, their in expertise international acknowledged with NGOs of consists 18 the warand changescold Europe Eastern in non practically became IRU of activities the congress the After administration and German experiences government the Germany with their Organizationsdemands. from shared

oren er la years Fourteen tribute their expertise to the Economic and Social Council and to other bodies within the within bodies other to and Council Social and Economic the to expertise their tribute rry iscorrespondinglyrry enhanced

that

18 German Sinti League League Sinti German ndia expressed its support for the demands of the Roma at the United Nations. United at As the Roma ofthe demands support forthe its expressed ndia

( was held in Geneva in was held 19 in Liégeois 2007,214 e, n ac 19, t sau ws prdd o aeoy 1 Cnuttv. hs category This Consultative. 11: Category to upgraded was status its 1993, March in ter, ( Fosztó 2003,113 - onr” f h Roma the of country”

) . in Götingen organized the third World Romani Congress, Congress, Romani World third the organized Götingen in ( Liégeois214 2007, ) .

( Acton and KlímováActon and ( Marushiakova Popov and 2004,79 53

nentoa Rmn Union Romani International (

auhaoa n Ppv 04 79 2004, Popov and Marushiakova ngoing basis: the weight that their proposals to the the to proposals their that weight the basis: ngoing ) . the

one han one of the of the - Alexander 2001,160 - d, the congress declared that declared congress the d, existent until the end of the the of end the until existent Comité International Rom International Comité

(IRU) ) .

) ) ht was that . .

On the the On as as CEU eTD Collection within European organisations to deal specifically with Roma, with specifically deal to organisations European within into developed origin nomadic of population as Roma to referred produced organisations these that documents internat European 1990s, the Until minorities. 15 last the in developed has framework Next, Rights. Human of Declaration regime rights human the War, World Second the after First, Roma and rights, minority generic rights, human fundamental of protection the norms: of kinds rela acceptanc and spread codification, the in role crucial a play actors International 2.5 withinCouncilofEurope. the 21 of nomads and 20 nomads stateless problemsnomadicofpopulationsof origin. on and 125 role Resolution 1 the Europe of (1983) on Authorities (1981) Regional Recommendation and Local Europe; of Conference in Standing nationality; undetermined nomads of situation social Minist of Committee Europe; in travellers other and Gypsies of situation the on 19 Roma the specifically dealing with has emerged of institutions network separate a By 1990s, mid the candidate in Roma of position cou the was enlargement Eastern EU’s the of process the in

uh s h CnatPit o Rm ad it I Sinti and Roma for Point Contact the as Such AssemblyCouncil (1993) GypsiesEurope, onRecommendation ofof 1203 Europe. (1969) 563 Recommendation Assembly Europe: of Council the of documents following the instance, for See,

ntries. tion to Roma. to tion - ofThe emergence the — specific norms. specific comprising special bodies under the auspices of international organisations such as as such organisations international of auspices the under bodies special comprising

“a true European minority”, European true “a International governmental and non and governmental International responsibility of local and regional authorities in regard to the cultural and social social and cultural the to regard in authorities regional and local of responsibility

‘ ’

R . 19 oma issue

However, in less than a decade, from nomadic people Roma people nomadic from decade, a than less in However, ional organisations paid little attention to Roma. The few The Roma. to attention little paid organisations ional

cmrhnie nentoa lgl n institutional and legal international comprehensive a – ’ 0 er amn a te rtcin f h rgt of rights the of protection the at aiming years 20

se wti OC ad h Gopo Seilsso Roma on Specialists of Group the and OSCE within ssues in the international arena in the 20 54 specialised committees and organs were set up set were organs and committees specialised

- governmental actors can promote three promote can actors governmental emerged based emerged 21

and one of the central issues central the of one and ‘ ers Resolution (1975) 13 on the the on 13 (1975) Resolution ers travellers

’ on the Univer the on , ‘ nomads e of norms in in norms of e ’

or sal sal ‘ a CEU eTD Collection transnational recognition selftransnational and EU; the of role changing the (4) regime; rights minority transnational (2) immigration; Roma of fear (1) level: global least At Roma RightsEuropean as well as EU, the and OSCE the Europe, of Council the Norway Sweden, France, Finland, Denmark, Belgium, Ireland, Kingdom, United the 1990, late the In sought principally asylum Germany and Poland in Bulgaria Romania, from primarily fled Roma 1990s, early the In societies. home their in integration their promote to governments European prompted immigration Romani of fear the all, Above 2.5.1

, Fear of Roma im Roma of Fear ,

five

and Canada also received Romani asylum Romani received also Canada and and Yugoslavia to escape discrimination, persecution and persecution discrimination, escape to Yugoslavia and fear of Romani immigration

atr cnrbtd o h eegne f the of emergence the to contributed factors transnational pro Roma advocacy Centre (ERRC) Centre

migration - Figure

determination. -

and the European Roma Informationand EuropeanRoma Office the Genesis ofGenesisissue' the 'Roma minority minority rights inadequacy of of of 'Roma international genesis issue' regime 55

(

Bárány 2002b,243 - seekers. The response of many of these these of many of response The seekers.

and ‘ changing of role

oa issue Roma

internati advocacy; (3) inadequacy of the the of inadequacy (3) advocacy;

(5) the continuing struggle for struggle continuing the (5) the EU

recognition and economic hardship. They hardship. economic determination transnational onal NGOs such as the the as such NGOs onal )

struggle for .

’

self n Erpa and European a on -

(ERIO)

CEU eTD Collection Roma. immigrantof increasingexpulsion the and Roma of all stigmatizationofficial to led police the French group a between clash a France, in however Roma; Romanian immigrant an was criminal the Italy In and Roma. of harassment, masses police of persecution, deportation the to led origin Romani of person a by committed cases both In attention. international attracted 2010 in France from and 2007 in Italy from Roma immigrant of expulsion the particular, In of however,repatriation immigrant Roma, continues. of freely freedom can the and enjoy movement They regulations. visa by controlled be cannot movement whose citizens European became Roma European Eastern most EU, the of enlargement the With after hordes” “Gypsy of invasion the envisioned tabloids European Western and Roma immigrant attacked neo and skinhead Meanwhile immigrants. Roma illegal repatriating reim was governments co and effectively Directive 23 22 so to implement fully not did itFrance that Luxemburg. only Commission informed in European The ofJustice Court the to (the law EU breaching for sanctioned not was state French the However, Roma. of expulsion and rhetoric Citizenship and Rights Fundamental th Europe, of Council the actors international Several

According the report of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency, not a single Member State has “transposed the “transposed has State Member single a not Agency, Rights Fundamental EU the of report the According longerandwith residence a permit

Charter of Fundamental Rights): the European Commission did not refer the caserefer the not did Commission European Rights): Fundamentalthe of Charter the the ofEastern European countriestheadhesion to European Union. oig ia eurmns o ctzn o te edn cutis and countries sending the of citizens for requirements visa posing rrectly in its entirety.” (34) “In the thirty months since the Directive has been been has Directive the since months thirty the “In (34) entirety.” its in rrectly

e European Parliament, and the European Commissioner for Justice, for Commissioner European the and Parliament, European e

- stay up to to up stay

including the Vatican, the Commissioner of Human Rights of of Rights Human of Commissioner the Vatican, the including

- ald iiesi Drcie no t dmsi law domestic its into Directive Citizenship called

ald o edn te pny iciiaoy French discriminatory openly the ending for called three 56

–

ots n n EU any in months

similarl

gens du voyage voyage du gens y to the the to y Kristallnacht M - (French Travelers) and Travelers) (French Nazi groups regularly regularly groups Nazi ember ember

– tates.

a homicide homicide a 23 wh , 22

The The ich ich CEU eTD Collection the Human Rights Project in Bulgaria, the Citizen’s Solidarity and Tolerance Movement in in Movement Tolerance and Solidarity Citizen’s the Bulgaria, in Project Rights Human the emerged NGOsrights had human 1990s, national mid Byrights. human the people’s well International Wall, Berlin the of fall the After burgeoned. pro time, same the At countries. partie political foundations, associations, various establish themselves could Roma 1989, After association. and assembly of rights limited had which regimes socialist state the of collapse the after boomed activism Roma 2.5.2 push for pro and Roma for opportunity of window a opened Roma” the with affair half within corrected and recognized France TheGypsies ofHungary,1993. 25 humancommitmentsto 1995 rights, the within freely reside 24 and move to members family theirfinal, territory840 COM(2008)Member ofStates, the Brussels,December2008 10 and Union the the of citizens from of right the questions on 2004/38 40 Directive of complaints, application the on Report Commission, European individual Directive.”, the comp of application 115 incorrect for cases 1800 registered has It than application. its moreon petitions 33 received and Parliament has Commission the applicable, the and likeRoma, abusive or corrupt against proceedings and criminal policemen and dismissals to led has cases legal pursue to determination Their Hungary. in Minorities Ethnic and National of Protection the the Republic, Czech the

Struggling for Ethnic Identity: Ethnic for Struggling ill and Torture

The emergence emergence The -

the below discussed below the 24 - treatment of Roma, 1993; Bulgaria: Turning the blind eye to racism, 1994; Romania: Broken Romania: 1994; racism, to eye blind the Turning Bulgaria: 1993; Roma, of treatment

n Hmn Righ Human and te ofcas t te rscto o toe epnil fr attacks for responsible those of prosecution the to officials, other

( Bárány 2002b - oa Gs rn y non by run NGOs, Roma

of a transnational advocacy network advocacy transnational a of Union for Peace and Human Rights in Slovakia, and the Office for Office the and Slovakia, in Rights Human and Peace for Union

Czechoslovakia’s Endangered Gypsies, 1992; Struggling for Ethnic Identity: Ethnic for Struggling 1992; Gypsies, Endangered Czechoslovakia’s

European Roma Strategy. Roma European ) s Watch ts .

, n ee mnrt self minority even and s, 25

a 57

year. ea pbiiig h voain o Romani of violations the publicizing began

- Roma but advocating on behalf of Roma, Roma, of behalf on advocating but Roma

Nonetheless, the well publicized “French publicized well the Nonetheless, - established NGOs such as Amnesty Amnesty as such NGOs established

ansadoee fv infringement five opened and laints

- oenet i certain in governments

- Roma activists to to activists Roma -

such as such against against

CEU eTD Collection role in the in emergence ofpro role migr (self issues key on discussions roundtable organised has countries, European Eastern in operating (PER), Relations Ethnic on Project based US The variousorganizing rights forms ofhuman education. internation monitoring bodies international to reports shadow submitting abuse, rights human of patterns reverse to litigation strategic comprise activities Their 1996. in OSI of support financial the with founded was (ERRC), Centre t Rights Roma, Roma European of abuse rights human combat specifically to NGO international leading The Framework Strategy initiatives international in role direct at aimed programmes Roma for support institutional pro key A 26 ‘representative’ the within Travellers Eu and of Council Roma on Experts of Committee the and OSCE within Issues so Initially recommendatio Co and Security the mass Westward pro strengthening the of activity advocacy the both to Due

Both are discussedare Both below. ‘ to, t., ruh tgte atvss eprs ad oiiin, n tu pae a vital a played thus and politicians, and experts, activists, together brought etc.), ation, lgt f Roma of plight - - Roma actor is the Open Society Institute (OSI). The OSI provides financial and financial provides OSI The (OSI). Institute Society Open the is actor Roma called expert bodies were created such as the Contact Point for Roma and Sinti and Roma for Point Contact the as such created were bodies expert called oe bt wr fuddi 19) Ltr teps ee made were attempts Later 1995). in founded were (both rope ns establishedspecial and ca bodies

bodies comprising Roma themselves thus the thus themselves Roma comprising bodies migration of Roma, international organisations have turned their attention to attention their turned have organisations international Roma, of migration - prto i Erp (SE poue rprs n formulated and reports produced (OSCE) Europe in operation 26 ’

. s el Frt te oni o Erp (o) n te raiain for Organisation the and (CoE) Europe of Council the First, well. as

ly building Romani representation and leadership, and plays a key key plays a and leadership, representation and lyRomani building - Roma networkRoma oforganizations.

such - eae atvte ad raiain, prts t own its operates organisations, and activities related s h Dcd o Rm Icuin n te U Roma EU the and Inclusion Roma of Decade the as 58

lled to lled to tackle ‘Roma issue’.the

- government, governmental policies, governmental government, - Roma microcosm and the fear of fear the and microcosm Roma

European Roma and Travellers and Roma European l ovnin and conventions al

to create more more create to

CEU eTD Collection Rights, a comprehensi a Rights, Human of Declaration Universal the on based regime rights human general the to addition In 2.5.3 remedy problems. these communi inconsistent often These, 1990s) until the called nomads (or Roma to relation in resolutions and recommendations declarations, 10 last a the formed bodies special the with vis policies government influencing at aiming advocacy network transnational alongside NGOs international and national Local, Ro for Platform the and Europe of Council the of auspices the under 2004 in created was Forum Romain also talkabout general recognizin (usually they althoughbalanced, more were documents Later Gypsies.” of mobility normal the to return a merelyis […] Councilthe for 27 the for Convention Framework 1995 Europe’s of Council the as such level, regional the at minority on norms developed also have Bank, World the and Organization Labour International the (UNESCO), Organization Cultural and Scientific Educational, Nations United the as such organisations, and Religious Ethnic, or National to Belonging Persons of Rights the on Declaration a adopted Nations United The 15 last

Early documents, such as the 1995 Report on Report 1995 the as such documents, Early ma Inclusion in 2008 within Inclusion 2008within EU. ma in the

– The inadequacy of the minority rights regime rights minority the of inadequacy The 20 years protection of the rights aimingat the ofminorities. is ae n mk non make and face ties - 5 er, h eggd internation engaged the years, 15 of Europe contained romantic and essentialist views such as “the increasing mobility since 1990 sincemobility increasing “the as such views essentialist and romanticcontained Europe of or indigenous rights. Declarations have also been drafted by organisations organisations by drafted been also have Declarations rights. indigenous or ve international legal and institutional framework has developed in the the in developed has framework institutional and legal international ve ( Majtén

27 igitc ioiis n 92 n ohr intergovernmental other and 1992 in Minorities Linguistic Romani that problems specific the identify to attempt documents ,

yi Vizi and 2006 - idn pooiin ad eea rcmedtos to recommendations general and propositions binding

The Situation of Gypsies (Roma and Sinti) in Europe in Sinti) and (Roma Gypsies of Situation The g their heterogeneity inheterogeneitytheirfootnote).g only a 59 ;

Marchand 2001 Marchand al organizations produced myriad reports, reports, myriad produced organizations al

; O'Nions 2007

- — à ) . - vis Roma. In In Roma. vis

as they were were they as

prepared CEU eTD Collection observes Pogány As integration. to social their sufficient for or Roma not of discrimination the is against either struggle regime rights minority present the that recognition the of out grown specifi Roma discussed above The Roma. of inclusion social the promote to sufficient not clearly is culture” one’s enjoy to right “the the However, recognize Roma ornational as the ethnic minority. Conv Framework Europe’s of Council 1966 UN’s the Rights. Political of and Civil 27 on Covenant International Article by guaranteed is culture to right individuals’ Romani All draft 1997 States’ American Declar of Organization the or Minorities, National of Protection Convention. Framework 29 practiseprofessand usetheirowntheirown orto religion, language. o theirenjoy to group, their ofmembers other the withcommunity inright, the denied be not shall 28

In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities such to belonging persons exist, minorities linguistic or religious ethnic, which in States those In t s o e oe ta Blim Fac, ree Lxmor, odv ad uky ae e t rtf the ratify to yet have Turkey and Moldova Luxembourg, Greece, France, Belgium, that noted be to is It ation onthe Rights ofIndigenousPeoples.

administrations. CEE that has been ofthe violence feature oustinga regionthe ofCommunist since escalati the reversed instruments rights minority and Central thehave Nor services. public to in access equal them assure Roma or states European Eastern for conditions living unsatisfactory grossly already righ minority of rhetoric The

( Pogány 2006

ention applies to countries that ratified the treaty and and treaty the ratified that countries to applies ention )

ts has failed to arrest the erosion of what were were what of erosion the arrest to failed has ts 60

In addition, on a European level, the the level, European a on addition, In bde ad eomnain have recommendations and bodies c

n n anti in on - oa etmn and sentiment Roma wn culture, to culture,wn CEU eTD Collection European Union. European the of commitment and role political the justify and expose to supposed is group minority European stateless marginalized, a of plight the with concerned Being identity. changing its demons to supposed is 1990s mid the from Roma with preoccupation growing EU’s The political European community human is uphold emerging rights isto aimed that norms. From 1993. T in the Maastricht of force into entry the with Union European a into developed Community transitions violent to, subject be could or experiencing, were that countries neighbouring in stability ensuring of way a as externally rights human and democracy promoted EU the Wall, Berlin the of fall the After countrie governments European An 2.5.4 Bosnia as Tu such countries candidate currently 32 Junethelaid at EuropeandownCouncilin 1993 Co were criteriamembership These EU. the of intent and obligations the accepts and economy,market functioning re criteria 31 Macedonia,Serbia,Herzegovina,Kosovo, Croatia, and Montenegro, Turkey the response, 30 a As EU. the joining for criteria as communities Roma of situation the of so reports country the to reports NGO the from passages verbatim transposed sometimes that Commission European the for communities Roma of situation the on submissions focused EU, the of enlargement Eastern the of course the In

The Copenhagen criteria are the rules that define whether a country is eligible to joinUnion. The is European thedefine eligible whether Thecountry to aCopenhagenthat rules the criteria are h ER cnius o rpr sbisos o te uoen omsin n h stain f oa in Roma of situation the on Commission European the for submissions prepare to continues ERRC The h E hs smlr eeae n urn ( current on leverage similar a has EU The rkey.

international organization, the European Union, European the organization, international

The special role of the the of role special The s against the Copenhagen criteria quire that a state has the institutions to preserve democratic governance and human rights, has a a has rights, human and governance democratic preserve to institutions the has state a that quire 32

. More importantly, the Commission Commission the importantly, More . 30

, as it it as ,

the

has

E ( common European market and economic cooperation, a a cooperation, economic and market European common a 21, 208 2010, Ram uropean uropean esrd te rges o Esen uoen candidate European Eastern of progress” “the measured - ezgvn, rai, aeoi, otngo Sri, and Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Croatia, Herzegovina, 31 oeta) addt cutis nml a Abna Bosnia Albania, as namely countries, candidate potential) . penhagen,Denmark,from whichtheir take name.they

U 61 nion

) .

has enhl, h Erpa Economic European the Meanwhile, explicitly formulated the improvement the formulated explicitly

Gs rprd well prepared NGOs

had significant leverage on Eastern on leverage significant had .

- eerhd and researched - ald EU called reaty of of reaty

trate trate - CEU eTD Collection recapitulates the socializationrecapitulates flowofnorm case ofthe the in Hungary by the on Relying however,of political commitment, the in da sign a as strategies” “Roma term long and medium produced governments European Eastern European the Issues, Sinti and Roma RomaEuropeantheOffice, Information for Point Contact the Bank, Development European of Council Europe, 33 voluntarya basis. non important most the by formulated initiative international unique a is Decade The launched. 2005 Inclusion Roma of Decade the commitment, decreased governments European Eastern on actors pro of influence the EU, the to adhesion their after way, paradoxical a In

Namely the Open Society Institute, the World Bank, the United Nations Development Program, the Council Program,of theNations Development United World the theBank, Namely Institute, SocietyOpen the - governmental and intergovernmental a intergovernmental and governmental

Figure - o casc cea f Risse of schema classic now 4

Transnational norm socialization in the coursenormTransnationalin ofenlargement socialization EUthe

Roma and TravellerRoma andForum, Europeanand Romathe Centre Rights ctors ily has changed. lives little ofRoma 62 33

- to which states were encouraged to join on on join to encouraged were states which to Ropp - 2015 programme (hereafter Decade) was Decade) (hereafter programme 2015 . To maintain the governments’ political governments’ the maintain To . - Sikkink Sikkink ( 1999 ( Röv ) , the following chart chart following the , - Roma international Roma

id 2004 id

) :

CEU eTD Collection netd t hps n h E aan Te ot nleta NO i ti field this in NGOs influential most The again. EU the in hopes its invested apparent 2008 By deterio revealed policies” guide and assess to order in ethnicity for disaggregated data generate to need crucial the about governments participating among meet are governments how of assessment thorough any conducting to obstacle biggest the remains communities Roma about data of lack “the that programme the halfwayrealized Secretariat Decade the However, European quantifi Eastern strategies Roma and “transparent a incorporated Decade national the period, enlargement the in of drafted governments failures the from Learning housing. goa specifying developing by Roma of inclusion social and status economic Decade GitanoSecretariado Fundación R Fund, Education Roma Minorities, Minority and Roma for Center Racism,Policy Network, Organizations Grassroots Against Network European Foundations, at (Speech join.” 37 to organizations international and InternationalJuneRomaofCommitteeinthe27 heldSteering on Decade 2011) Prague, states other attracted has it And evaluation. The provideindependent has civil It society the encouraged to doesn’t. and discuss what works forumwhat providedto a discrimination. tackling of and importance the poverty elevated of has problems “It 2011 interrelated in Decade the of achievements following the identified 36 on SetRoma Education Data over be to tend children n limited a only States, 35 34 act more Institute support ofOpenSociety

For instance, a survey research carried out by the Open Society Institute in 2009 suggest that in some Memberin some that suggest in2009 Institute SocietyOpen bythe out carriedsurvey research instance,a For DataNo met Itrainl Erpa Rm Rgt Cnr, uoen oa nomto Ofc, pn Society Open Office, Information Roma European Centre, Rights Roma European International, Amnesty lhuh G Although able” review of the progress reviewable” Action ofthe Plans. ofDecade ive involvement ofthe EU. M 36 –

( ember No Progress,No Open Society2010. Foundations, - Popkosta 09 h vr lmtd civmns f h Dcd become Decade the of achievements limited very the 2009 og Srs te one o Oe Scey nttt, n oe f h iiitr o te Decade the of initiators the of one and Institute, Society Open of founder the Soros, eorge s n idctr i fu pirt aes euain epomn, elh and health, employment, education, areas: priority four in indicators and ls ration, not priority progress, Decade certain countries. in in areas

S ae hv t dmntae oiia cmimn t ipoe h socio the improve to commitment political demonstrate to have tates umber of Roma children complete primary school. According to the research Roma Roma research the to According school. primary complete children Roma of umber ioa 2011 dinova - ersne i seil dcto ad ergtd schools. segregated and education special in represented ,Open2008. Society Institute

n ter eae omtet, ept wdsra agreement widespread despite commitments, Decade their ing

- )

formed the European Roma Policy Coalition and Policy and for Roma called European Coalition the formed

n te pro the and 63

oa ircs tre is teto and attention its turned microcosm Roma

Decade has involved the Roma communities and and communities Roma the involved has Decade .

M ights Group International, European Roma Roma European International, Group ights roe, oilgcl eerh results research sociological oreover,

a national Decade Action Plan Plan Action Decade national nentoa Comparative International

35 37

- h 20 the

with the the with th

the the -

CEU eTD Collection Presidency, the main EU bodies (the Parliament, the Commission and the Council) launched launched Council) the and Commission the Parliament, (the bodies EU main the Presidency, EU Hungarian the under recommendations, and resolutions several after 2011, In Summits. expresse politicians level top 2010, and 2008 In education. and care, health employment, inclusion, social as policy areas crucial such for in learning and framework coordination institutional an provides EU the addition, In Roma. of integration period same the for euro billion 76 of budget overall 2007 period the in inter of those gove overshadowing instruments financial substantial possesses also EU The relation in importance Roma. to so The law. public fram legal comprehensive a provides EU the former, the for As policies. common facilitate and coordinate to organizations international other no like means financial and legal possesses actor, international generis sui as EU, The familyUnionofthemove and residemembersfreely their to and within territory the of 39 irrespectiveethnic oforiginracial or 38 strategy Framework EU The board. on get will Spain) Italy, France, (UK, populations significant Roma with states European Western that unlikely seems it moment the at but states, pre pro the of pressure the under governments strategiesbydeveloped European Roma Eastern of wave third represent theeffortsrecent The the

Directive 2004/38/EC of The European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizensrightof the on April2004 29 Council of andthe of European Parliament Theof 2004/38/EC Directive implementingequalJuneprincipleCouncil of2000 the29 of treatmen 2000/43/EC Directive

- EU FrameworkEU Integ forNational accession phase, joining the recent recent the joining phase, accession rnmental organizations. The Structural and Cohesion Funds redistribute 347 billion euro billion 347 redistribute Funds Cohesion and Structural The organizations. rnmental

- - 03 Wti te tutrl ud, h Erpa Sca Fund Social European the Funds, Structural the Within 2013. called Anti called

discrimination ration Strategies up to 2020. Strategies upto ration ntaie s quasi is initiative - Roma actors and the EU. Similarly to the first EU first the to Similarly EU. the and actors Roma 64 38

d their commitment to the cause at the Roma the at cause the to commitment their d ework complementing regular international international regular complementing ework and Citizenship and –

is supposed to endorse endorse to supposed is - adtr o Esen European Eastern of mandatory 39

directives are of particular of are directives

the MemberStates the t between persons t h social the -

with an an with

- CEU eTD Collection 2.6 EUpolicyan agenda. revivalof a as seen be can According UNESCO. by partially sponsored was and Warsaw near Serock, in held was Con Romani World fourth, The 2.6.1 (RNC) the and Congress National Roma the namely world’, the of Roma ‘the representing on monopoly o concept its elaborated Union Romani International The nation. Roma of recognition international and recognition transnational the for struggleto continued actors Romani 2000s, and 1990s the In

EU pre

The struggle forThe struggle transnational recognition s and The emergence of the notion of non of notion the of emergence The • • • candidates EuropeEU EU enlargement in the criteriafor the issue" "Roma by incorporating pro Balkan) the Western forof countries (but stillongoing untilearly 2000s from1990s late only Eastern major leverage of - accession Rmn non Romani f Figure - Roma actorsRoma European Roma Travellers and

Three waves Three of

- ertra nation, territorial

the Decade of Roma Inclusion which now will be transformed into transformed be will now which Inclusion Roma of Decade the externalon pressure gress in 1990, was symbolically placed in Eastern Europe. It It Europe. Eastern in placed symbolically was 1990, in gress Inclusion Decade Romaof • • • • Eastern Europe additionto and Spainin Western Balkans NGOs member states commitment by comprising low influenceof voluntary 2005

hl new while national governments to tackle ofthe plight Roma 65 -

2015 - Forum (ERTF). territorial nation territorial

elf actors emerged challenging IRU’s IRU’s challenging emerged actors - determination

Strategy EU Framework • • join European states whether Western states but unclear (2008 Roma actors lobbying by pro only memberEU result longof

- 2011)

CEU eTD Collection time a lot of hope for improving the social status of the Gypsies and solving their numerous numerous their solving and Gypsies the of status social the improving for hope of lot a time that At 1991. in (Italy) Rome near Ostia in meeting the at time first the for introduced was the saw integration a as European Roma the in of concept Gypsies the of emergence the for place a for searching of process The and becometheir countries to aspiration new part ofthe Euro development future for trends the to response a is part second the while Europe, Eastern and Central in Gypsies the of integration social of degree higher relatively the by o their for look to have theytime same the at and in live theycountries the of citizens are Roma the that concept the is us to interest of IRU of Congress Fourth the by approved materials the Among power fresh this of influx The Europe. Western in Roma the from distant less or more countries, these in formed was elite newRoma a times socialist during and Europe Eastern in live Roma presenc important An congress. the attended countries 28 or 24 20, 18, representatives from Roma sources different nat a as Roma the of concept The developments. a as Roma the of concept The their them, for ( community changes Roma the of positive development the for ideas considerable new seek to any them led disappointment without countries the of most Framework the joined Europe R the and minorities national for Convention Eastern and Central of countries the When particular. in institutions European the and law towardsinternational directed was transition, of period hard were or appeared which Europe, Eastern and Central in problems Marushiakova Popov and 2004,81 gave new dimensions to thegave Roma to international newdimensions movement. wn place in the future united Europe. The first part of this concept was determined was concept this of part first The Europe. united future the in place wn e was the great number of Roma from Eastern Europe. The majority of of majority The Europe. Eastern from Roma of number great the was e ‘ ain ihu a state a without nation ) .

oma were given the status of national minorityin of status given werethe oma 66 ‘ trans[border]

ion without a state was suggested and and suggested was state a without ion ’

was a logical consequence of these these of consequence logical a was - - national minority national Atlantic realia. Atlantic

aggravated as a result of theof result a as aggravated

’ . This This .

f these of concept concept CEU eTD Collection with the heads of state of the Czech Republic and Bulgaria, members of the governments of governments the of members Bulgaria, and Republic Czech the of state of heads the with co and understanding arenas. international various nation with equality for Aspiring Justice. Congress, as organs such establishing by body like itself into state transform to a only international nations IRU the in fora, attempted represent states that Recognizing institutions. international the before nation Roma the representing a as Roma the of concept the to dedicated is organization the of activities future the of program The After sociologist Jean ‘tr of idea the back trace Others 90s. RadicalTransnational of the member non a by articles many in developed 40 Fund, supervisoryChildren’s treaties bodies) Secretariat, Council, Social and (Economic bodies UN other various at P status consultative a achieve did IRU the seat, this get not theyAlthoughdid UN. Assemblythe General of (GA) the seat in a demanded IRUMoreover, sides) forsolvingtwo equal Roma problems the of e. Bulgaria (i. of Republic the IRU and of jointprojects of preparation for president Bulgarian (de office open Nice, in EU the of leaders the of meeting the attended Yugoslavia, and Italy

S ee Internationalthe cited Charter RomaniUnionin

the Fifth the 40

- facto Transnation facto ‘ ain ihu a state a without nation C - Pierre Liégeois Pierre ongress of IRU in July 2000 in Prague, this concept became the leading one. one. leading the became concept this Prague, in 2000 July in IRU of ongress - prto betwee operation

al Radical Party office) in Brussels, made official proposal to the to proposal official made Brussels, in office) Party Radical al

O ( te t o Arl 2001 April of 4th the n Guy 2001 - states, IRU launched a complex diplomatic offensive in in offensive diplomatic complex a launched IRU states, ’ IU rsne isl ofcal a a lea a as officially itself presented IRU .

P nntoa o non or ansnational artyco - R ad zc Mnsr o Frin far” met Affairs”, Foreign of Ministry Czech and IRU n oa Poo itoat fo Iay a influe an Italy, from Pietrosanti Paolo Roma, ) .

( ( 67 - Klímová Acton and KlímováandActon opted in the IRU leadership as early as the mid the as earlyas IRUleadership the in opted ermanent Observer Status at the GA and a a and GA the at Status Observer ermanent

( - Marushiakova Popov and 82 2004, alaet Peiim ad or of Court and Presidium, Parliament, Alexander 2005 - ertra mnrt’ o h French the to minority’ territorial t , e sign hey - Alexander2001 ed ) .

Mmrnu of “Memorandum ) .

ding institution institution ding ed

ntial IRU IRU ) .

- CEU eTD Collection The main division between between division main The proceduresimmigration the Roma stateless’ facto granting ‘de for struggled critiques their whereas communities; German ethnic The Roma. immigrant neglecting but Sinti, Germany of organization Sinti ( and Roma main the criticized network this of Members concentration camps, blockades. hunger border and strikes, 57 Hamburg his and Germany) to Poland Ro stateless a (himself Kawczinsky Rudko was network the of figure prominent A network. a Germany from formed (mainly Yugoslavia) families and Poland from refugee Roma of deportation the against struggling organizations and activists 1980s, the In 2.6.2 of coupling the as such ethnicity” Germany, and in citizenship nationhood, concepts constitutional key some to even and the as such institutions multilateral and organisations rights human international politicians, Israeli and American, European, of part the on intervention outside sought movement new “The ( clan of boundaries traditional the crossed devel and stateless’ facto ‘de are Roma that G intoSinti and Roma of integration Zentralrat Deutscher Deutscher Zentralrat 58 ) . )

Their activist repertoire encompassed marches, occupations of churches and former former and churches of occupations marches, encompassed repertoire activist Their

Council of Europe and the United Nations, defining itself in opposition to state policy state to opposition in itself defining Nations, United the and Europe of Council The The ih t apy o rsdne emt otie h fra faeok f slm or asylum of framework formal the outside permits residence for apply to right r ole ole o f t he Roma National National Roma he Sinti und Roma und Sinti ( 55 ) . Zentralrat

erman society as equal citizens, equal societyas erman - ) for advocating only on behalf of German Roma and Roma German of behalf on only advocating for ) based organization based and their critiques was that the former advocated the advocated former the that was critiques their and ( 58 Congress - structure, tribal affiliation, and country of origin” of country and affiliation, tribal structure, ) oped a “pan a oped .

68 Zentralrat Zentralrat

- o te te hn, rgre the “regarded hand, other the on ,

European Romani nationalism which which nationalism Romani European anan ta Rm ad it are Sinti and Roma that maintains

Rom & Cinti Union Cinti & Rom

whereas the latter argued latter the whereas m who migrated from from migrated who m

( Matras 199 Matras 8, CEU eTD Collection ( (RNC) CongressNational Roma the of establishment the initiated he year same The Warsaw. during leadership IRU the mid confronted the as early as IRU from away broke his he with followers that notes Gheorghe since IRU, with relation a have did however, Kawczinsky, ( European nation as a political representation Roma would grant Rightswhich Romani Charter European a for called RNC 1993, In EUROM. name the under organization umbrella Romani ( ultimat but 1981, in Gottingen in Congress Romani World the or Union Romani International the of channel intellectual pan Germany “in that notes Matras the which upon ideology reintegration the challenged effect in which one as and nomads«, »homeless of image undesirable the to return and setback a as argumentation statelessness 2001 groups such for importance particular of is protection and recognition being Transnational rights, citizenship enjoy not do who Roma seeker underl to important is It comprised network international mos broader a into RNC turned “he Program, Participation 1997 In organization. O ( Gheorg 62 60 Matras 1998,62 Matras l i te ae 90 cud acisy eeo RC no n nentoa umbrella international an into RNC develop Kawczinsky could 1990s late the in nly ) ) . tly byOSI NGOs funded same ofactivists were whose the office” .

) In 1990, at a a at 1990, In .

e 2011 he Zentralrat ) ) ie the i.e. , .

oges n ülemRh, hr ws natmtt cet European a create to attempt an was there Mühlheim/Ruhr, in congress was founded.” - 98 wie en te ietr f pn oit Isiues Roma Institute’s Society Open of director the being while 1998, ine that the roots of RNC go back to advocating on behalf of asylum asylum of behalf on advocating to back go RNC of roots the that ine o & it Union Cinti & Rom ely through independent, local grassroots work with refugees” refugees” with work grassroots local independent, through ely ( 59 - European Romani nationalism did not emerge via the the via emerge not did nationalism Romani European )

the the orh ol Rm Cnrs hl i Serock in held Congress Roma World Fourth 69

eae isl fr nentoa purposes international for itself renamed - 90. n a 19 h openly he 1990 May In 1980s. e jure de

( Nirenberg 2009,101 or e facto de oa as Roma stateless.

( Meyer Meyer ) . -

CEU eTD Collection nation.” In other words, the authors deem insufficient the representation of Roma by those those by Roma of representation the insufficient deem authors the words, other In nation.” of way new a for calls Declaration The Holocaust.” “forgotten the as well as persecution, and marginalization, language. and culture, traditions, Na are “we that pronounces manifesto calls text the First, advances claims. three interrelated RomaniCongressWorldadopted fifth The 2.6.3 manifesto the of adoption the and symbolism political of reinforcement the as well as IRU, of revitalization Roma the remind to was rights initial 1990s its of the movement in RNC radical of role main the argues Gheorghe excluded they as do 43 42 approve itdid not 41 Europe in personalities “prominent involving society” global the of needs changing the to State the of “adequacy is than world nation globalized a traditional to suited more is that nationhood stateless of that claims manifesto the Second, an hear voice their make to want Roma that declares manifesto The leave. they which in states

This way more than half of the population con population the of half than more way This S wasissued andAlthoughActon Cong manifesto theKlímová, the after theaccording d wish to participate in in d wish participate politics. to international ee the manifestoee inthe appendix

The ‘ The D Declaration Nation of

eclaration of of eclaration ( ActonKlímováand not speakany not ofdialect Romani - state ersnain f oa aat rm hi blnig o n o t another to or one to belonging their from “apart Roma of representation o te nentoa rcgiin f h saees oa nation. Roma stateless the of recognition international the for

s. The authors explicitly refer to contemporary debates on the the on debates contemporary to refer explicitly authors The s. and and the in UNentire Community

- oriented, oriented, atio - Alexander 2001, 198 2001, Alexander 43 the the

The text also alludes to a shared history of discrimination, of history shared a to alludes also text The n’

at the Congre World Romani fifth Roma nation offers to the rest of rest the to offers nation Roma

militant agenda. RNC contributed to the reform and reform the to contributed RNC agenda. militant sidered in general Roma by the International Romani Union is Union Romani International the by Roma general in sidered in f niiul” h sae h sm origin, same the share who individuals” of tion 41

(

Matras 2002 Matras the text ‘ text the 70

) .

Declaration of Nation’. Declaration of ) . ”

s humanity a new vision vision new humanity a s

ress itself ressso t ( Gheorghe 2011 42

The manifesto The fiito to affiliation hedelegates

) . The

CEU eTD Collection territorial nation could become a catalyst for the debate on the reform of existing international of reform the on debate the catalystfor a become could nation territorial non stateless a as representation for request Romani the that believe authors the but rights, exerc the protect should institutions what specify not does Declaration The collective and individual rights mediated not by whentheyare states. interstate not rights” (sic!) exigible creating for need the providing to testifies experience Romani the that claims manifesto rules, peremptory are Laws, are Rights Human Cha international the where in “world a i.e. everybody” and each to liberty freedom, a envisions manifesto the Third, representation. (trans w cultivated and maintained non stateless of vision offers Roma alternative nation The an massacres.” wars, and tragediesand disasters to leading coup that out points manifesto the Furthermore, ofindependentstate,an (self several above, discussedAs state. own an or territory 44 policy and activist Romani key with Acton, Thomas scholar, activists scholars, by embraced non unique a representing Roma of discourse The 2.6.4 by byensured institutions. supranational laws enforced adequate in world a for search a in rules, and institutions

It is to be noted that the second claim is based on the dubious declaration that Roma have never looked for a for looked never have Roma that declaration dubious the on based is claim second the that noted be to is

- odr saees ain sol hv te ih t itrainl eonto and recognition international to right the have should nations stateless border) The quest for legitimacy for quest The –

law, since the international community has not been able to implement their implement to able been not has community international the since law, Romanestan - territorial nationhood demonstrating that national identity can be be can identity national that demonstrating nationhood territorial

tot raig nation a creating ithout

, the landthe Roma.ofthe ,

ompltn re which order cosmopolitan and

policy 71 - aes lk. rmnn pro Prominent alike. makers

appointed) Roma leaders actively sought the creation the sought activelyleadersRoma appointed) ig tt wt te ain hs e ad is and led “has nation the with state ling hc te ihs f l niiul wl be will individuals all of rights the which - state. - territorial nation has gradually been been gradually has nation territorial 44

h mnfso mle ta all that implies manifesto The s be o asr democracy, “assure to able is

- maker, Nicolae Gheorghe, Gheorghe, Nicolae maker,

- a truly global truly a oa activist Roma ise of human human of ise r ters on ters .

The – - -

CEU eTD Collection 1990s, such private bodies were the International Romani Union, Roma National Congress, National Roma Union, Romani International the were bodies private such 1990s, end the By Roma. of behalf on advocating bodies public and private of mushrooming the with coupled been has Roma on resolutions and recommendations of proliferation The non a As minorities. linguistic minority,Gypsies greatly thediversity to cultural contribute ofEurope.” or national of definitions the into fit not does that one minority, European truebut a theytheirare own, call country to having nota Europe, special “A ( hav a provide to state’ a ‘home a have not do who people non transnational, a are they fact the in lies main Gypsies the activism of Romani uniqueness on monograph a of author Bárány, Zoltán Similarly, Gheorghe 2001,63 world a in continents and states countries, of boundaries the across or territories certain to confined less or more are who minorities ethnic of situation common the “Unlike 2001 in declared 45 who activists of circle small decisions make and a deliberate is it limited: is Congresses World the in role delegates’ wh obscure remains it elected; ‘ the of few IRU, Concerning grounds? onwhat they and speak, do behalf whose On questioned. been increasingly has bodies these of legitimacy democratic (w Travellers’s and Roma on Experts of Committee the and OSCE) (within Issues Sinti and Roma for Contact the included bodies public Centre; Rights Roma European Bárány 2002b, 2 2002b, Bárány

Council of Europe, AssemblyCouncil (1993) GypsiesEurope, onRecommendation ofof 1203 Europe.

lc aog h mnrte i rsre fr yse. iig ctee al over all scattered Living Gypsies. for reserved is minorities the among place ) . )

. In 1993, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe declared: Europe of Council the of Assembly Parliamentary the 1993, In

delegates (

Bárány 2002b, 258 2002b, Bárány regions, Romani communities are dispersed both within and within both dispersed are communities Romani regions, te rpeet n o wa gons Frhroe the Furthermore, grounds. what on and represent they o

’

t h Wrd oa oges ee democratically were Congress Roma World the at 72

) .

Nirenberg claims the IRU “has always always “has IRU the claims Nirenberg en or extend protection to them to protection extend or en - wide diaspora” wide

- territorially based based territorially ithin CoE). The The CoE). ithin tains: “The “The tains: ( Acton and and Acton - territorial

of the the of ”

CEU eTD Collection h pbi bde ae diitaie nt wti itrainl raiain cmrsd of comprised organizations international within units administrative are bodies public The 2001 ha they consequently advocate; behalf whose on communities the not but donors, their to accountable are NGOs such that out pointed Critiques communities. Romani of needs real the neglecting for criticized pro (mos foundations private by funded pro Concerning typicallywere people” ten less than members active its membership, general its for meeting without stretch a at years gone has hundre one than less to limited membership engaged an had 2004 EnlargedEurope, 46 Romani of challenges main the discuss to occasions several on politicians and activists body policy international activists, Roma pro these of accountability of lack The often still are they officials, public appointed are experts such Although servants. public international

Project on Ethnic Relations Ethnic on Project fessionals. Furthermore, the hegemonic human rights approach of pro of approach rights human hegemonic the Furthermore, fessionals. Poet n tnc eain (E) a US a (PER), Relations Ethnic on Project . , 2009

seen as providingseen voice of policy ‘the in Roma’ ) groups are often taken to represent the community’s interests. A variety of of variety its to accountable constituency. A interests. community’s the represent politic genuine for substituting been has network advocacy to taken often are society civil groups Romani developing rapidly organizations, political of place the In .

- Roma NGOs, their overwhelming majority do not have not majoritydo overwhelming their NGOs, Roma .

Roma and EU Accession: Elected and Appointed Romani Repres Romani Appointed and Elected Accession: EU and Roma

e o adt t sek o Roma for speak to mandate no ve tly the Open Society Institute), Society Open the tly ( - Nirenberg 2009,99 aes ad scholars and makers, - Roma bodies resulted in an increasing demand increasing an in resulted bodies Roma 46

- based NGO, brought together Romani Romani together brought NGO, based )

- . making processes.

- d persons [...] as the organization organization the as [...] persons d

o te rain f legitimate a of creation the for

and they are comprised of comprised are they and

( ááy 2002b Bárány al representation that is that representation al membership, - Roma NGOs was was NGOs Roma

entatives in an in entatives ;

they are are they Trehan -

from from they CEU eTD Collection 2.6.5 charter” for sucha European (elected) legitimate and unified a saw He rights. collective certain Roma the affording to governments European European a of establishment the be to goal end the t to aid redistribute to organization new a wanted people some body, representative elected an creating of objective primary the to addition In M representation and participation political andRomani Future (2006) Present Politics andRomaAccession:(2003); Romani Appointed inEU and Europe (2004); Elected Representatives Enlarged an and National at Leadership and Representation Romani (2002); Roma the of Status the and Representation, Leadership, (2000) Romania in Elections and Roma (1999); Slovakia and Hungaryin Roma Romani the and ParticipationPolitical and (1999); Government EU: the to Countries Candidate Policy inParticipation the in Communities Romani the Toward Policies 47 pan a creating about diplomacy Finnish the with negotiations experts and figures Romani and IRU prominent both representatives the involving up set was Contact Group Roma International the Gheorghe) Nicolae (and CPRSI of initiative the at 2000, In RNC. the and IRU the Roma: representing for competed organizations two 1990s, the In

Self irga, already 1997wrote: in

- oenet n Hung in Government The European Roma European The par Romani of group core a Such parliaments. national to elected those among from democratic via levels drawn be should all level international the at representation legitimate And elections. at representatives select should community Romani possible a offer procedures Democratic masses. Romani inactive the self often narrowand between the gapthe bridge can that representation legitimate a create to need will itself movement Romani The organizations

International Levels (2001); Roma and the Question of Self of Question the and Roma (2001); Levels International liamentarians can be rightly recognized as legitimate partners for international international for partners legitimate as recognized rightly be can liamentarians - ( Making (1999); Roundtable Discussion of Government Polici Government Discussionof Roundtable (1999); Making Nirenberg 2009,103 r: h GpyRmn Eprec ad rset fr h Ftr (97; State (1997); Future the for Prospects and Experience Gypsy/Romani The ary:

( Gheorghe Mirga and 1997

level bod level a nd Travellers Forum Travellers nd .

y of Roma as the best means of drafting and arguing and drafting of means best the as Roma of y ) 47 .

Two prominent Romani activists, Gheorghe and and Gheorghe activists, Romani prominent Two ( 74 igos 07 250 2007, Liégeois

he poor, whereas “Kawczyincski believed “Kawczyincski whereas poor, he ) .

ie hre ta wud omt all commit would that charter wide - - uoen oa oy From body. Roma European Determination: Fiction and Reality Reality and Fiction Determination: - appointed Romani elites and Romani and elites appointed ) . N, s el s other as well as RNC,

es on the Roma in Romania inRomania Roma the on es hs tutr began structure This

solution; the solution; CEU eTD Collection work guidelin the sets who President Forum's the the and by Committee enacted Executive are decisions Their Strasbourg. in assembly plenary the at interests their represent who delegates their selected NGOs Roma international and organisations umbrella Europe Travelle Kalé, Sinti, Roma, of populations the “represents ERTF establishto similarly the with relations EU,OSCE, UN. close and Counc the of partner” “special a being NGO international an as registered vote to able be to basis voluntary ( a on join could members which Parliament Saami the to similar Roma of Parliament European a become to ERTF the wished some Although (ERTF) 2004. in Europe of Council the of bodies various of front in cause the represented government Finnish the 2001, 51 50 49 48 democraticlegitimacythe present delegates national several is ERTF dubious. It of was hoped electe or organizations umbrella representative Since delegates dependingthree population given size the ofRomani onthe in country. established populations.” all Romani] [of of structures representative 75% least at represent are “to organizations supposed umbrella national Those ERTF. to organization umbrella national one Europe of Council each practice, In hoge 2010 Gheorghe

Article Statuteof the5.1. of ERTF ibid. Article availableStatuteof the1.2. http://www.ertf.ro/viz/About%20ERTF/1 .

” 50 ” 49

. ,

which fin which “The Forum is based on the principle of representative democracy where where democracy representative of principle the on based is Forum “The

) eventually , ally resulted in the creation of the the of creation the in allyresulted

http://www.ertf.ro/viz/Statute/4/en –

ne te nlec o Fec diplomacy French of influence the under - Member States Member 0/en

(accessed2011) September 14 75

having a Romani population can delegate can population Romani a having 51 d Roma leaders exist in few countries, countries, few in exist leaders Roma d

ah mrla raiain a u to up has organization umbrella Each European Roma and Travellers and Roma European

(accessed1

n ofcal rgsee and registered officially and 48

rs and related groups in in groups related and rs 4 September4 2011) il of Europe aiming Europe of il s f h Forum's the of es –

ERTF was was ERTF

national national

Forum CEU eTD Collection uoe ek is xets, e aoe ae is ok pn t recommen its upon work its bases alone let expertise, its seeks Europe of Council the even not Moreover, Union. European the of that to compared limited very whose organisation international an on influence have ma It limited. are powers its CoE, of partner consultative a being foremost, and First it to affiliate to chose country CoE every almost over spread organizations local Europe. hundred Several in institution Romani representative most and largest single the is ERTF Today, have years, four least at ofgo for independent active been financially are and have Europe of Council the of States member 10 which least at in affiliates/members Forum, the of those with ar there addition, In 2010 peop of number select a appointing forum national a form to how on associations Romani for precedents and standards created Internationalthe RomaEvangelical Mission of Churches Romani The Fellowship, Evangelical International Travellers andGypsies Network, Women Roma West Meets East Congress, 52 organization” the of terminology or rules the structure, the know not do participants ERTF Most [...] organization. umbrella] [national to relation in and in role their delegates. the th of of “members that many notes Nirenberg to even unclear, remains forum the of shape unique the Second, be opinion” foran times asked maywhich there at NGOs out of many Romani one than more nothing as recognizedformally MG the by made still are Roma towards policies CoE

urnl ET hs h floig nentoa mmes Itrainl oai no, oa National Roma Union, Romani International members: international following the has ERTF Currently ( ; Nirenberg 2009,107 Nirenberg 2009 vernment funds.”vernment e international members, which are INGOs “whose aims are compatible are aims “whose INGOs are which members, international e ) .

) oa ot Ntok Frm f uoen oa on Pol, Interna People, Young Roma European of Forum Network, Youth Roma .

However,various ERTF the deficiencies. suffers from

( 107 52 ) .

e o ted h gnrl seby f ERTF of assembly general the attend to le

e RNC and IRU often misunderstood or misinterpreted or misunderstood often IRU and RNC e 76

leverage over leverage - S - ROM expert body. “The ERTF is is ERTF “The body. expert ROM

national governments is governments national ( dations. In practice, practice, In dations. 106 ) .

“Many ERTF ERTF “Many

( Gheorghe Gheorghe y only only y tional tional CEU eTD Collection .. ET uuly hoe is oiis avcc srtge ad roiis ihu its without priorities and strategies membership” advocacy policies, its chooses usually ERTF [...] function top of circle small a by decided almost are ERTF of statements and policies “The working. decision and deliberation democratic Fourth, of largely up made is it practice of kind a individuals with emeritus status” “in delegates, national representative of up made be supposed is assembly general the Although assembly. general first ERTF’s the of day the until only status special their hold to meant were who members board and founders original ego” every to titles Third, institutions” formal little had they distribute; to money had ERTF the that assuming organization the joined first participants journalists seek leade Romani but constituency, national their on based not is legitimacy delegates’ ERTF perverse a is there bodies, Romani international earlier to Similarly ‘ h title the RF smlry o other to similarly ERTF, - holders, such as the the as such holders,

( fora fora success again top and again explained ERTF’s members board The they the ERTF.’ that the prove ‘represent to asked use could repeatedly delegates that cards delegates identity out give assembly, to leadership annual 2006 the At 110

( 112 ( ’ 109

) to . of ERTF to gain prestige and the attention of governments, donors and and donors governments, of attention the and prestige gain to ERTF of

) .

)

the the ERTF . –

(

106

that education that would help them make sense of European politics and politics European of sense make them help would that education )

delegates do not represent the ERTF. They represent their national their represent They ERTF. the represent not do delegates n as gatd emnn sas n h gnrl seby o the to assembly general the in seats permanent granted also and ( Nirenberg 2009,110 president, two vice presidents, treasurer and secretary general. general. secretary and treasurer presidents, vice two president,

oai international Romani ( 107 77 - aig a dtrie i te ttt, r not are statute, the in determined as making, ) .

) .

bodies, “rapidly developed honorary honorary developed “rapidly bodies, ‘ ees legitimacy reverse –

without without to rs ’ : CEU eTD Collection mlmn te a wl; h rgt o eie on decide to right the well; as them appropriate, implement where and, own our on programmes and projects, partners, our select to and development cultural and social, economic, our freelypromote to right autonomy, the cultural self to right the underlines text The Romanipe.” the of heritage cultural common the to oneself avows who Romanes, of language common Indo historical common the to oneself avows “who artic first the in Roma defines Charter The subcontinent. Indian the in roots its having “pan a form Roma that affirms text The ofrights, list a and although several claims formulated parts. both are in prea a into divided being declarations rights human of structure the follows Charter The Roma the the of adoption the been has ERTF of achievements main the of One 2.6.6 57 56 55 54 53 and experts to adherence traditional “the that stresses Charter the occasions, several On discipl of means by »integrated« be to is that problem explicitly social group,as a view fringe Charter the regardingThe social a “as criticizes Roma ordiscrimination obstruction vote to onand democratically.” it

¶4 Article6 Article1 ¶23 S eein wholethe text appendix

ERTF

in 2009. Such a charter was first proposed by RNC in 1994. in RNC by proposed first was charter a Such 2009. in 55

Charter Charter o

n . t

he Rights Rights he

- eemnto icuig “th including determination o f the the - uoen ainl ioiy wtot kin without minority, national European 78 Roma

- our representation free of any kind of of kind any of free representation our Greek origin, who avows oneself to the to oneself avows who origin, Greek

inary measures and state repression.” state and measures inary 56

rgt o utvt one’s cultivate to right e Charter

( McGarry 2010, 144 2010, McGarry o n the Rights of of Rights the n - state” mble le as le 57 54 )

CEU eTD Collection h Catr al uo Rm “o ciey atcpt i te oiia poess n their in processes political the in participate actively “to Roma upon calls Charter The ofRoma live.”number ar Funds, Roma. Roma of rights fundamental the guarantee Furtherm segregation tongue hate campaigns and stereotypes,prejudices, culture their of destruction or abandonment to or assimilation Roma of security and liberty integrity, mental and Most of self rightpeoples’ of of anyblatant infringementkind fateconstitutesa our on decidingspecialists 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 non stateless unified the to similarly brief, In wh states”

Article24 Article20 Article16 Article17 Article16 Article19 Article18 Article15 Article14 Article12 11, Article9 Article8 ¶20 ich

articles request States to guarantee the fundamental rights of Roma, such as the physical the as such Roma, of rightsfundamentalguarantee the to States request articles

- 67 should be granted a seat granted should a be in nationalthe state’s parliament! 69 62 determination.” , including Roma history and culture in mainstream school curricula, school mainstream in culture and history Roma including ,

n uo sae t esr te omn o ntoa Rm um Roma national of forming the ensure to states upon and Social as well as Funds, Structural that ensure “to EU the requests Charter The r, oe rils drs te U OC, n CE o upr Mme Sae to States Member support to CoE and OSCE, EU, the address articles some ore,

e used to support disadvantaged regions of the EU in which particularly large large particularly which in EU the of regions disadvantaged support to used e

and discriminationand employmentin 58 68 - territorial Roma nation. However, as opposed to the the to opposed as However, nation. Roma territorial

Declaration of Nation, Nation, of Declaration

61 , the right to establish own media in theirmotherin own media establishto right the , 66 79 , to act as role models by employing more more employing by models role as act to , 65

. the ERTF Charter embraces the vision of a a of vision the embraces Charter ERTF the

59 te ih nt e ujce t forced to subjected be not right the , 70 60

maue t measures , rla alliance/forum brella 63

ending school school ending e counteract he radical radical CEU eTD Collection Europe, but rather signed a partnership framework agreement with the European Roma Roma European the with agreement framework partnership a signed rather but Europe, repre partner negotiating special a as ERTF recognize not did EU The same Roma footing onthe the placing fellow non as their of aim the with Strategy Roma European comprehensive a of drafting the in ERTF the with Europea the urged ERTF of President the 2010) April in Cordoba any platforms at represented ofthe ERTF of reports annual the platfo five first the of minutes the neither In Inclusion. Roma for Strategy Framework EU an of adoption the development, recent important most the in limited very was role its body, Roma European representative most the be to appears ERTF the Although 2.6.7 rightsrecognizes and the ofstate ofRoma importance the the of cosmopolitanism September(accessed18 2011) 30 to 2009 74 http://www.ertf.org/images/stories/ inheldmeetingin2009 September Brussels, 73 72 71 owntheits consultative EUPlatform structure, Inclusio forRoma Brussels a (ERIO), Office Information

Annual Report on the European Roma and Travellers Forum Activities covering the period fromperiod1 the Activitiescovering TravellersForum European Romaand the on Annual Report T http://www.ertf.org/en/documents/reports http://ec.europa.eu/justice/disc heAnn2009

Participation Participation th

September 2010, 2010, September ual Report ofconfirmsERTF invited the Report ualthat of President wassecondERTF not the platform i n Declaration,

. http://www.ertf.org/images/stories/documents/ERTF_Annual_REP_2010_EN.pdf d

rafting rafting rimination/roma/roma documents/ERTF_Annual_Report_2009.pdf 72

ol I id n eiec o ta te RF a officially was ERTF the that of evidence any find I could 73 t he he ; although at the Second European Roma Summit (held in in Summit (held Roma European although Second ; the at - position the EU - ae pro based

Charter

Framework Strategy Strategy Framework - papers.html - 80 platform/index_en.htm

perceives the state as the main guarantor of guarantor main the as state the perceives - oa doay raiain ad created and organisation, advocacy Roma

(accessed 18 September 2011) September (accessed18 - - Roma citizens.” Roma level policies and politics. and policies level

n. (accessed 18 September 2011) September (accessed18

n Commission to cooperate to Commission n (accessed 18 September(accessed18 2011) f

or Roma Inclus Roma or etn te oa of Roma the senting 74

rm meetings rm

November ion 71

nor

, CEU eTD Collection Roma popula Roma geographically of poverty “the post concentrated on concentrating approach inclusion social discussed socio similar share who people other of exclusion the not but group, target a as people Roma on cited: been oft since has principle I Roma of Principles Common ten the where Presidency Czech the under 2009 April in held meeting its since Platform the of work the in involved been has ECPR EU. the of involvement active more the for advocate to (ERPC) NGOs field In influential most this in 2008,the 28.9.Líviaand Rapporteur: Affairs,Home 2010. Járóka, 9. authorities; 79 local and May2009 regional of Involvement 8. instruments; 78 Community of Involvement ofActivecivilRoma of society;the 10. participation Use 7. policies; based mainstream;forcultural AimingAwarenessapproach;the 4. 5. genderthe dimension; Transferofof evidenc 6. Roma European 77 International, Group GitanoSecretariado Rights F Education Roma Minorities, Minority and Roma for Center Racism,Policy Network, Organizations Grassroots Against Network European Foundations, 76 75 coordinating and supporting in bodies European for role restrictive more a designated the t Rather, affirmed policy. Roma Platform European a of form the in instance for solution European a of the of Europeanization the evaded bodies EU The

Working Document on the EU strategy on the social inclusion of Roma, Committee on Civil Liberties, JusticeLiberties, Civil on Committee Roma, inclusionofsocial the strategyon EU the on WorkingDocument o Ministers AffairsSocial and Employment Roma, the of inclusion the on Conclusions non and pragmatic Constructive, 1. RomaforEU Platform AprilPress Release,Prague,24 Inclusion, MEMO/09/193, 2009 met Itrainl Europe International, Amnesty - economic circum economic .

body, but rather a process a body, driven rather but by participants. formal a not is It policies. national and European into aspects Roma of inclusion – experts and NGOs actors organisations, key international governments, national which institutions, in Council the of request the at Presidency EU the and Commission the by organised environment flexible and open an is platform The

tion is directlytion orindirectly to by.”subject threatened can interact a interact can

- transitional rural and suburban underclass to which the majority of EU’s EU’s of majority the which to underclass suburban and rural transitional he primary responsibility of Member States for Roma inclusion, and and inclusion, Roma for States Member of responsibility primary he stances.”

nd formulate strategic advice for decision for advice strategic formulate nd n oa ihs ete Erpa Rm Ifrain fie Oe Society Open Office, Information Roma European Centre, Rights Roma an

- 78 discriminatory policies; 2. Explicit but not exclusive targeting; 3. Inter 3. targeting; exclusive not but Explicit 2. policies; discriminatory

This essentially means that the EU subscribed to the above the to subscribed EU the that means essentially This ‘ explicit but not exclusive targeting exclusive not but explicit nclusion 81 76

form ‘ Roma issue Roma 77 ed the European Roma Policy European Roma the ed Coalition

were accepted. Ever since, the second second the since, Ever accepted. were 75

’ , i.e. proclaiming the primacy the proclaiming i.e. , 79

- makers on the effective the on makers ’ . “It implies focusing focusing implies “It . . f the EU, 10394/09, 2810394/09, EU, fthe

und, Fundación und, –

EU EU e - - CEU eTD Collection Platform meetings.Platform var great and ERPC, ERIO, MEPs, Romani Strategy: Framework pro and Romani various sum, In properly is Directive) Equality Race applied.” (the force in already legislation the that ensuring part in competence, the has it where act to determined is Commission European the mobilisedto EUStructuralFunds be frameworkpolicies. ofthe implement can these the Also, national of ofRoma. coordination States“This to implementingMember situation in improve the policies 80 the for struggle the and Union, European the of role changing the regime, rights minority Romani analysed: were developments five particular, In studied. was issue’ ‘Roma the self of claims Romani assessing discussed was Roma” the are “who of question chapter This

EU RomaforEU Platform Press Release, Inclusion, MEMO/09/ im 80

Figure policies supports benchmarking and mutual learning and considerable resources in in resources considerable and learning mutual benchmarking supportsand policies migra rvdd akrud nlss o te ae study. case the for analyses background provided 6

nt RomaniofEUdrafting Frameworkparticipation in the the StrategyInclusion Romafor

, pro s,

- Romani oa rnntoa advocacy, transnational Roma MEPs

- - determination determination Romani actors have participated in the shaping EU’s Roma Roma EU’s shaping the in participated have actors Romani

Platform Strategy

EU 82 in the fourth chapter. fourth the in

which ERIO

193, Prague, 24 AprilPrague,24 193, 2009

il e f rca iprac when importance crucial of be will h iaeuc o te international the of inadequacy the ERPC

ey f te cos n the in actors other of iety

is, h controversial the First, Next, the emergence of emergence the Next, .

h fa of fear the

icular by icular CEU eTD Collection Roma, participation political of options of overviewsystematic a discourses, main the of analysis claims political and developments, actors, main self and recognition transnational

as well as well as situating claims Romani amongs

- eemnto o te oa natio Roma the of determination 83

t those of other trans ofother those t , the next chapter chapter next the , n. - will border groups.border aig rsne the presented Having

proceed with with proceed

the for CEU eTD Collection icuss () n h 1970 the In (1) discourses. The 3.1 religious and immigrants, diasporas, communities. including groups stateless and/or transnational situate and cosmopolitanisms dis are state of options discourses focusing onself Th settlements several are There autonomy. Roma of form territorial such no exists there of, aware am I as far As responsibility. own its in jurisdiction and this exercises issues minority of number substantial over jurisdiction the with vested is population majority the form Roma where territory certain a that imply would autonomy Territorial (i) personal autonomy.(ii) advocate ofautonomy.and form different a or may may enjoy enjoyterritorial Roma (i) either (1) social economic2000sand integration the main has been priority the ofRoma latethefrom human (3) violations;rights to focusshifted early until the1990s 2000s from is

The The

historical reconstruction reconstruction historical hpe aaye ad iuts oai lis I ietfe ad tde tre major three studies and identifies It claims. Romani situates and analyses chapter Shifting discoursesShifting cussed. self - determination

- bounded and transnational forms of political participation and representation and participation political of forms transnational and bounded Analysing and situating situating and Analysing The chapter chapter The

- approach determination, human rights violations, and social inclusion. rights human social determination, violations, and s - of the previous chapter chapter previous the of 90 cam o self of claims 1980s s

hm n h bodr pcrm f lis adv claims of spectrum broader the in them subsequently

underscor Chapter 3 Chapter 84 es the importance of recognizing that Roma are Roma recognizing of that importance the es identifies five interpretations of Romani Romani of interpretations five identifies

- eemnto wr o te oern; (2) forefront; the on were determination reflects a shift in the focus of dominant dominant of focus the in shift a reflects R

omani claims omani

where Roma form the form Roma where

( anced by other other by anced Rövid 2011 Rövid

Next, Next, ) .

CEU eTD Collection (2) The The (2) on feasible desirable and transnationala level. non such whether design, institutional and theory political Roma. the including Hungary, in minorities national and ethnic the well most the Probably residence. minority, a in membership basisof on the granted of autonomyis form This communities. non or Personal (ii) living country. their in nationalist right extreme or kings” ( Roma discussed As self local and mayors the rights, collective special enjoy not do they however, Macedonia); in Skopje of district Orizari Šuto the Hungary,in or in Gadnain instance (for population the majorityof countries. 81 counter need groups self and culture language, own their of stripped assimilated, posit opposite the in are minorities numerous However, ethnicity. or race perceived of basis the on institutions common from excluded involuntarily anti or rights human The political an mainstream into integrated fully be to are Roma Accordingly, Roma. of rights fundamental

Oft

ie eape ae h Ctlnas n te ugra cmuiis iig n ugr’ neighbo Hungary’s in living communities Hungarian the and Catalonians the are examples cited Romanestan). - ua rights human governments have the same rightsgovernments same have and the d social institutions. in the previous chapter previous the in - - aoiain rtcin nt oey n h frs f anti of forms the in solely not protections majoritarian ertra atnm apas o e oe utd o dsesd Roma dispersed for suited more be to appears autonomy territorial

uh lis ae en dacd ihr y self by either advanced been have claims Such

approach promotes the civic equality and the protection of the the of protection the and equality civic the promotes approach - iciiain prah s dqae o mnrte ta were that minorities for adequate is approach discrimination

- known functioning non functioning known

, there have also been attempts to create a country for the the countryfor a create to attempts been also have there , oiiin / ciit wo ih o e rd f h Roma the of rid get to wish who activists / politicians 85

duties as all theduties in others that country. - o: hy ae en involuntarily been have they ion: territorial autonomy is enjoyed by enjoyed is autonomy territorial - territoria - oenn institutions. governing

l form of autonomy is is autonomy of form l h ra calne for challenge real The - pone “Gypsy appointed - discrimination discrimination 81

These These u

not not ring CEU eTD Collection personal (pol self essential of form some to amount rights collective the If rights. collective or individual as granted be can and members, minority of differences the account into take rig equal of and discrimination a whole, the On ( but citizenship, undifferentiated and facilitate not does schools Roma establish to right the Having etc. hospitals, workplaces, segregation of issues the self on Focusing (i) (ii) and humandetermination rights approaches. (3) Kymlicka 2007,90 The focus on the the on focus The tcl clua, te) hy eoe n uooy Atnm cn e ihr ertra or territorial either be can Autonomy autonomy. an become they other) cultural, itical,

( Brunner Küpper and 2002,17 te otm f h heacy f ioiy ihs s h picpe f non of principle the is rights minority of hierarchy the of bottom the t ) - . determination and minority rights have been criticized for downplaying for criticized been have rights minority and determination

social inclusion social and exclusion from common institutions, such as schools, schools, as such institutions, common from exclusion and hts. The next step is special, group special, is step next The hts. Non Figure -

(individual (individual or collective) discrimination discrimination rights) (equal (personal (personal territorial) or of Roma has grown out of the critiques of the (i) self (i) the of critiques the of out grown has Roma of

) ahr aiu group various rather 7 .

The hierarchy rights of Special rights Autonomy 86

- differentiated minority rights rights minority differentiated - differentiated rights which which rights differentiated - determination determination

- - CEU eTD Collection agnlsto fRm. ouigecuieyo iciiainipssavr simplistic very a imposes discrimination on exclusively Focusing Roma. of marginalisation the to contribute that discrimination than other processes social and economic neglecting comm is it return, In (ii) housing, healthcare. and education, decent to access provide and jobs their lost who Roma of masses the of conditions living the improve to than Roma of difference ethnic the promote to cheaper is it Moreover, ethnicisation ofsocial problems,the thus inter undermining self of discourse the Furthermore, mainstream attend schools, classes.mixed to like would who students Roma those of exclusion the overcoming and communism of collapse the Following racism. by explained be entirely cannot Roma of proportions huge of misery the that realized gradually makers policy European and National responsibilityelite’s to fortheir prejudices failure by blamingpopular act also racism to disadvantage social Attributing ills. social other and aggression inside it turn such approaches, exploit may simplifying forces political wing right moderate) even (and extreme Furthermore, Roma within inter local of diversity the to insensitive of vision oil eain, lmn ol te rjdcd aoiy Sc a apoc is approach an Such majority. prejudiced the only blaming relations, social Dfeec’ s sd o xli Rm ipvrsmn, oil eso and tension social impoverishment, Roma explain to used and is people ‘Difference’ ‘Roma’ between ‘difference’ el essential everyone some of promotion The ( p ‘Roma’ of isolation the conserves political It initiatives. ‘integration’ of failure the and migration, conflicts, Kovats 2003 ni

communities forinstance violence, humandomestic trafficking usu and

e n oit epot taiinl rjdcs n lw expectations. low and prejudices traditional exploits society in se

) .

n o rtcs te ua rgt/niiciiain icus for discourse rights/antidiscrimination human the criticise to on - determination may be easily interpreted as contributing to to contributing as interpreted easily be may determination - - out, and blame the Roma for increasing crime, crime, increasing for Roma the blame and out, ethnic relations, as well as human rights violations rights human as well as relations, ethnic ol ad suppo and eople 87

- ethnic solidarity.ethnic t te dooy f segregation of ideology the rts ( Kovats 2003

diminishes the diminishes ry. ) .

CEU eTD Collection extremely poor micro regions in Eastern Europe is a crucial policy objective and will will and objective policy crucial hopefully living improve the a ofmany conditions Roma. is Europe Eastern in regions micro poor extremely by” threatened indirectly or to subject directly is population Roma EU’s of majority the which to underclass suburban post concentrated geographically of poverty “the on Concentrating strategies. of financing and monitoring coordination, the improve to attempts initiative Each Roma. of inclusion economic and social the at aimed has Strategy)Framework EU Inclusion, (iii excl 2006 socially structure and class and economically society civil both outside i.e. locked being underclass, populations an of formation the to led neo The society. of out graduallysliding started and market labour legal the restruc the 83 and 82 only spots. two blind like camp concentration into forced immigrants Ashkali post n do who groups “Roma” other all of difficulties social the implicitly ethnicity of phenomena complex post Europ throughout communities Roma by faced difficulties all not However,

Ibid. JusticeLiberties, Civil on Committee Roma, inclusionofsocial the strategyon EU the on WorkingDocument ) Each wave of the above discussed Roma strategies (EU pre (EU strategies Roma discussed above the of wave Each ) Home Affairs, Rapporteur: Lívia Járóka, 28.9.Lívia Rapporteur: Affairs,Home 2010. Járóka, - - communist regions, such as itinerant groups struggling for adequate stopping places or places stopping adequate for struggling groups itinerant as such regions, communist “the excludes explicitly strategy Framework EU recent The transition. communist ) .

turation of national economies, most Eastern European Roma suddenly fell out of out fell suddenly Roma European Eastern most economies, national of turation

is a legitimate and vital and legitimate a is

- ae dsrmnto [n] sus f migration” of issues [and] discrimination based 88

policy focus. Developing the isolated and and isolated the Developing focus. policy

campi nomadi campi - accession, Decade of Roma of Decade accession, ( ot live in impoverished in live ot - zlni n Ladányi and Szelényi transitional rural and and rural transitional in Italy in - liberal transition liberal e are related to to related are e –

to mention to

national 83 uded

and and CEU eTD Collection oiia eult. uh clu bid prah eeae ehi dfeecs o h private the to differences ethnic relegates approach blind colour a Such equality. political a At (i) participation. political of fu options into translated be can rights of pyramid The 3.2 dangerous to lead aiming policies disciplining at “workshy” Roma call and unemployment with Roma Associating Roma. of exclusion the to contribute that stereotypes those precisely reproduces exclusion social and misery with Roma identifying Moreover, education. incre for aim rather should and accomplished already countries EU most objective modest very a school, primary Romafinish all ensure to aims strategy Framework EU the instance For denominator. common commo for aiming Furthermore, Barany 1999 in Instead, Europe. Eastern across MPs Romani of dozens be should there largely are 2009 Roma McGarry that suggest Studies Roma. underrepresented of representation and participation political the for provide to seem not does regime citizenship a such practice, in However, can and alsoelections, elected as representatives. be pa they citizens, equal As community. political the of member other any as power political of exercise and control distribution, the in claim same the supposedly have They According advocates and individualsphere the equality citizen. ofeach ndamental level, Roma participate in given political community on the basis of their formal their of basis the on community political given in participate Roma level, ndamental

Optionsofstate ing for their social assistance stigmatizes the whole group as “social burden” and may may and burden” “social groupas whole the stigmatizesassistance social their for ing ly, Roma citizens participate in the demos on the same footing as any other citizen. other any as footing same the on demos the in participate citizens Roma ly,

; emesh 2006 Vermeersch n oa, ainl n Erpa level European and national local, on - boundedpolitical participation and representation asing the number of Roma students in secondary and tertiary tertiary and secondary in students Roma of number the asing n European objectives may result in reaching the lowest lowest the reaching in result may objectives European n ) .

osdrn ter rprin n h gnrl population, general the in proportion their Considering 89

( ááy 2002b Bárány

( Szalai 2000 Szalai ;

lmv 2002 Klímová ) .

rticipate in rticipate ; CEU eTD Collection minimal, far below far theirminimal, demographic proportion. Roma or mainstream on either parliaments national to elected Roma of number the Overall, satellites. their becoming risked and parties mainstream with themselves allied that legislatures national the in seats secure to managed parties Romani those Only havingboth predominantly R of case the in (as focus ethnic its disclose explicitly not does organization the if party political as register to possible is it nonetheless, in instance For associations. Bulgaria as or parties political as either elections national and local in participate to organizations minority / ethnic allow may regimes citizenship blind Colour elect 9 give to estimated are Roma parties mainstream of lists the on or own counted Slovakia in fifty almost and Romania, in 150 Poland, in ten to six Hungary, in 280 Republic, ident bodies, Klímová expert and (consultative etc agencies, bodies governmental public charities); foundations, (association, fur also may citizens Romani ( 2000 in 160 and 1996 in 136 to 1992 in 106 from grew councils local of members Romani Romania In Poland. except countries European Central the all in councillors and mayors Romani now are there as level, local on encouraging more is situation the representation, parliamentary of terms in progress visible no is there While Klímová 2002,119 ed to to parliament!ed the , five

ate bsd n tnc dniy r c are identity ethnic on based parties

MPs of Ro of MPs fe 10 eitrd oai soitos n fudtos n h Czech the in foundations and associations Romani registered 120 ified ) .

ma origin in the whole of Eastern Europe who were elected on their on elected were who Europe Eastern of whole the in origin ma

. ad i so via and ) oma membership) oma ther their interest in non in interest their ther - 10 % of the population) no Roma candidate has ever been been ever has candidate Roma no population) the of % 10 - ald rdtoa laes A fr rvt bodies, private for As leaders. traditional called ( Free Bulgaria Bulgaria Free Bárány 2002a Bárány 90

(

Bárány 2002b,213

ntttoal fridn o register; to forbidden onstitutionally - electoral forms such as private bodies private as such forms electoral ,

for example for ) . and and

For instance, in Slovakia (where Slovakia in instance, For Democratic Congress Party Congress Democratic ) .

the number of elected elected of number the party tickets has been been has tickets party

CEU eTD Collection Ministry Information ofPublic Issu Romani for Office the of Head the and Office Presidency the in IssuesMinorities National Adviseron of posts Party the Romani the guaranteed also which Party Democratic Social the with agreement coalition a through sea a gained RomaniParty the from MP Romani a elections, non The interest. their to voice give and Roma represent to supposed also are they servants, civil appointed non and Roma Both consultative functions. Roma these All etc. coordinators, ministerial o inter plenipotentiary include organizations specific Roma the with deal to bodies public established states European Eastern Most de ( legitimacy. th giving thus partners negotiating as them see still authorities some although Mondialu) (Bercea Romani passes wealth and and charisma son. local father to In from leaders, in one addition find can on dependent usually is status whose leaders traditional such exist still There communities. t authorities local by appointed as (such leaders Roma traditional for As lmv 2002 Klímová monstrations, social monstrations, social movements, a the self the a

) . - sceay f tt, esnl dios o h pie iitr r president, or minister prime the to advisors personal state, of secretary r

- appointed King (Florin Cioabă), Emperor (Iulian Rădulescu) and President President and Rădulescu) (Iulian Emperor Cioabă), (Florin King appointed electoral and electoral field may also be linked. In the 2000 Romanian Romanian 2000 the In linked. be also may field electoral and electoral oai iies a as egg i ifra atvs, ae at in part take activism, informal in engage also may citizens Romani ‘ of all Roma all of - oa a wr i sc pbi bde. Although bodies. public such in work may Roma

( o take charge of keeping order and collecting taxes in Roma in taxes collecting and order keeping of charge take o Klímová2002, 117 ’ . Such leaders are recognized only by a handful of followers, followers, of handful a recognizedby only are leaders Such .

and

online politicalorganizing. es with the title of Sub of title the with es 91 vajda vajda - - specific institutions have only advisory and and advisory only have institutions specific

iitra cmisos n committees, and commissions ministerial ) .

and

bulibasha t (in addition to the reserved one) the to addition (in t - Secretary of the State at the at State the of Secretary

, hy ee historically were they ), ‘ Roma issue Roma hy r typically are they em an aura of aura an em ’ . These . CEU eTD Collection lcin tw elections parliamentary Romanian 2008 the In MP. one than more of election the preclude not does system the However, well. as Slovenia and Croatia, Herzegovina, and Bosnia in tried been reserved of system The has come from Romaseat Partythe Romaofficially Party (now called Pro reserved the occupyingrepresentative Each representative. Romani a for reserved been 1990, Romani In representation. and participation political their facilitate to minorities to rights special accord countries Some (ii) byelected, actions Roma. their aversion to find detrimental and Travellers the of Assembly Plenary the of President the also is he and Council City Sibiu the on representative as elected was but Deputies, of Chamber the for elections part Roma of Centre Christian the formed instance, for Cioabă, bodies. supranational or national in positions fulfil or governments local of members become and politics electoral into way their find leaders traditional the of Some Plena its chairs Cioaba Florin as long as Forum Travellers http://www.ertf.ro/viz/About%20ERTF/10 and Roma European the of work 84 part In representation. and participation political of sphere additional an have autonomy of form a enjoying Roma (iii) t threshold), for party lists minimum as quotas (such and districting, conscious race rules regions, ethnic/national defined of overrepresentation electoral certain from exemption minorities of include representation political the improve to intended techniques electoral Other onlist mainstream ofa partyanother

For instance the biggest Romanian Romani Party (Partida Romilor Pro Romilor (Partida Party Romani Romanian biggest the instance For

ou. t s impo is It Forum. Rm wr eetd o te is tm: n eetd o te eevd et and seat, reserved the for elected one time: first the for elected were Roma o

( Reynolds 2006 Reynolds

seats for Roma representatives in national or local assemblies have assemblies local or national in representatives Roma for seats icular, in Hungary minorities enjoy collective rights in the fields of fields the in rights collective enjoy minorities Hungary in icular, )

rtant to underline that most Roma see such leaders, even if if even leaders, such see Roma most that underline to rtant .

a a seat in the Lower Chamber of the Parliament has, since since has, Parliament the of Chamber Lower the in seat a a - 0/en

( McGarry 2010,91

(accessed 9th September(accessed 9th 2011) y, and ran ran and y, 92

–

unsuccessfully ) .

- 84 Europea) refuses to take part in the in part take to refuses Europea)

–

uoen oa and Roma European in the 2000 national national 2000 the in - Europe). Europe). ry Assembly. Assembly. ry

he CEU eTD Collection powers as the local minority local powers as the assem self national self The minority one. local national the are to nor report level, to obliged national governments the to subordinated not is local The level. self minority self minority local the of interests the represent national These assembly. one establish can group minority Each minoritythe their capacity in population such. as scholarships institutions, establish can it minority; the of festivities and holidays the decorations; medals, name, own its sites; memorial and monuments protected violate rightsinstitutions the that within minority; of authority its define circle ofthe can it the o operation the to related decision or practice a to object and measures initiate proposal, a make information, for ask to right the include governments self minority local of powers The self local self minority are rights collective of bearers The languages. minority of use the and culture, media, education, electoral both in non and state of options the recapitulates table following The - governments and the nationalgovernments the government, and respectively. .; most importantly, it must consent on any act of the local government affecting affecting government local the of act any on consent must it importantly, most .; - governments on local and national level that are intended to be partners be to intended are that level national and local on governments - electoral are electoral

- governments but with a national a with but scope. governments nas.

- bounded political participation of Roma Roma of participation political bounded

opne, s companies, - governments on the national national the on governments

- oenet r natio or government

blies have similar similar have blies hos mda or media, chools, nal

to - f CEU eTD Collection bv al uoen pltcl rn. iies f oai rgn ae rne f pin for options of range a have origin Romani of Citizens arena. political European, all above ‘ The 3.3 inte the at lobbying in or attention international gaining in interest little had Ram ofstates.composed Internat states. participating of bodies by implemented and ratified, upon, agreed drafted, are agreements multilateral and Bilateral state. own their by principally politics international in represented be to supposed po democratic of members other any to Similarly (i) participating politics / international in European that abovemay tripartite the into scheme. fit autonomy equality political special special formal rights – Roma issue Roma Optionspolitical participationof transnational

based on her empirical study empirical her on based

over quotas of mainstream ofmainstream quotas exemption from rules from exemption ( mainstream political mainstream political party Roma communal reservedcommunal ’ e.g. threshold lower minority territories parties)for ethnic has also emerged also has Table race

minority self - Roma MP Roma government representation of representation districting electoral parties - 1 party conscious conscious seats

Options ofOptions state ional organizations have also been founded by and are primarily are and by founded been also have organizations ional

– – bounded andpolitical participation representation

for the above discussed reasons discussed above the for found that, indeed, most Romani activists and leaders and activists Romani most indeed, that, found associations, associations, private body private foundations, foundations, activism 94

lities, citizens of Romani origin are are origin Romani of citizens lities, consultative and non electora expert bodies, expert governmental governmental Ombudsman public body public agencies, –

in the in

rnational level for level rnational bulibasha, etc.) bulibasha, leader (vajda,leader

international, traditional traditional traditional

CEU eTD Collection as well as in the drafting and adoption of various EU level resolutions and recommendations andresolutions level ofadoptionEU various drafting and thein as well as Ro of plight puttingthe in role vital a played haveMEPs Romani The of list Fidesz2009 onthe the and 2004 in elected was Járóka Lívia and Democrats; Free of Alliance Hungarian the of list Vik Europe, Eastern From 1994. and 1989, 1987, in Party Workers’ Socialist Spanish the of list party the on times three elected was who Heredia Ramírez Dios de Juan was origin Romani of MEP first The Roma. of exclusion social and struggle the beenin activelyParliamentinvolvedhas European The engage only the electoralpolitics, existing in ofinternational form Parliament. the European non seek may citizens ar international Romani the in interests their represent to likely not are states respective their so level national on represented adequately not are Roma above, demonstrated as However, the with it should role speak EU, but is government the oftheir associations civic not that her told explicitly activists Romani Some rights. their improving 85 list party national on quota Roma a Introducing system. electoral European the reforming on plans several are there However, moment. the at utopia a be to appears level transnational a on Roma to rights political special Granting (ii) the However, candidates. Romani national most in legislatives as currently of736members out one only individual for vote severethan more even be to appears Parliament European the in Roma of underrepresentation cannot origin Romani t lists, party national for vote only can citizens EU that noted be to is It Framework recentincluding the EU Strategy Inclusion. forRoma

F or a detaileda or internationalof alloverview see Romarelated documents

–

Hungarian Civic Union. - lcoa frs f rnntoa pltcl atcpto or participation political transnational of forms electoral 95

s of s tória Mohácsi was elected in 2004 on the the on 2004 in elected was Mohácsi tória Member States Member

Majt ( Ram 2010,201 Ram

ényiViziand against the discriminationthe against

with significant Romani Romani significant with ma on the EU’sagenda, the on ma is ofRomani origin. herefore citizens of citizens herefore ( 2006 ) .

) .

ena. ena.

CEU eTD Collection ( multi of disintegration the from resulting statelessness as well as long, so for suffered have they which under states national by treatment special transnational to claim non transnational legitimate a have Roma that argues Meyer stateless groups. self of form a entail essentially would st various in living citizens Romani that imply would autonomy of form transnational a Having (iii) party. European own their forming consider also maycandidates Romani elections, at run and form European the in minorities/nations stateless Euro if for Furthermore, parliament. seats reserved have to possible also theoretically is It citizens. Romani of representation the improve to option one is population new against countriesdiscriminatedthem. 86 in autonomyfor cultural transnational for arguesNimni, Ephraim of patriotism agonistic the and national the on relying Kímová, 2001, 300

The breakup of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia leftTheRomastateles YugoslaviathousandsbreakupCzechoslovakia and of of communities Romani and digenous

tts f rnntoa mnrt my rvd poeto fo te discriminatory the from protection provide may minority transnational of status ates could have jurisdiction over substantial range of issues pertaining to them. This them. to pertaining issues of range substantial over jurisdiction have could ates ) . democratically legitimate long a Saami as the seen presupposes, of best realization light is the autonomy In such aspiration. gaining legitimate experience, a is autonomy political and trans gain to Roma the of efforts the that doubt no be can there present trans existing the a into being incorporated of be status could special theminority how see to easy not is it Although

As for the institutional settingAs institutional autonomy, forthe oftransnational Meye

- territorial minority that have been persecuted for centuries for persecuted been have minority that territorial

- pean political parties and their candidates were allowed to to allowed were candidates their and parties political pean cultural aut cultural

elected bodies ofelected bodies representation. ne alia inter

( Klímová - eemnto ad self and determination onomy concept of Karl Renner and Otto Bauer Otto and Renner Karl of concept onomy 96 te ucs o te oa n establishing in Roma the of success the ,

- lxne 2007 Alexander - tnc atr Erpa co European Eastern ethnic ) .

- h otie ta te two the that outlines She governance of dispersed dispersed of governance s, as the citizenship lawsofthecitizenship as the s, - ( day legal frameworks, frameworks, legal day Meyer 2001,301 uooy en a being autonomy - term goal whose whose goal term r remains vague r remains

- ( national cultur national Meyer 2001 Meyer - untries national national de jure jure de )

) .

: al A 86

CEU eTD Collection radical visionradical ofdeterritorialization ofall promoted bynations Nimni: assimilation and instrument an merely are They organization. political of forms and autonomy l indigenous and Romani the subordinated has that state a from emanate they because citizenship “internal th to Referring from majoritytreatment societies. the to due alienated severely are they (3) pattern; settlement dispersed have they (2) society; and them, minorities surround that societies majority the from separate even or different feeling of sense strong a have they (1) common: in characteristics three has groups self and determination state by misused oft a and negative As on, on authorities. dependent based by, granted policies are and rights legislation Minority experiences. state towards mistrust by driven largely f drive the that appears It – protection minoritie no have we If it. over fight cannot to territory If dangerous. not is ethno own exclusivepropertyan become particular ofa its on nationalism and culture with e claiming without sovereign non becomes seeks nation each that roof the If

they still operate under their own laws and customs outside those of the majority the of those outside customs and laws own their under operate still they e deep mistrust between majority societies and Roma, Klímová argues that that argues Klímová Roma, and societies majority between mistrust deep e ”

( Klímová osqec, eea Rmn atvss r seig fr o self of form a seeking are activists Romani several consequence, - based solutions” are not feasible. “The citizenship rights fail to do justice do to failrights “Thefeasible. citizenship are solutions” not based

- ( government outside the mechanisms the outside government ofstate. Klímová or trans or - Alexander 2007, 399 2007, Alexander

- - Alexander 2007,411 state forms of autonomy of forms state

cuie ertra cnrl te nuin f politics of infusion the control, territorial xclusive 97

) .

s and majorities, we do not need minority need not do we majorities, and s As an alternative, Klímová embraces the embraces Klímová alternative, an As ) .

–

- of both scholars and activists and scholars both of ertra,i ec nto cn be can nation each if territorial, - national group, we do not need group,national need wedonot

u national nlike of absorption absorption of aws, aws, –

is is -

CEU eTD Collection nationalism, (3)statelessness,nationalism, (4)deterritorialization, (5)emergence ofa transnational elite. diff five on focusing distinguished be can cosmopolitanism Romani of interpretations exclusive, mutually necessarily not five, least At 3.4 ec and social to states of mainstream in them include political, to and rights citizens the fundamental failure ofRomani protect the from stemming are claims cosmopolitan Romani words, other In thus Roma, strengthening social identity their of conditions material the improve to funding increased to lead will strategy that is hope The bodies. international and governments national both with leverage of power its increase to aimed Union Romani International the parliament, own its with nation, made was non transnational stateless a be to claim the that argue authors Several (1) special rights special autonomy

equality political formal Romani cosmopolitanisms

for

onomic processes. One can argue that although the Roma are striving for for striving are Roma the although that argue can One processes. onomic

taei purposes strategic mainstream/European parties? reserved seat in the in reserved European seat EU: Romani MEP, European EU: MEP, European Romani Romani politicalpar Romani transnational (cultural)transnational Table global: viaglobal: states Parliament? 2 autonomy?

quotas of quotas electoral Options ofOptions politicaltransnational Romaparticipation for

( . By raising the ethnic status of Roma from minority to to minority from Roma of status ethnic the raising By . Guy 22 2001,

ty? erent elements: (1) instrumental considerations; (2) considerations; instrumental (1) elements: erent

) .

OSI, E IRU, ERTF, RNC, informal activisminformal private body private RRC, ERIO, non electoral

CPRSI, MG - territorial nation territorial EU Platform, EU Platform, public body public

ROM

- S

this -

CEU eTD Collection either in the “home country” or as refugees and asylum seekers in a “receiving country”. It is is It country”. “receiving a in seekers asylum and refugees as or country” “home the in either to claim The (3) avant providing adequatenation mode more a to globalized worldthan nation the that ofthe an form Roma manifestos, discussed above the to According participation” power and power of exercise of forms new of forerunners the nation the to latecomers are Roma the because However,“exactly established minority, ethnic an as recognition claim to able being of stage the reached finally have ‘Roma’ society, of recesses subpolitical the in centuries After ‘awakening’. national of concept century19th traditional, the with accordance claims thefrom stems Romani cosmopolitanism manner, seemingly paradoxical Ina (2) are own solved, problems politicalhow greater their i.e. participation in say greater a but statehood, Roma not is motive political real their nation, a as recognition Charter ERTF of case the (in global a therefore Roma state that convictionthe from stems cosmopolitanism Romani marginalization. and exclusion persecution, state of experiences governme a Such ( state kin quasi a like act to bodies international demanding protection international for strive and Czechoslovakia of disintegration themselvesfound Roma of thousands of tens that remembered be to Gheorghe 2011

f h rcgiin n self and recognition the of oeae cosmopolitanism moderate t. n h cnrr, t s rvn y itut oad sae uhrte bsd on based authorities state towards mistrust by driven is it contrary, the On nts. ” ( Kovats 2003 lgl re i evsoe gaaten te iet, self liberty, the guaranteeing envisioned is order legal ) ) . statelessness

) .

may also originate from experie from originate also may - - eemnto o Rm nto. It nation. Roma of determination bounded policies and politics failed to tackle th tackle to failed politics and policies bounded

os eod h ojcie f xrig rsue on pressure exerting of objective the beyond goes Yugoslavia. even as a nation of equal standing with thos with standing equal of nation a as even Declaration of Nation of Declaration 99

De facto De and nces of exclusion and hostility and exclusion of nces ) or European (in the case of case the (in European or ) de jure jure de - state universe, they may be be theyuniverse,may state de jure jure de ( Thelen 2005, Thelen 46

can be “interpreted in in “interpreted be can - ad non garde stateless Roma thus Roma stateless - eemnto and determination stateless after the statelessafter ( Pet nationalistic rova 2004 rova e plight ofplight e - territorial e already already e - states. ) .

)

CEU eTD Collection nation of abolition the and nations, majority of idea the of deconstruction the attachments, national the for stands cosmopolitanism Romani form, radical most its In (4) states. world/Europ the throughout citizens Romani of rights fundamental Romani of ideologists main the of one Gheorghe, nation. in papercosmopolitanism, recent acknowledgesa Roma whole the to cosmopolita own their project organizations international or NGOs in working elite Romani transnational minuscule the as seen be also can Roma of cosmopolitanism the Finally, (5)

- states. states. t ih n mtto Zoim r n ohr id f tnc atclrs. n fact, In particularism. ethnic of kind other any or Zionism imitation an with it a activists Romani f ys atvs my e ohn ls ta te blto o te nation the of abolition the than ( less nothing be may activism Gypsy of self human individual of bedrock new a to self the from shift must law prot human global of be foundation The deconstructed. themselves must in be minorities must majorities ethnic of rights the that much so of logic not is It minority. national the a than rather transnational a is as Roma define to seeking this everywhere; rights human having for substitute no is There ho the century. after refuges as emerged that sanctuaries other the of protection twentieth the them For opposite. the is lesson p can own their of place only a that having Holocaust the from learnt have they that imagine still can Jews while Acton and GheorgheActon and 2001,68

mehalla re stuck with their cosmopolitanism; they cannot cop out from from out cop cannot they cosmopolitanism; their with stuck re , the ghetto, the segregated pariah nomadism, and the the and nomadism, pariah segregated the ghetto, the ,

- ( contradictory illusion of national self national of illusion contradictory ahu 2002 Calhoun )

100 oet hm rm rptto, o Rm the Roma for repetition, a from them rotect

- determination. The unfolding a unfolding The determination. ) .

el dctd oai activists Romani educated Well - etr Hlcut blse the abolished Holocaust century e without the mediation of mediation the without e class consciousness class oas o te sixteenth the of locaust deterritorialization ected, as that ethnic ethnic that as ected, - determination determination n experiences n - genda of the the of state. of CEU eTD Collection following figureThe recapitulat

adaptive techniques, as I know languages, I have people to meet in many places in in manyinplaces meet to people languages,Ihave Iknow as techniques, adaptive organizatio international between mobility My cosmopolitanism. imagined of form another international the Following or self grounds. of my cosmopolitan, these proletariat, fall on a the activism for After Roma argue in [...] perspective to culture. and started histories I social Communism Roma onto it projected and background cultural and social my affirmed I category, this of usage the with being of heritage and meaning the not was I although Rom a am a I meant Activism be. to obliged necessarily that life my of moment certain a at decided I the world and I worldand the know how to ns and various places has been part of this: I thought I have my own own my have I thought I this: of part been has places various and ns

es the five interpretations of Romani cosmopolitan claims. - otaa a pr o ti wdsra Rm dapr was diaspora Roma widespread this of part as portrayal

deal with with deal my in luggage life a 101 ţigan

T rlx h tnin ta wn along went that tensions the relax To . n opportunity to come into terms with with terms into come to opportunity n

( Gheorghe 2011 t es European least at ) .

CEU eTD Collection

• (2) trans recognition a of distinct nation - statenationalism • • cosmopolitanism (1) instrumental international international states pressure on trasnational advocacy Figure 8 • • (3) moderatecosmopolitanism

mediated by states) global/ rulelaw European of (not structures European outside minority state determination of nation Roma / recognition , autonomy and self

Romani cosmopolitanismsRomani

102

• (5) projectedcosmopolitanism transnational transnational Romani elite generalization of position the of

cosmopolitanism (4) radical • • withering of states nations general deterritorialization of

CEU eTD Collection comprising (4)non trans of phenomenon the (2) solidarities, transnational of forms pro distinguished:(1) be can challenges of types Four trinity ofstate transnation spectre broader the in located be can actors Romani by advanced claims cosmopolitan The 3.5 87 the transnationalcaptures pro pro of forms transnational self the either promoting on focus may claims cosmopolitan behind considerations strategic The (1)

ExpressionofHannahArendt

Situating - eemnto, r ua rgt o sca icuin f oa Al f hs entail these of All Roma. of inclusion social or rights human or determination, l oiaiis hlegn te ethla itrainl re, n atclr the particular in order, international Westphalian the challenging solidarities al - nation R omani cosmopolitanisms - territorial stateless nations. territorial - territory. - tt nto, and nation, state

- ( Non Roma advocacy, i.e. i.e. advocacy, Roma 1973 Transborder statelessnations -

Figure Roma microcosm hasRoma the that in developed last two decades. 87 Transnational solidarities - )

territorial statelessnations

Trans 9

Situating Romani cosmopolitanismSituating Romani - statenations ne alia inter

103 ainlsi cam das u atnin o the to attention our draws claims nationalistic

rnntoa solidarity transnational

- f 3 trans (3) of representadvocacy and activism Roma

- border stateless nations, nations, stateless border Th . s interpretation is

CEU eTD Collection minority form others s are nations most so states, than nations more many are there fact, of matter As a boundaries. state with coincide not do time the of most nations of boundaries The political action. has largelythat ignored been of highlights interpretation nationalist importance (2) The the andBenhabib, PetranovicShapiro, 89 88 personal (e.g. overlap jurisdictions territorial their while membership, their to regard with separate and distinct be can communities political boundaries: and membership territorial between mismatches possible two identifies Bauböck manner, similar a In one of members nation specific live: only always will ethno some there remain where territory a delimit to possible not simply is it cases, most It ethno every of program great the does only Not ome nations are located on the territory of more than one state (trans state one than more of territory the on located are nations ome

Two recently published edited volumes focus on trans on focus volumes edited published recently Two AseminalArendt’sis exception

withkin Trans Hungarians) - nations within a state (sub a within nations - state nation state - nation having its state, but also the territorial enmeshment of nations. of enmeshment territorial the also but state, its having nation -

state (e.g. state ubr f ain lmt h raiain f h uiesl nationalist universal the of realization the limit nations of number 88

Continental Imperialism: the PanImperialism:the Continental (2007).

, until recently, until

Figure

Trans Trans state state nation state (e.g. Statelesstrans - state and natio stateless 89 104 Kurds) , by

- -

- state nations). nations). state state national attachments: national state

the literature ontransnational literature identities the and Stateless

- - - national minorities.national Movements n trans s

Sub

(e.g. Catalans) (e.g. - -

state nations state in state national state Arendt

stateless. Bauböck and Faist and Bauböck - state nations), while while nations), state - cultural autonomy cultural (

1973

Furthermore, )

. attachments

(2010), CEU eTD Collection GermanArendt movements, Hannah points that out pan the to relation In theorists. society civil global of those to similar extent Trans (a) na Trans and political community. territory state of boundaries the between simply not is mismatch the i.e. community, trans stateless a of members instance, For community. political recognized legally and specific a imply donot suchin national capture it attachmentsthat cannot membership i.e. communities, a jurisdiction territorial on focuses typology Bauböck’s However, overlapping communities calls He migration). international (e.g. overlaps membership their while jurisdictions separate territorially have may polities conversely, or, minorities), of st and boundaries national between congruence the for aiming boundaries, membership or state Trans (b) ate borders. Irredentist and secessionist movements seek to restore the trinity the secessionist and borders.Irredentist restore to movements seek ate ofnation tion - tt nto, uh s h Krih nat Kurdish the as such nation, state - - state nationalisms may either (a) negate, (b) rectify, or (c) transform the trinity of state of trinity the transform (c) or rectify, (b) negate, (a) mayeither nationalisms state territory. - - state nationalisms may advance radical critiques of the nation the of critiques radical advance maynationalisms state tt ntos a rciy h Wspain nentoa odr by order international Westphalian the rectify may nations state all times, the politicalall acts ofthe state at determine, should circumstances, with changing needs, national therefore that and states; not and people the was history of course the in factor and permanent only interest state over national of transcend "worldpolitics that usually argued priority the on insisted always politically, Pan The […] people's people" "stateless a Russian Russians the in Th government. lie own their to pan from separatum corpus all felt a as themselves keeping of their in was state, the theories to indifference superiority the through Slav runs […] institution an movements. as state the to Hostility

( Bauböck 2007, 92 is is what the Slavophiles meant when they called the the called they when meant Slavophiles the what is is ) 105 . o, o o bln t oe pcfc political specific one to belong not do ion,

( Arendt 1973,237 Arendt

- s the framework of the state," that the state,"that the of framework the s Germans, who were more articulate articulate more were who Germans,

h fre nse, the nested, former the nd membership in political in membership nd ) .

- state system, to some to system, state - Slavic and pan and Slavic ' correcting

- state latter ’

the - - - - CEU eTD Collection citizenship regimes. Ascitizenship Kastoryano argues Trans nation of project policies the extend citizenship. These dual a such policies membership extraterritorial through trans a of government homeland the Typically, borders. state within pluralism promoting and accepting trans Finally, (c) belongingnot nation. the to those of assimilation forced or expulsion be extermination, the by changed can boundaries membership the Alternatively, boundaries. state changing by territory 90 may the into cat fall also they i.e. state, original sending/ home/ kin/ a have not may three last The groups. territorial trans oftrans categories of nation concept territorial the on relies cosmopolitanism Romani of interpretation radical The (3)

Concerningcasethe oftrans Hungarian - tt ehi gop: i daprs (i trans (ii) diasporas, (i) groups: ethnic state - tt ntoaim my lo e en s lgclcneune f h lbrlzto of liberalization the of consequence logical a as seen be also may nationalisms state - tt nation state organize spe and state which in democracies re homogeneity, cultural nation unitary the of creation the of time legitimacy. gain to order in state, the before ofwhich reappropriatedlie heart identities, them organized place to redefined, and the at immigrants, of associations by guided are that activities cultural privileged libe cultural The in politics. step identity next and logical pluralism a is communities transnational of emergence The - building beyond the state territory in which the nation is already dominant already is nation the which in territory state the beyondbuilding Non . - - tt ntos a as se self seek also may nations state state and stateless nations. The literature stateless and nations.literature The state

is t h etnin f h ntoa cmuiy eod h border the beyond community national the of extension the at aims - egory groups. ethnic ofstateless ertra ntos a b ietfe b frhr eosrcig the deconstructing further by identified be can nations territorial

ak on behalf ofsuch onbehalf identitiesak

- state nationalis state - mre u t a utcluaim ple i Western in applied multiculturalism a to due emerge - eonzd soitos ae a have associations recognized

106 m, see the edited volumem,seeeditedthe

- irns (i) trans (iii) migrants, - - aim ht aos tnc lrls has pluralism ethnic favors that ralism affirmation across national borders by by borders national across affirmation state, which tends towards political and and political towards tends which state,

Minority identities repressed at the the at repressed identities Minority

( Kastoryano distinguishes at least four types of fourdistinguishes least types at of ( Ieda 2006 Ieda - ain, n (v non (iv) and nations, 2007, 161

who are perceived as perceived are who privileged ability to to ability privileged ) .

) .

non 90 - - . CEU eTD Collection isoiain prts hn h pplto i qeto fes xldd rm their mythologized from excluded feels question host in surrounding population the when operates Diasporization centr a at originates dispersion The an persecution, expulsion, term The (i) BasquKurds or as such states, any in majoritydominating a form not do others Hungarians; as such state, kin own their have them of Some state. one than more of territory the on live that communities of category The (iii) country, sense this they in stateless. also hence are trans several bene: Nota homeland. the societ host in re and (ii) Trans - territorialization; having chosen to migrate to another country; being more integrated more being country; another to migrate to chosen having territorialization; - migrants y thus having more hybrid identities; and maintaining continuous linkages with with linkages continuous maintaining and identities; hybrid more having thus y diaspora –

es. it makes plans to return to plans there makes it

oit. eann te eoy f h centr the of memory the Retaining society. Figure are distinguished from diasporas by lacking a perspective of reunification of perspective a lacking by diasporas from distinguished are trans has traditionally been applied to to applied been traditionally has 11 fre mgain o rlgos pltcl ad cnmc reasons. economic and political, religious, for migration forced d

Diasporas, trans - tt nat state e ions

- – migrants, trans

an ancestral land or place or origin, a homeland. homeland. a origin, or place or land ancestral an - opie l srs f tnc ntoa, indigenous national, ethnic, of sorts all comprise migrants form only a minority in their sending sending their in minority a only form migrants 107 ( Kastoryano 2007,164

- nations, non ‘ victim - territorial groups territorial ’

populations suffering from from suffering populations e )

–

o ielzd and idealized now

CEU eTD Collection (ii) (ii) radical cosmopolitanism The advanced. of claims Romani may category. this within fall (i new Westphalian, postand state universal transform or trans four these general, In trans dispersed maycommunities real orimagined a strong to homeland have not attachments either. of members some Furthermore, dimension ethnic an often has identity religious non are communities religious the of Most states. several or one of territory (iv) successfully function and majority institutions ofthe the within, society. into, integrate to want They decision. their for society dominant the by against discriminated re at aim typically migrants groups are claims Most (iii) undesirable minorities. trying by policies homogenizing such pursue also maygroups ethnic Dominant at aim also may nations stateless re Anti Post WestphalianNew ) Anti ) - nfcto ad eertraiain f cran ipre cmuiy Trans community. dispersed certain a of reterritorialization and unification New Non - - Westphalian Westphali - within within Westphalia - - Westphalian territorial territorial

h inter the an n

communities do not have territorial attachments and they may live on the the on live may they and attachments territorial have not do communities

p claims, i.e. the total negation of the (inter the of negation total the i.e. claims,

claims are typically advanced by diasporas that by definition seek the seek definition by that diasporas by advanced typically are claims ost

Occasionally - Very rarely tt sse b rjcig h tiiy f state of trinity the rejecting by system state Diasporas Typically - Westphalian - - Westphalian, respectively.Westphalian, - state groups state centric nationalism. Let us call these positions: anti positions:these call us Let nationalism. centric ann sm o ter utrl rdtos ihu being without traditions cultural their of some taining

Table

‘ 3 Trans i.e. they seek the accommodation of trans of accommodation the seek they i.e. correcting

– Trans

Very rarely Very rarely as discussed abov discussed as Typically 108 - state nationalisms - migrants –

’

for instance for ertra ad ebrhp boundaries. membership and territorial

- irn, rnntoa o sub or transnational migrant,

Trans Occasionally Occasionally e –

Usually in the case of Islamic ummah. Islamic of case the in

- may either negate, or rectify, rectify, or negate, either may )state system are very rarely rarely very are system )state - nations - nation

- Non ertr. Trans territory. - Occasionally (antithetical) territorial, and and territorial, - to to - Typically Westphalian, Westphalian, national and and national - - state ethnic state territorial ‘ eliminate

- state

- ’

CEU eTD Collection The two sorts of transnationalisms are in dynamic interrelation, sin interrelation, dynamic in are transnationalisms of sorts two The re transnational, constellations to membership political for framework reference the wide by nationalism of transcendence the to and borders, across projected nationalism of term the notes, Bauböck As multiculturalismcentric urge oftransnational and form citizenship. some post Such states. (pluralist) individual by accommodated Trans 2007, 309 live they which in country the into immigrate not did they i.e. society, dominant and state the into incorporated coercively were minorities autonomist most groups, accommodationist to contrast In autonomy. of form some desire typically society, mainstream the into integration trans and Diasporas acquired citizenship at autho of decision discretionary a from naturalization turning minorities; of autonomy of) sort (some recognizing as such rights legal and membership of transformation institutional the to refers citizenship of liberalization The emergen between correlation a observes Kastoryano community, ethnic four a in made - tt saees uooit rus a avne lis ht ant e easily be cannot that claims advance may groups autonomist stateless state ce of ce transnational claims ) .

once practiced autonomous governance in the territory now controlled by the the by controlled now territory the in governance autonomous practiced once ( - Bauböck 2010,309 dimensional space that comprises the host country, the country of origin, the the origin, of country the country, host the comprises that space dimensional n itrainl organizations international and - nations, nations, birth orthrough naturalization transnationalism n h ohr ad rte ta seig oiia ad social and political seeking than rather hand, other the on

) ( . Kastoryano 2007,161

rities into an individual entitlement; and tolerating dual dual tolerating and entitlement; individual an into rities

the liberalization of citizenship regimes and the the and regimes citizenship of liberalization the 109 has two meanings: it may refer to the ideology the to refer may it meanings: two has

( ( Bauböck 2010,297 rna 21, 44 2010, Bruneau - ) Westphalian claims challenge sta challenge claims Westphalian .

ce transnational claims are claims transnational ce

) ) . .

inl r global or gional s ie above, cited As ( Valadez Valadez ning te - CEU eTD Collection whose self whose “non globalization” that argue authors several brief: In hybridity,cultural imagined the that and any), (if homeland the with linkages continuous imply dispersal, of kind any in originate may hand, other the on diasporas, age global / hybrid / New homeland. to return to desire the and dispersal,offorced implyresultsiden the are diasporas age modern co the reflects diasporas hybrid diasporas new and old between literature the in distinction The non de that implying modernity” political de of process general non of of notion the manner, similar a In trans other by advanced those amongst interpretations. five distinguished and claims Romani non and electoral both embracing state of options into non hierarchy this of principle the autonomy. from outright and rights ranging special to rights) rights equal (i.e. discrimination of hierarchy the presented I First, claims. Th autonomypersonal thr manifested e aim of aim e - l ocalized imaginaryocalized “ethnoscapes - territorial political autonomy (for instance advanced by Roma organizations), and the and organizations), Roma by advanced instance (for autonomy political territorial - determination does not imply cultural autonomy on territorial foundations [but ] [but foundations territorial on autonomy cultural imply not does determination this chapter was to provide an analytical framework for studying Romani political studying Romani for framework analytical an provide to was chapter this - ( evolution of non of evolution Kastoryano 2007, 174 2007, Kastoryano ( rna 2010 Bruneau - territorialization territorialization - territorial claims and constellations. The old / community / / community / old The constellations. and claims territorial ) ough ofindividua network the - , modern age and global age diasporas diasporas age global and age modern , non electoral forms. Next, forms. electoral - one ad trans and bounded ” )

- oaie ppltos net hmevs ihn new, within themselves invent populations localized entailing the emergence of transnational communities transnational of emergence the entailing ( territorial Appadurai 1996 – homeland homeland becan non

- seen by some authors authors some by seen state and stateless nations, including diasporas, diasporas, including nations, stateless and state 110 - ertraiy s at f lre poes of process larger a of part is territoriality

refers t refers Finally - tt frs f oiia participation, political of forms state ) . o two phenomena: particular claims particular phenomena: two o

I studied specifically cosmopolitan cosmopolitan specifically studied I , - territorial. territorial. I situated these Romani claims Romani these situated I ls’ relationships ( Faist 2010 Faist – tity boundary maintenance titymaintenance boundary

s te eta fre of force central “the as

Then, I trans I Then, ) , community and and community , ( onv 2010 Koinova

( 169 ) .

lated lated ) -

CEU eTD Collection the problems to claims theoretical oftrans non and immigrant

- ertra communities. territorial

national democracynational firstI the chapter. in discussed

111 n h nx catr I il eae hs political these relate will I chapter, next the In

CEU eTD Collection can be questioned. Forth, the idea of self of Forth, idea questioned.bethe can self its of claims and itself diaspora / nation Roma of idea the Third, debated. self the on focusing Second, grounds. various self Romani of forms existing Ro 4.1 first (4.1) problems theoretical the to study case the links chapter previous The levels ofcritiques. non of idea the self the for argue may one manner, self Romani of forms of idea the existing rejecting imply necessarily not Criticizing does determination criticism. of scope the enlarges step Each Finally, discussed. ofnon be idea the mani claims and forms of political participation can be assessed on different levels. First, levels. different on assessed be can participation political of forms and claims mani

chapter. Second chapter. , From cosmopolitan claims to theories, and back again back and theories, to claims cosmopolitan From

AssessingRomani cosmopolitanisms Romani claims are assessed in the light of my own theoretical own my of light the in assessed are claims Romani

two - territorial trans territorial

chapters overviewed, analysed, and situated Romani political claims. This This claims. political Romani situated and analysed, overviewed, chapters

(4.2 ) ,

the case study’sthe lessons are - determination and pro and determination - border self border - - determination of trans of determination territorial territorial Chapter 4 Chapter - determination oftrans determination - determination. The below figure summarizes the the summarizes figure below The determination.

112 trans

- eemnto o Rm has Roma of determination - - border self border Roma solidarity have been criticized on criticized been have solidarity Roma drawn for cosmopolitan theories.drawn forcosmopolitan

f rnntoa dmcay First democracy. transnational of - border nations without accepting without nations border - the the - border nations / diasporas /nationscan border determination isdetermination studied. Roma nation. In a similar a In nation. Roma

position outlined in the the in outlined position -

determination determination widely been been widely

CEU eTD Collection As discussed above, over the past two decades, the the decades, two past the over above, discussed As 4.1.1 Romani subaltern the with non (meaning ‘gajo’ or ‘white’ labelled often are OSI) the and ERRC the as (such actors international major the pro the of case the in form different a take divisions such However, big and associations grassroots NGOs,international political parties formal civilactors and that criticise the establ small activists, radical and providers service moderate o segments th microcosm this call this in specialised organizations and bodies of network a alongside relations,

Critiques f global civil society, within the pro the within society, civil global f

of existing pro existing of - Roma) by their critics. Accordingly, ‘white ‘white Accordingly, critics. their by Roma) e p e ro ( - Trehan 2009 Roma global civil society civil global Roma Figure 12 Existing Existing forms of - R

Levelsclaimsofof assessment Romani Primacy of oma global civil society civil global oma Idea of Idea of Idea of ) .

The former former is criticisedThe grounds: onat least three

113

- Roma microcosm there are tensions between between tensions are there microcosm Roma

‘ Roma issue Roma

( Rövid and Kóczé2012 and Rövid • • • • • • pro Romani self Romani Romani self Romani Romani self determination (5) trans self non - Roma solidarity (1)

- - determination ’ - territorial trans border self national

has emerged in international in emerged has ii oit’i contrasted is society’ civil - Roma microcosm, since microcosm, Roma - - - determination(2) determination(4) determination(3)

) - . border ‘

As with other with As issue ishment.

- ’ (6) . Let us us Let .

CEU eTD Collection voluntary f are pro and Roma of number good a particular, In for. work they that communities Roma the to not and donors their to accountable being of accused are actors International (ii) bl turn suchsimplifyingapproaches, mayforcesexploit wingpolitical right moderate) even (and extreme Furthermore, usury. and trafficking human violence, domestic inter local diversityof the to insensitive is approach an Such majority. prejudiced the only blaming relations, social of vision simplistic very a imposes discrimination on exclusively Focusing as well as thestate), sources local a welfare the of retrenchment the and socialism state of fall the after unemployment of rise macro both downplaying he a promoting of accused are NGOs ‘White’ (i) 96 benefactors” professional of customer social constant a into community the turning thus preservation, community of mechanisms natural the kill run long ofdevelopment they forthem. which best Supatterns the consider pro brief, In such from removed and traditional valuescivic asco altruism, technocratic as perceived often are NGOs Professional Roma. stru daily the from remote very are efforts advocacy international Moreover, ame Romaame forincreasingthe aggression social ills. crime, other and ) .

inanced by OSI so they have to align to to align to have they so OSI by inanced - ethnic relations, a ethnic - based Roma associations Roma based - Roma actors often patronise Roma in their desire to help them and impose impose and them help to desire their in Roma patronise often actors Roma s well as to human rights violations within Roma communities, such as communities, such as Roma violationsrights within human as to s well - economic and macro and economic nd ofinequalitiescontext conflicts. and –

mmunity cooperation service and especially Europe Eastern in 114 foundations - sociological processes (such as the enormous enormous the as (such processes sociological

gemonic discourse on human rights, thus thus rights, human on discourse gemonic

priorities. Membership priorities.

( Marushiakova and Popov 2004, 2004, Popov and Marushiakova ch a patronage a ch the could “in -

are almost non are

( Trehan 2001 them

inside ggles of many many of ggles - - Roma NGOs Roma founded and and founded - existent. existent. ) - . out, and and out,

CEU eTD Collection ils f ua rgt voain (uh s oie bs, oetc ilne educational violence, domestic abuse, recentsegregation orthe of France) mass expulsion from acknowledged. Roma be also must police as (such violations rights human of fields associations. Roma grassroots strengthen to vital is It hegemony. into turn easily solidaritycan that demonstrate and society important to attention draw critiques Such citizens.autonomous f Roma preventing for responsible extent, an to are, also leaders/mediators non authoritarian, such conflicts, local some resolve to able be may they although non by empowered ( leaders’ Roma ‘traditional such However, roots from detached ‘gajo’their live a and way oflife. are bodies international for working Roma that argue leaders or activists Roma ‘traditional’ in grassroots weakening further associations, local from Roma brightest brain of kind a create NGOs International (iii) of margins the to pushed been have societies most in communities Roma First, importance. factors Three programs. political la leadership; divided symbols; unifying accepted widely of lack platforms, communication and media supportive to access of lack resources; financial meagre weaknesses; organizational internal identity; Roma of nature fragmented – authors of couple a by Themobilisation. puzzle Romani ofweak socialpolitical mobilizationand has been a hegemony‘white of The

amongst others others amongst

itrcl ognstoa, n socio and organisational, historical, things

- Roma leaders in order to control and tax Roma communities. Therefore, Therefore, communities. Roma tax and control to order in leaders Roma

( Bárány 2002a Bárány ’ NGOs is not the only reason for the weakness of Romani grassroots Romani grassroots weaknessof the for reason only the not NGOsis ’ –

o lsd oiia opruiy stru opportunity political closed to However, the invaluable work NGOs undertake in specific specific in undertake NGOs work invaluable the However, ; Klímová 2002 Klímová empirical empirical 115 ad, uiaa etc. bulibasa, vajda, - drain, offering high salaries and attracting the attracting and salaries high offering drain,

ck of realistic, coherent, and pragmatic pragmatic and coherent, realistic, of ck limitations of the pro the of limitations ;

Vermeersch 2006 Vermeersch - psychological psychological trs te tgaie and stigmatized the ctures; hv, n h ps, be past, the in have, ) – ) .

- Explanations refer refer Explanations Roma global civil global Roma r o particular of are itiatives. Several Several itiatives. o becoming rom ddressed - elected elected en

CEU eTD Collection resources” together working are associations object defined, them of Many who appoints The public. d hierarchical, not highly typically is structure organisational often are boards their of members the of details and funding, of sources associations are criticisedRomani forlack oftransparency democracy. poorinternal and Their Romani of fragility the to contribute also weaknesses organisational ‘Internal’ but politicians engineers,also doctors, lawyers, etc.)only exists form. teachers, embryonic in surmountable; gradually is however disadvantage African historical of a example such that The demonstrates extermination. Americans or slavery exclusion, systematic faced even hav They society. citizenships. Sinti, Traveller, etc.) Caminante, Romanichels, Manoush, Gitano, Kelderash, Vlax, Boyash, Romungro, Kalo, as (such groups diverse to Roma/Gypsy belong as perceived identity:individuals Roma and fragmented the to attributed On identity. Roma be of nature stigmatised also can mobilisation Romani of weakness The difficulties of[ benefit organisations these that being opinion common a generallylow, is NGOs ,

pre ( ” 294

( sently in most societies a Roma middle class (including not only activists and and activists only not (including class middle Roma a societies most in sently Rostas 2009,119 family friends orclose members ives; and are marked by disunity by marked are and ives; ) “ . “

ed o e ii ad ndpal; ae ipe tutr ad e, fe ill often few, and structure simple have unadaptable; and rigid be to tend pa dfeet agae, eog to belong languages, different speak poorly organised and have difficulty getting along with each other, let alone let other, each with along getting difficulty have and poorly organised Consequently, it is no surprise that “amongst Roma the level of trust in in trust of level the Roma “amongst that surprise no is it Consequently, e never been part of the community of equal citizens, and in certain epochs certain in and citizens, equal of community the of part been never e –

n ag pr bcue f hi inte their of because part large in ) .

the the 116

n hn, there hand, one ( Rostas 2009 ”

( Bárány 2002a, 292 2002a, Bárány

different religions, and have different different have and religions, different ominated by an authoritarian leader authoritarian an by ominated ) .

s o tog vrrhn pan overarching strong no is s c nse ) . meiin o scarce for ompetition The majority of Roma Roma of majority The grassroots. grassroots. sic ] the ] ir

- - - ,

CEU eTD Collection infcnl, ih lre rprin f oa tl lvn a te agn o society. of margins the at living still pro dominate NGOs Professional Roma improved of not proportion has large status a social with their significantly, hand, other the on communities; Roma of plight internatio of attention the raise to managed pro the sum, In bybeing humiliated security staff. u origin Roma one’s hiding or Leaving behind surprise. asno comes Roma amongst most assimilation Libertà Sarkozy’s of (think right governing ‘moderate’ by joined are parties right Extreme media. mass hist Such deep have aggression. stereotypes and shouting filth, laziness, crime, with ‘Gypsies’ Non stigma. associate a frequently contexts most in is ‘Gypsy’ as perceived being hand, other the On skinis importantdarker marker colour limiting considered as possibilitiesan the of voluntary assimilation. 91 Roma. de and marginalisation further the in result only can it counterproductive; supp may Pro equality. for struggle the lead must actors Roma hegemony. into turn easily pro the of case The perceptible. hardly tha class middle Roma of and has emerged, Romani educated activist elite well an transnational but professional and layer thin very A fragmented. and weak remain associations Romani grassroots while p reasonable jobs, have access to standard health care or simply do the shopping without without shopping the do simply or care health standard to access have jobs, reasonable p

n ifrn s different In 91

i sti in )

makes life a great deal easier: one has a better chance to get into decent schools, take schools, decent into get to chance better a has one easier:deal great a life makes ort them in various ways, but replacing or outweighing Roma activists is is activists Roma outweighing or replacing but ways, various in them ort ceis non ocieties, mtzn ‘Gypsies.’ gmatizing - oa lbl ii scey a a ie rcr. On record. mixed a has society civil global Roma Union pour un Mouvement Populaire Mouvement un pour Union t could serve as the backbone of an autonomous Roma civil society is society civil Roma autonomous an of backbone the as serve could t -

oa dniy Gpis i dfeet as I ms (u nt l! al countries, all all!) not (but most In ways. different in ‘Gypsies’ identify Roma orical roots, and are reproduced both by public education and the and education public by both reproduced are and roots, orical

- Roma

osqety te tog eie o (voluntary) for desire strong the Consequently, civil society, often speaking in the name of ‘Roma’, of name the in speaking often society, civil - Roma movement demonstrates that solidarity can can solidarity that demonstrates movement Roma nal organisations and national governments to the to governments national and organisations nal 117

n Berlusconi’s and the n hn, t has it hand, one - oiiain of mobilisation lPpl della Popolo Il - wing parties parties wing - Roma allies Roma - Roma Roma

- off off

CEU eTD Collection rcie h rgt t etbih idratn, col, uem, n tete; cultural theatres; and museums, schools, kindergartens, establish to rights the practice to resources provide not does state the As autonomy. cultural supposed their enjoy to means elected the the however neither have representatives Roma; for emerged has participation political of system parallel A constituency’s ( the and economi socialand urgent most the such all, Above grounds. several on criticized self minority Hungarian The Brownand 2000 debated form existing criticize self The 4.1.2 self minority be local can of composed it which by mechanism no is there college and day one for only exists college electoral This representatives. an by elected are accountab The opponents represented is not communities its marginalizes control, takes winning organization The candidates. unsuccessful of status the undermines seriously system the thus a have not does opposition the Furthermore, autonomy rema

Critiques of existing forms of of forms existing of Critiques ( - eovnd Te eieain n decision and deliberation The reconvened. h primacy the eemnto o Ro of determination Burton 2007 Burton s

ility of the National RomaNational Self ilitythe of of Romani self Romani of ins hollow for the poorest forthe ins hollow minorityHungary of ; Szalai 2000 Szalai

; (and (and Dobos 2007 Dobos common the the - ) governance system, presented in the previous chapter, has been been has chapter, previous the in presented system, governance ma can be realized in some form of autonomy. Most authors authors Most autonomy. of form some in realized be can ma . -

determination ( determination ( ) local governments’) local unrealistic expectations. Kovats 2001d idea itself of) granting autonomy to Roma. However, the the However, Roma. to autonomy granting of) itself idea power to tackle issues of social exclusion, nor the financial the nor exclusion, social of issues tackle to power ; c problems Roma face, thus they have to thusto theyhaveface, Roma problems c Kállai 2002 Kállai R omani self omani significant significant 118 - government has also been debated. Itsbeen membersdebated. hasalso government ) ‘ particularly . cultural parliaments cultural

;

Koulish 2005 Koulish - - determination aig f h Ntoa Rm Self Roma National the of making role in the minorityself the in role

in Hungary) has also been widely widely been also has Hungary) in tu te iest o Roma of diversity the thus ,

( ; Sz Kovats 1997 Kovats alai 2000,564 alai ’

are not meant to address to meant not are

confront confront ,

2001d - ) governments, . -

government government ; both the both Schafft - CEU eTD Collection 4.1.3 2011 recognition of forms contemporary and compensation historical proper of nature the as well as Roma of disenfranchisement and submission historical the on dialogue nationwide the hinders autonomy of tokenistic self minority of system Hungarian the sum, In agreeing to restricted onand is role representatives’ Romani the and tokenistic, often are consultations Such marginalized. are organizations Romani other all thus government, the of partner negotiating legitimate the of president the addition, In g Self Roma National the make to means limited very have organizations and citizens Romani Thus unclear. remains representatives its of role actual the transparent; not are government dissentingRomanivoices 92 counter need and assimilated involuntarily been have that minorities mi special above, discussed As (a) of “Roma issue”. emergence the the i.e. Roma, for policies special of necessity the question (b) generally more or citizens; self / rights minority self the of primacythe maydebate autonomy,one Romani of forms existingcriticizing Goingbeyond overnment accountable overnment

Similar tendencies can be observed in Romania whe Romania in observed be can tendencies Similar )

Critiques of of Critiques - eemnto o Rm. uh rtqe ete () fim h inadequacy the affirm (a) either critiques Such Roma. of determination 92

and overtly decentralized regime of political representation. The inadequate form inadequate The representation. political of regime decentralized overtly and

prioritizing prioritizing ( - McGarry2010 determination approach for tackling the social exclusion of Romani Romani of exclusion social the tackling for approach determination

( Kovats 2001d eeomn o a eun Rmn cvl oit ad ees a deters and society civil Romani genuine a of development legitimizing the government’s Roma policies.legitimizing government’s Roma the

N ) the self the . ational Roma Roma ational

oiy ihs n clua atnm ae dqae for adequate are autonomy cultural and rights nority ) .

- determination of of determination 119 re the Romani MP of the reserved seat may margi may seat reserved the of MP Romani the re - governance can be criticized for installing a a installing for criticized be can governance

S elf - government is often seen as the only only the as seen often is government R oma -

majoritarian protections majoritarian

( of the the of Szalai Szalai nalize - CEU eTD Collection with extreme poverty and social exclusion thus unintentionally reproduces the stereot the reproduces unintentionally thus exclusion social and poverty extreme with Roma associates still it targeting”, exclusive not but “explicit of principle the to subscribing E the Although may policies Roma problems social inter undermine and ethnicize such that out rightlypoint Critiques inclusion. social their at primarilyaiming attempts recent genera in criticize may One (b) institutions!common self of form some that However, mainstreamimply does not mixed schools, classes. it attend to would like t of exclusion the overcoming facilitate not does schools Romani of criticism The hospitals, generally citizens anti of forms beyond rightssocial foreachcitizen. equal and tangible providing policies social and employment, education, effective without Rom of inclusion social the for I redistributing money lowtaxpayers income from ones high to income failures the and corruption, economy black of omnipresence the as such Roma of integration social the blocking adopt to easier is it Furthermore, wishes fight. to t is vital to point out the inadequacy of the minority rights (and cultural autonomy) approach autonomy) cultural (and minorityrights the inadequacyof the out point to vital is t or restaurants. - eemnto i nt desirable; not is determination

Faeok taey o Rm Icuin teps o vi ti ptal by pitfall this avoid to attempts Inclusion Roma for Strategy Framework U

focusing seek equal access to common institutions, such as schools, workplaces, workplaces, schools, as such institutions, common to access equal seek

- iciiain n udfeetae ctznhp I contra In citizenship. undifferentiated and discrimination

n sus f self of issues on tt amnsrto ad r and administration state

n efrs o rae eaae oiis o Rm including Roma for policies separate create to efforts any l , s el s h hlons o aotn “oa policies” “Roma adopting of hollowness the as well as a, ‘ oa policies Roma - eemnto rvas ht h rgt o establish to right the that reveals determination 120

only ’

hn o ake h praie challenges pervasive the tackle to than glto, h pres txto system taxation perverse the egulation, advocates the the advocates - ethnic solidarity.ethnic hose Roma students who who students Roma hose –

primacy just to name to just few. a

f accessing of s

t, Romani Romani t, ypes it it ypes

CEU eTD Collection diaspora. or nation Roma single a designating of controversies the to refer enjoyin critiques Such Roma autonomy. of itself idea the debate may one further, step one Going 4.1.4 overwrite doesit! not and identity of yourchoice accepts majority the i.e. Roma, as accepted being and oneself identify as stigmatized being from leads recognition and equality for equality In citizen of member equal asRoma a and community.the life, of spheres various in face discriminationcitizens Romani and prejudice the given However, urgent. less no are populations Romani disen historical the as well as identity, and culture Roma of recognition The 2009 1999 Pogány 2006 Strand and 1991 2006 Binder include contributions Important 93 transnational the of discourse the contrast but building, nation Roma of project the recognize to belong languages, differen different have churches, speak different that groups of diversity great a of consists in reality nation Roma supposed the Accordingly, nation. Roma the with identify not do groups Roma?, the are Who section the in above discussed As debated. be can nation Roma the of reality social the First,

I do not aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the multifarious debate on the question of Roma nation. Roma of question the on multifariousdebate the of overview comprehensive providea aimto not do I te wrs te oai eonto srgl am for aims struggle recognition Romani the words, other ; ;

WillemsLucassen2000 and Kenrick and Poulton 2001 Poulton and Kenrick Critiques of the idea of of idea the of Critiques and

93 ,

; 2008

Popov 2008 Popov the the ; Marushiako ; Clewett 1999 Clewett freedom freedom

several anthropologists several ; Simhandl 2006 Simhandl

a 2008 va to identify oneself an oneself identify to ; ( ; co 2006 Acton Klímová ) Feys 1997 Feys .

; R csos taiin, n self and traditions, customs, t auhaoa n Ppv 2004 Popov and Marushiakova omani self omani - Alexander 2007 Alexander ; ; Stewart 1996 Stewart ; Fosztó co ad Klímová and Acton

121 2002 have pointed out that certain allegedly Romani Romani allegedly certain that out pointed have - d liv d determination they struggle for struggle they

, ; ; 2003 Szalai 2003 Szalai 2003 Kovats e as Roma. as e ; Gay y Blasco 2002 Blasco yGay

- lxne 2001 Alexander ; both ; ; car 2009 McGarry Szuhay 1995 Szuhay Lauritzen 2004 Lauritzen

The long road of road long The -

peltos Sc critiques Such appellations. being recognized both as an an as both recognized being ‘ (legal, political and social) social) and political (legal, gypsy ; ; co ad ud 1997 Mundy and Acton ’ Goodwin 2004 Goodwin ;

Tamás 2007 Tamás , o th to ; 2010 Liebich 2007 Liebich franchisement of franchisement sm fr of form some g fedm to freedom e ;

'in 2007 O'Nions the struggle the ; ; Toninato Toninato Han ; Marsh Marsh cock cock ; ; CEU eTD Collection h 15 the in created were ‘gypsies’ and ‘vagrants’ of categories the that argue Lucassen and Willems in formation ‘Other’ the the ofnation popula These etc. vagrant, nomad, cigány, gypsy, as stigmatized been have who those all embrace to attempts nation Roma that argue scholars several Second, Musicians. Boyash, Traveller, Sinti, Manouche, Gitano, Kale, ordinary of those with elite Romani van ( 95 94 discrimination racism: and persecu past to reacts building nation Romani contemporary Accordingly, possessions. accumulate to and work to refusal 2005 Italy and France in police of professionalization the for reasons main the of one was groups Blumer 2011 Blumer

For the special role of remembering persecution under persecution remembering of role special the For Forinstance, seerolethe Baar2011 , 2009 th

(

ilm n Lcse 2000 Lucassen and Willems etr b rsrcig h po r poor the restricting by century

) Roma communities which exist at the present time and of encouraging greater greater encouraging of self and pride and time present the at exist which communities Roma fractured often the amongst cohesion promoting of means useful a also is nation enhanced securing for tool pr of, and recognition valuable a undoubtedly is nation the Roma terms a legal of and notion political in However, premature. remains identity national […] 1999, 158 future. the in point some at reality a become may it that possibility the from usefulness,or potential its from way no detracts in nation Romaa of concept ; ; . The vagabond was depicted as the prototype of criminal, because of his alleged his of because criminal, of prototype the as depicted was vagabond The . Vidra 2005 Vidra 1997 Kapralski whether in sociological or anthropological terms, talk of a Gypsy or Roma Roma or Gypsy a of talk terms, anthropological or sociological in whether tions have historically been marginalized and commonly played the role of role the played commonly and marginalized been historically have tions )

) ‘ . Gypsies

- , worth amongst the Roma in g in Roma the amongst worth

2004

’

; innation Finnishthe Marushiakova and Popov 2005 Popov and Marushiakova ovision for, Europe’s Roma peoples. The concept of a Roma of a concept The peoples. Roma Europe’s for, ovision tion - ) 95 states. .

bu dmntae ta te er f h mbl poor mobile the of fear the that demonstrates About n mriaiain a wl a peet om of forms present as well as marginalization, and le t lcl naiat t inhabitants local to elief 94 122

the - -

buildingin building is based on a negative identity as it it as identity negative a on based is building

Second World War in Romani nation Romani in War World Second eneral. The obvious artificiality of the the of obviousartificiality The eneral. Tervonen Tervonen ; Stauber and Vago 2007 Vago and Stauber ( 2012 u ecuig travelling excluding hus ) .

; twr 2004 Stewart - building see building (

Pogány ( About or - ; CEU eTD Collection ismnt ‘ that disseminate institutions state own its of development the with coupled not is traditions, customs, languages, under the Third, transnational minority).(diaspora, ‘ devel these of All network. advocacy Roma pro transnational a of development the as well as migration Romani of fears contemporary anti way, paradoxical a In identities that nation Roma the of conceptions primordial sum, In Roma themselves consider origin Romani of citizens Hungarian most instance, For cultures. and t denies) even downplays(or nation Roma encapsulated an of idea the promoting Furthermore, over looms will supposedly groups individuals. and Romani ‘Roma’ allegedly would that history and language Romani standardized of teaching the embrace may curricula school national instance, For attempts. homogenizing facilitate he importance of multiple of importance he oa issue Roma crd Ntoa clue gnrly mre y upesn inmrbe smaller innumerable suppressing by emerge generally cultures National scored. and

o vie o dset n eprmnain nr outr asmlto ae rightly are assimilation voluntary nor experimentation, and dissent of voices nor Hungarian. movement so these all with racism genocidal past the in or now similarities, cultural the not end, the In frame. that using by unite let’s So one. are we say they because one, are we boomerang: a like works it way a In risk ’ , true s el as well as f eeoig hmgnzn ad ecie ainl dniy ha identity national reactive and homogenizing a developing of

Rm ntoa clue te ‘ the culture, national Roma ’ pupils. The threat of being incorporated into the Roma nation against their against nation Roma the into incorporated being of threat The pupils. , have to be decisive, but the common experience of persecutory and and persecutory of experience common the but decisive, be to have ,

( Willems and LucassenWillems and 2000,266 identities - h sra ad eiiain f h dsore f oa nation Roma of discourse the of legitimation and spread the called Gypsy called - - ait n eacptr srgls ae en enocd by reinforced been have struggles emancipatory and racist

taking as a fact that this was indeed what historically happened historically what happened indeed was this that fact a as taking and and

ways of lif of ways

and detaches Romani citizens from their home countries home their from citizens Romani detaches and - groups. Actually we are talking about an anti an about talking are Actuallywe groups. 123 e. Although the ‘belated’ the Although e. pet cnrbtd o h eegne f the of emergence the to contributed opments

host ’

) tt’ etbihd ntttos may institutions established state’s .

leave room room leave appear

Roma nationbuilding Roma for neither multiple multiple neither for

ol enforce could le t many to alien s

- to be be to racist

and - CEU eTD Collection Westphalian Trans of self Romani of itself pro and determination assessmen empirical the distinguished chapter the far, So 4.1.5 intellectuals intelligen The culture. and identity own their reaffirm and develop, negotiate, recollect, to opportunity ears” two and nose a as nationality a have must “men all Althoug altogether. dismissed be not nation Roma However,should ofthe criticized. recognition struggle my the for in opinion, 98 97 huma of attribute inherent ( an reality] [in not is nation a having […] 96 ethno some remain always will there live: nation specific one of members since feasible, not is feasib neither is program nationalist universal the previously, discussed As becomes a nation be to have boundaries membership and/or territorial be to is that nation homogenous one to belongs Stewart 1996,85 Stewart

I distinguished I anti I Imrowe to commentthis ears two and nose a havemust he asnationality a have must man a seems it “nowadaysGellner: cites Stewart any any

- odr om o self of forms border trans Critiques of the idea of trans of idea the of Critiques tsia has always played a special role in such processes, and no one knows how many knowsmany how one no andsuch processes, in role special hasalwaysa played tsia - border ethnic orn ethnic border 98 are sufficient to

) ednis Acrig o h uiesl ainls porm ec individual each program, nationalist universal the to According tendencies. .

- ‘ Westphalian,Westphalian,newand post proper - determination. Next, the desirability and feasibility of self of feasibility desirability and the Next, determination. - – Roma solidarity from theoretical critiques of the primacy or the idea the or primacy the of critiques theoretical from solidarity Roma e Szilágyi from the Hungarian Institute SzilágyiHungariane theoffrom InternationalInstitute Affairs.

n ot cases most in ’

nation -

eemnto ae primari are determination create create nation.a

ational groupsational discussed. are - state. state. h nationality is not an inherent attribute to humanity, not humanity,not to attribute inherent an not is nationality h -

border national self national border -

t s mosbe o eii a ertr wee only where territory a delimit to impossible is it 97 124

rtce b a nation a by protected - ‘ Westphalianinpreviousthe claims chapter. corrected y rtczd n fae fr their for feared and criticized ly 96 t of existing forms of Romani self Romani of forms existing of t

nity, but it has come to appear as such” such” as appear to come has it but nity, ; Romani citizens should have the the have should citizens Romani ; - ’ determination

so that the given trans given the that so - tt. Consequently, state. le, nor desirable. It desirable. nor le, - national minority. national

- determination determination - border border

new - CEU eTD Collection 4.1.6 et with demos ofstatelessexample the nation to rest Roma humanity as replacing the interpreted may be also own its have to seeking nation each of futility the out points an universal tragedies the to leading still of is and led “has rejection nation the with the state Coupling program. of nationalist out grown has cosmopolitanism Romani radical The humenforceable Romani anti the pan Nationof Declaration manner, similar a In solidarity. democratic and primordi a relieson it since desirable, not is It sticky a has citizenship “Democratic developed. have communities political overlapping non thus country receiving the in citizenship original their keep Immigrants emerged. already have constellations such migration, of flows transnational of course the In h could states various of territory the on living but diaspora given a to belonging individuals trans The (i) autonomy or(ii) non of idea The ave jurisdiction over substantial a ave jurisdiction range them. ofissues to pertaining d wars, disasters and massacres and disasters wars, d - German claims discussed by Arendtbydiscussed claims German

Critiques of the idea of non of idea the of Critiques - hnos thus promoting non a odr non border -

- an rightsan even against state authorities. statist vision ‘tru fora aspiration statist is coupled the with a general vision general of a ofdeterritorialization territorial self territorial

anti evokes the discourse of stateless nationhood resemblingstatelessnationhood pan of discourse the evokes -

- territorial autonomy of dispersed communities would imply that that imply would communities dispersed of autonomy territorial Westphalian - determination may refer to (i) trans (i) to refer may determination ” –

- reads the the reads territorial trans territorial om o self of forms

- ( territorial version ofuniversalterritorial nationalism. 1973 125 al conception of nationality and confuses ethnic ethnic confuses nationalityand of conception al ) . Declaration of Nation of Declaration

However, as opposed to the pan the to opposed However,as - eemnto cno b jsiid The justified. be cannot determination

- border self border all political communities. state - ly’ global rule of law, i.e. globally’ rule i.e. oflaw, border forms of personal personal of forms border - . However, offering the the offering However, .

determination . The manifesto The - ertra a territorial - movements, movements, - Slavic

rightly and nd CEU eTD Collection “The citizenship rights fail to do justice because they emanate emanate they because justice do to fail rights citizenship “The Klímová Roma, and societies majority between mistrust deep the to Referring live. diaspora the of members the to relate to how is dilemma political and theoretical main The quasi a like act to them asking organizations international from support and protection demand per and excluded of statelessness of claim the on based is actors Romani some of cosmopolitanism moderate The stateless enjoy donot diasporas kin support ofa the kin a Having ‘host’ their trans and diasporas old of cases The borders movi when well as it to cling they and individuals, to clings it quality: chapter. 99 nation Roma to belonging declare citizens all nearly villages several in census, a t and groups, Roma allegedly of heterogeneity the both downplay thus nation, self transnational of claims such However, 399 assimilation” and absorption of instrument an merely are They organization. political of forms and autonomy laws, indigenous and Romani the subordinated ttachment

dsigihd isoa, trans diasporas, distinguished I ) .

kin

” - ( state state Bauböck 2010, 297 s of citizens of Romani origin. For instance, according to the 2001 Hungarian Hungarian 2001 the to according instance, For origin. Romani of citizens of s

onr. hs gop my lo use xrtrioil ebrhp policies. membership extraterritorial pursue also may groups These country. - ( state, dual state, Szarka 2003 ( - Gheorghe 2011 Alexander argues that “internal citizenship “internal that argues Alexander -

citizenship may facilitate may citizenship ) .

) -

. irns trans migrants,

) .

eue Rmn ppltos Lcig kin a Lacking populations. Romani secuted - nations - ain, n non and nations, 126 99 - eemnto asm a ecpuae Roma encapsulated an assume determination

are different as they a they as different are

- trans state and and dualstate cannot seek - border self border - ertra com territorial - based solutions” are not feasible. not are solutions” based

both both ( Klímová - determination. However, determination. ‘ re primarily citizens of citizens primarily re oe countries home rm sae ht has that state a from ng across international international across ng the Hungarian and the the and Hungarian the uiis n h previous the in munities - lxne 2007, Alexander - citizenship. e multiple he - tt, they state, e facto de ’

where where

CEU eTD Collection (ii) Arguments for non for Arguments (ii) institute, research museum, channel, radio station, TV Romani establish instance, for thus, autonomy power sufficient Travellers and the Roma transforming European for framework legal the provide could EU, the all above organizations, but model, the Hungarian to similar autonomy, supplementary enjoy could citizens Romani inclusion. bounded non for claims Nonetheless, capable most polity.the ( to opportunities respect and welfare social with to access equal inequalities and participation political rights, excluding individual in polities democratic successful most the been statesindubitaglobalization’,have of equality.democratic ‘processes Despite for struggles undermine to likely are state respective their from citizens Romani detaching Furthermore, of end the diagnose territoriality authors some relations, political of and social of deterritorializatoin transnationalization the of vision Brunkhorst 2007, 106 2007, Brunkhorst or t ( eacher training programmes. Badie 1995 and resources to to resources and

) - n transn a on

. territorial trans territorial

) Excluding “internal Excluding , while others predict others pluralisation, while of the predict territoriality: - ertra saees uooy o o ncsaiy eae state negate necessarily not do autonomy stateless territorial

Forum into a genuine European Roma Parliament having having Parliament Roma European genuine a into Forum ational, possibly European, level. Accordingly, European European Accordingly, level. European, possibly ational, effectively - border border

127 - all all citizenship s citizenship self

xrie trans exercise political communities. Observing the the Observing communities. political - determination are often part of a broader a of part often are determination olutions” implies withdrawal from withdrawal implies olutions” - tt non state - ertra cultural territorial

bly -

CEU eTD Collection rnil o all of principle self democratic territorial boundary the theory, democratic to in problem solution partial a only offer generally theories cosmopolitan such First, criticized normativeare onboth empirical grounds. and explicitly support states territorial from citizenship decoupling for Arguments rule 100 complyto failure decisions. the with the sanction and decisions such execute could institutions what to attention little pays but decision democratic of arenas novel on primarily focuses democracy cosmopolitan self in participation for framework pro and force, of use legitimate the with decisions those backing rights, citizens’ of definitions binding and authoritative delivering of capable is that unit political a require relation in and Second, self exercise able to be alone

T .

he idea of democracy, the rule of the people, does not by itself tell us which people, which demos, should demos, which people, which us tell itself by not does people, the of rule the democracy, of idea he

to determine the boundaries of demos. The demos should not only be affected, but also also but affected, be only not should demos The demos. of boundaries the determine to –

become plural fugitivebecome and o sense underlying the because but travel, of commonness the and migrants of number increasing the of merely because not about come changes These fixed. spatially less become will orientation them for even But suffic homeland. the on insist will defiantly more ever the among Inwill so speak, who it. to fall world,who those choose must between, poor ofthe and it, choose can who globe, the of affluent diaspora the among of generalized sense sense a a least at [...] or overlays. identity, transparent two but of space, divisions global exclusive mutually dimensional longer no are Territories arrangements. Territ cosmopolitan/ global/ post global/ cosmopolitan/ - affected ory persists, but it becomes less compelling: a voluntary set of spatial spatial of set voluntary a compelling: less becomes it but persists, ory - rule. to the first critique, the juridical the critique,first the to -

interests - rule effective and binding and effective rule

100

institut what discuss not do they since – - rule rule

mrcd y eea cosmopolitans several by embraced ( - Maier 2007,83Maier national democ national (

Williams 2007, 240 2007, Williams f utpe oead, il eoe increasingly become will homelands, multiple of 128

( Williams 2007, 228 2007, Williams )

ratic theories. However, such theories such However, theories. ratic -

. institutional boundaries of citizenshipof boundaries institutional

iency of their original territory or or territory original their of iency ) .

For instance, For – ions could make non make could ions

f territory will itself itself will territory f ) either implicitly or or implicitly either . –

F is not sufficient sufficient not is Held’s visi Held’s or instance or viding the the viding - making making on of of on , the - - CEU eTD Collection Westphalian Westphalian Accordingly advanced. being are democracy of forms transnational of be claims and thrive; can constellations citizenship developments interrelated but distinct three p study, transnational distinguished: case the of basis the On 4.2 2007 C and Spain in instance well are there more, of is forms What territorial autonomy. claim do minorities numerous since unrealistic completely is model th that observes Kymlicka Third,

) . Lessonsof study thecase

ci tizenship, democracy,transnational political theory and general. in ,

nd) ht ant n sol nt e de be not should and cannot that anada) esn cn e rw cnenn tasainl solidarity, transnational concerning drawn be can lessons transnational democracy forms forms of olitical and ethnic solidarities come forward; post forward; come solidarities ethnic and olitical Figure

pooin f non of promotion e 13

Democracy,citizenship, solidarity post constellations citizenship - - Westphalian established models of territorial autonomy (for (for autonomy territorial of models established 129

ethnicsolidarities - transnational ertra rcgiin s universal a as recognition territorial politicaland

- territorialized

Westphalian ( Kymlicka post - CEU eTD Collection could not entirely be explained by racism. Consequently, the most recent efforts of the EU the of efforts recent most the Consequently, racism. by explained be entirely not could Roma of numbers large of misery the that recognised organisations international involved even anti and reinforced insufficient it proved as approach backfired rights human the 2000s early the by However, the to marginsRoma ofsociety. of number vast a pushed have that processes economic social complex more downplaying US (namely influence neo the American supporting foundations), under being as perceived often is contrast, in society, Pro States. United the of hegemony the to and globalisation (neoliberal) to response progressive a as conceptualised frequently is society civil global First, of global civilsociety reflected upon. be can claims. various advance ne advocacy and movements, solidarities, Transnational 4.2.1 (Pa 101 reality; For of themselves. in segment sufficient are important them of none an however upon reflects Each inclusion. economic and social to self on focus a from shifted societycivil one a on fixed not is study case agendaThe that the segment ofa global demonstrates civilsociety is dynamic: it deprived groups. struggle the on centre

The ‘EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020’ was accepted by all EU bodies EU all by accepted was 2020’ to up Strategies Integration Roma National for Framework ‘EU The rliament, Commission,rliament, inCouncil) 2011.

Lessons on transnational solidarity and global civil society civil global and solidarity transnational on Lessons

- dimensional, anti dimensional,

against the economic and social marginalisation of marginalisation social and economic the against On the basis of the case study, three common critiques of the concept concept of the critiques common study, three case of the basis the On

- Ro - liberal agenda by focusing on human human on focusing by agenda liberal a rjdcs Pro prejudices. ma

- neoliberal programme. The focus The programme. neoliberal - determination to human rights violations, and finally and violations,rights human to determination

130

- Roma global civil society and the the and society civil global Roma

instance, the most recent focus on on focus recent most the instance, tworks take diverse forms and and forms diverse take tworks

rights violations and violations rights of pro of - Roma global civil global Roma all

vulnerable and vulnerable - Roma global Roma

economic 101

CEU eTD Collection advocacy demonstrates that transnational solidarity may not weaken the capacity of states; on states; capacityof the weaken not may solidaritytransnational that demonstrates advocacy segregation. educational and residential increasing their in resulted racis and prejudices of range a face EasternEurope. Roma in situationof social ofthe extraordinarydeterioration Pro The pertaininglaw Roma. to by governments national influence to attempt and change of catalyst the are they problems’, after ‘running of instead t in limits prevent plan, anticipate, to able redistribute being not crises, to reacting and problems after running for criticised often are associations society civil Global law. international and state agency political as conceived often is society civil global Second, it thus misery stereotypes socialreproduces the hinder integration ofRoma. that with exclusively Roma identifies exclusion social commitment,politicaltheir demonstrateTo citizens. significan exerted advocacy Transnational still ofRoma proportion living th at Roma of plight hand, onthe other their improvedcommunities; social has status not large a significantly, with the to governments national and organisations international of attention activism. t Third, origin more Romani effectively. se it contrary, the he case study illustrate study case he - Roma

erms of redistribution and implementation of implementation and redistribution of erms On ( azr 04 181 2004, Walzer the the

global civil society civil global eks to influence and empower states so that they can integrate citizens of citizens integrate can they that so states empower and influence to eks n hn, h pro the hand, one

–

amongst other means means other amongst s

)

the strengths and weaknesses of transnational of weaknesses and strengths the Pro .

e marginse ofsociety. developed over the past twenty years in response to the to response in years twenty past the over developed - - wih n h poes f post of process the in which m Roma global civil society, by contrast, recognises its its recognises contrast, by society, civil global Roma oa lbl civil global Roma t

pressure on states to tackle t tackle to states on pressure 131

–

developing a regime of soft int soft of regime a developing Eastern European governments European produced Eastern

the the

society has managed to raise the the raise to managed has society nationwide policies; that is why, is that policies; nationwide

outside the mechanisms of mechanisms the outside

h cs o pro of case The - omns transition Communist – he

unintentionally unintentionally plight of Romani of plight Romanicitizens solidarities and solidarities ernational ernational - Roma Roma ,

and and –

CEU eTD Collection ocrig iiesi cntlain, h cs suy eosrtd th demonstrated study case the constellations, citizenship Concerning 4.2.2 Roma autonomous civilsocietyan is hardly perceptible. has elite well and educated professional an but emerged, and activist Romani transnational of layer thin very A hegemony. pro the of case The weak remain associations Romani grassroots while ‘Roma’, of name the in pro NGOsdominate dynamics Professional movement. transnational revealed study case the Furthermore, societ European and pressure transnational external importantly, More measures. policy effective into turned not were so case ofHungarian the in citiz constellations. nationality Citizenship, nat state, of congruence the positing citizenship of conception - called Roma integration strategies. However, th However, strategies. integration Roma called

Lessons on citizenship on Lessons advocacy The following Venn diagram Venn following The ies

on national on national an - oa oeet eosrts ht oiaiy a esl tr into turn easily can solidarity that demonstrates movement Roma ,

and residency are increasingly detached resulting in a great variety of varietygreat a resulting in increasinglydetached residencyare and solidarity democratic of strengthening the facilitate not did enship, nationality enship,

d local levels.d local - off Roma middle class that could could that class middle Roma off

1 and table and 32

and residency.and

e good intentions remained on paper on remained intentions good e

recapitulate the simplest the recapitulate

power and domination domination and power - Roma civil society, often speaking society,civil often Roma ion, and territoryis and ion,

serve as the backboneof the as serve t the at

and fragmented. and

discrepancies

Westphalian not tenable. tenable. not within within ;

they

CEU eTD Collection The case of Roma demonstrate Roma of case The incorporate mem constell ation 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

bers of an ethnic minority and/or stateless nation. The following The nation. stateless minorityand/or ethnic an of bers

non

Romani perspectives,Hungarian allowing fordouble, non Hungarian - non Hungarian Hungariancitizen, non Hungariancitizen - Hungarian Hungarian - Hungarian citizen citizen citiz citizen , citizen

non en , ,

Hungarian national non description , , -

Table Hungarian Hungariannational Hungariannational , - -

s tha s Hungariannational Hung Hungarian 4 Figure

arian national Example of citizenship constellationsExample citizenship of t

the citizenship perspectives are are perspectives citizenship the national ,

14 national abroad

Nation, state, territory ,

inHungary , , ,

133 abroad in Hungary in Hungary , ,

abroad inHungary

Hungarian citizen

+ + + + - - - -

Roma national a national Roma

Venn diagram and table table and diagram Venn even

Hungarian national more complex for complex more + + + + - - -

ttachment Hungary living in + + + + - - -

CEU eTD Collection are difficultconstellations represent. to countr triple even dual, having of options reality, In constella tion 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

y ;

n big at f etd uidcin (local, jurisdictions nested of part being and citizenship citizenship non non non Hungariancitizen, Hungarian non - - Hungarian citizen,non Hungarian Hungariancitizen, non Hungariancitizen, Hungarian Hungarian citizen,Hungarian non Hungariancitizen, Hungarianin Hungary national, - Hungarian citizen,HungarianHungarian - Figure non Hungariancitizen, Hungarian national, abroad Hungarian citizen,HungarianHungarian national, in Hungary Hungarianci Hungariancitizen, national,Hungary Roma in Table - Hungarian citizen,HungarianHungarian national, abroad - Hungarian citiHungarian 15 5 constellations

Example of citizenship constellationsExample citizenship ofincluding members

Examplecitizenshipofconstellations in tizen, national,Hungary tizen, Roma in Hungarian description zen, Roma national,zen, Roma abroad - - Roma non Roma Roma non Roma -

Roma national,Roma in Hungary

citizenships; - - are even more more even are Roma national,Roma abroad Roma national, in Hungary national,Roma -

Roma national,Roma abroad

- - Hungarian, inHungary Hungarian, Hungarian, abroad 134

being permanent resident in more than one than more in resident permanent being

complex and and complex

cludingmembersminority a of

ainl Erpa) Such European). national,

Hungaria n citizen + + + + + + + ------

differentiated including the the including differentiated ofminority a

nnational Hungaria

+ + + + + + + + - - - - -

national Roma + + + + + + + complex ------

living in Hungar + + + + + + + y ------

CEU eTD Collection country asylum residency and (Italy) denied rights. They 1990s. left who those situationof difficultthe study, illustrate case on the based diagram, followingVenn The à exclusion states. beyond support and protection for looking behind is populations Romani vast of statelessness facto de and jure de The stateless,remain their ci they but society, Italian into integrate to like would Italian, speak Italy, in born are children Their decades. two for Italy in living been have ‘immigrants’ these of Some citizenship). resi permanent of perspective the eliminating nomadi age on relying authorities, Italian - vis state authorities and and authorities state vis and put them in in them put and disintegrating Yugoslavia in in Yugoslavia disintegrating ,

Figure and marginalization feed the mistrust mistrust the feed marginalization and fail 16 ed

Citizenshipconstellationswith citi two residencies, two

to get the citizenship of the successor Serbian state, Serbian successor the of citizenship the get to vic equality is denied. official “Roma policies”. “Roma official ap nomadi campi - l seetps simtzd mirn Rmn pol as people Romani immigrant stigmatized stereotypes, old the the midst midst lcig hi itgain no tla scey by society Italian into integration their blocking 135

of a significant part of Romani activists vis activists Romani of part significant a of dency (later possibly followed by Italian Italian by followed possibly (later dency bloody ethnic war ethnic bloody

T hey rather rather xeine o sae persecution, state of Experiences zenships, and nationalitiestwo zenships, seek self seek s and persecu and s the the and also their ‘host’ their also and - main driving force force driving main determination and determination

tions in the the in tions

- CEU eTD Collection Members states. Members th master to learnt framework policy and financial provides It citizens. Romani of plight the tackling in interest increasing developed most The bound origin Romani of citizens of equality social and political legal, the for primarily pro of case the contrary, solidaritiestransnational f A 4.2.3 democracy.cosmopolitan or European of framework the in states, beyond rights fundamental their of protection the remedied. be can rights these of violations how and them, protect bodies which are, rights. European affair’ ‘French The obscure fragile, and theirremain direct and access is very EUbodies to limited. states Member by dominated decision deliberative, complex Its underdeveloped. self i.e. democratic, a as However, naetl esn f h cs study case the of lesson undamental

ed Le

democracies. ssons on transnational and and transnational on ssons

Above all, all, Above ese

of rnntoa democracy transnational

framework do not necessarilynot do

h sme o 21 taial dmntae te iiain of limitations the demonstrated tragically 2010 of summer the - oa doay eosrts th demonstrates advocacy Roma it is unclear for mo for unclear is it A te ae study case the As . s

o Mmes states. Members for - s ruling,

n hv scesul ue te Us l EU’s the used successfully have and E uropean democracy uropean rights result is 136 that emerging citizenship constellations and and constellations citizenship emerging that , st European citizens what our European rights European our what citizens European st

h Erpa Union European the in transnational forms of democracy. On theofdemocracy. On forms transnationalin based based

demonstrates, the rights of EU citizens citizens EU of rights the demonstrates, - making, and and making,

political community, the EU the community, political oa n pro and Roma at transnational actors struggle struggle actors transnational at

governance ,

a demonst has - Roma Roma motn legal, important

tutrs are structures everage over over everage organizations within within

ae an rated

remains The so The state - - CEU eTD Collection the pres the reality in citizens, Romani of marginalization political the counterbalance could Parliament European truly a Although legislatives. national in underrepresented extremely are minority’ di The States. Member decision democraticand deliberationEuropean manner, similar Ina citizens transposed However, directive. breac for sanctioned was state French the citizens, EU Romani of thousands expulsed and targeted Having State hasDirective “transposedMember the effectively correctly entirety.” and its in with freely reside and move directive Citizenship called 104 NovemberStates, 2009. Member the 103 of territory the within freely reside States and move to members family their and Union the of citizens 102 levels. 10 elections EP at run electora present elections Parliamentary European Since

- For a detailedFora lessonsdiscussion‘Frenchofofthe seeaffair’ MemberEU other in settlingand to movingcitizens EU Roma of situation The Agency, Rights Fundamental ietv 20/8E o Te uoen alaet n o te oni o 2 Arl 04 n h rgt of right the on 2004 April 29 of Council the of and Parliament European The of 2004/58/EC Directive 2 ilo Erpa ctzn rmi udrersne o bt ntoa ad Europ and national both on underrepresented remain citizens European million 12

ent ent systemelectoral f nor French authorities keep expulsing Romani EU citizens EU Romani expulsing keep authorities French n al 21, h Fec snt md te eurd eiltv modification. legislative required the made senate French the 2011, early In

EU sanction effectively

l system does not allow for European parties and their candidates to form and and form to candidates their and parties European for allow not does system l law. citizens can only vote for national party lists in in lists party national for vote only can citizens , therefore the largest ‘European minority’ or ‘stateless nation’ comprising nation’ ‘stateless or minority’‘European largest the therefore ,

ig U law EU hing t per that appears It ol a ope f Es f oai rgn ha origin Romani of MEPs of couple a only ,

srain demonstrate ssertation 102 in the EU was adopted in 2004; however, by 2008 not a single single a not 2008 by however, 2004; in adopted was EU the in urther reduce urther

on the right of right the on the breaching of European rights. breachingthe ofEuropean , but was only asked to fully implement the Citizenship Citizenship the implement fully to asked only was but ,

U can EU s

the political weightthe ofRoma. 137

European neither ta mmes f h ‘ags European ‘largest the of members that d

rtc te fun the protect Carrera and Atger Atger andCarrera citizens

and their family members to members family their and 104 now -

making are dominated by dominated are making damental rights of its its of rights damental ( h course the ve clearly breaching breaching clearly 2010

en elected. been ) .

103 European

The ean not the CEU eTD Collection 4.2.4 for framework in general, in amongst inequalities rights fundamental interconnectedness has sovereignty states’ Although reverse such tendencies. or for compensate not could EU the into Integrating citizens. of thousands of hundreds of European of Eastern neoliberalrestructuration the citizens. Romani of equality social and political, legal, the guaranteeing in states European of limitations serious the exposed study case The multiculturalism state transcend also may favou in argue and states within nationalism. of forms state or nationalism, centric unf apparently the on insist either may thinkers Nationalist ethnic transnational of challenges the to ways several in respond may theories Democratic ertn Erpa Union, European tegrating

solidarities and Le ssons for political theory political for ssons h wrd f vrapn ad etd uidcin, states jurisdictions, nested and overlapping of world the

democratic .

of their citizens their of integration; European and

citizens. the diversificationthe may

etim n promote and centrism deliberation, decision

Alternatively: one may accept the proliferation of several cultures several of proliferation the accept may one Alternatively: give up on enshrining each nation into a state and embrace and state a into nation each enshrining on up give tts ean h piay n esnil site essential and primary the remain states

T e ae study case he of r and and

state en curbed been

of constellations. citizenship the only polities havin polities only the - eti multiculturalism centric 138 hy ean h picpl cos guaranteeing actors principal the remain they -

demonstrated that that demonstrated making

In the course of post of course the In trans soci

eties y growing by - state or even cosmopolitan forms of of forms cosmopolitan even or state ,

and governance. governance. and

has resulted in the marginalizationresulted thein has easible project of universal state universal of project easible g genuine capacity to reduce to capacity genuine g . Multiculturalist thinkers thinkers Multiculturalist . even in in even transnational economic economic transnational

- communist transition communist rvd the provide s

f democracy. of the the increasingly

civic and and civic principal principal trans In - - , CEU eTD Collection national, European. national, democracy: of site only the not are state both rejects but democracies, bounded i.e. democracy, transnational difference a advocates dissertation the study, case the of basis the On options:summarizes these state ethnic of favour in argue may thinkers liberal Furthermore, decision deliberations, level European following for required highly official Although communication. e instance, Concerning symbolic.and decision consensus emerge to unlikely is polity democratic global a chapter, first the in discussed As - eti, trans centric,

documents into these languages, in in languages, these into documents

making, democratic control over control democratic making,

ETHNOS c polity ach was reached on the normative framework normative the on reached was the ethnic ‘thickness’ ethnic ne ethnic ofcitizenship,the complete

Ethnic neutral Ethnic Difference Nationalist respecting

- state a t aot t es oe agae o ev a te fiil eim of medium official the as serve to language one least at adopt to has

Table ,

the EU adopted twenty adopted EU the - r ompltn om o liberalism of forms cosmopolitan or

trans 6

Two dimensionalTwo democ of typology multiculturalism - State State State State state multiculturalism. state we are we nationalism liberalism - - - - centric centric centric centric

global decisions is bound to be entirely expressive expressive entirely be to bound is decisions global LOCUS member - 139 centric a centric practice

- s multiculturalism three

of overlapping and nested polities: local, local, polities: nested and overlapping of

Trans nationalism Trans Trans Trans nd global visions of democracy. of visions global nd and h kolde of knowledge the liberalism

official languages and translates all translates and languages official ratic theoriesratic proper subject of global collective global of subject proper It recognizes the primacy of state of primacy the recognizes It - - - - - state state state state neutral approaches, thus pr thus approaches, neutral

utrality feasible. is not -

making . The following table table following The . multiculturalism Cosmopolitan Cosmopolitan (impossible) -

liberalism epcig th respecting English language is is language English Global ,

and governance. governance. and

. Even if if Even .

eory of of eory omote omote States States For - CEU eTD Collection following three making. expects latterthe whereas parties; ofperiod form theinvolvement,political mostlylimited in assumes culture political of ‘thickness’ the incorporating by elaborated further be can typology above The multiculturalism b citizenship of conception difference a advocates dissertation the Instead, chapter. first the in rejected were citizenship of conceptions nationalist liberal and nationalist conservative manner, similar a In EUlanguage,official incl as recognized not are citizens EU of millions of tongue mother the that noted be to has It ide 105

ntifiesconstellations.slightly different Distinguishing the ethnic and political ‘thickness’ of citizenship was inspired by inspired was citizenship of ‘thickness’ political and ethnic the Distinguishing

agn fo ti lbrl o hc rpbia conceptions. republican thick to liberal thin from ranging obnn te iesos f ou, ethnos locus, of dimensions the Combining - dimensional table. dimensional .

Table uding sd n h nto o dmcai solidarity democratic of notion the on ased 7

Three ofdimensional typology democratic theories Romani, Romani, Turkish,

direct involvement in democratic deliberation and decision democraticdeliberation and in involvementdirect

140

and Russian. and ,

n dms is demos and

105 choice betweenchoicepolitical Bader Bader

h fre extrem former The eaiuae i the in recapitulated i.e. , ( 1997

) , although he although , - trans respecting - state state e -

CEU eTD Collection Democratic p and force, of use legitimate with decisions those backing rights, citizens’ of definitions binding self authoritative of capacity al of principle the factors: the that argue I study, case of basis the On theories envisacosmopolitan self authoritative for framework a provide to rights the members of its guarantee and to define able be also must demos themselves, the nationalist liberal and republican whereas affectedness, of importance the emphasize demos. to tend of theories boundaries the determining for necessary are factors three All availability the and ofcert securi economic and physical competencies, and skills democratic diversity, and equality government. institutional stable, conscious, i.e. rule, roviding forparticipation self framework in the hnes may thinkers solidarity, as I as solidarity,

t eurs n ntttoa faeok sae dsusv sae, clue of culture a spaces, discursive shared framework, institutional an requires It cetae eortc s democratic accentuate ain technologicalain innovations. l argue - ge meet donot affected authoritative government capacityof - oenet implying government self Figure in the first chapter, stems from stems chapter, first the in - - neet; eortc oiaiy mns mmes the members; amongst solidarity democratic interests;

17 democratic democratic

The demos of boundaries agency democratic solidarity zd icuie n eaiain om f self of form egalitarian and inclusive ized, this criterion.this 141 onais f demos of boundaries - oenet The government.

olidarity.

- rule. capability affectedness

Neither

t the o deliver authoritative and and authoritative deliver o oiia communities political

f hm r sfiin in sufficient are them of

r dtrie b three by determined are desire to collective self collective to desire

Cosmopolitan

most

and and ty, ty, - - CEU eTD Collection 2006 exclusion social neo of process the in demonstrated, Szelényi and Ladányi As d a in living if ‘Gypsy’ perceived neighbourhood, segregated stigmatized be can One reveal sociological and anthropological of range wide a Roma, being hide’ ‘to use no is one’sidentity choose to freedom and the is solidarity democratic of reinforcement that reveals Roma of case The recognizeto the res be to has identity one’s choose to freedom the particular, Insolidarity. democratic of absence the in root take cannot citizenship study case the of lesson fundamental A membersof regi lo ghettos, spatially in poor segregated marked ethnically “the become thus exclusion social and economic both from suffer to likely inunderclassneo 107 1998 2006 106 any without countries’ ‘host in live ‘immigrants’ Romani of Generations case the As added. be exclusion, of dimensions social and economic the to addition In

see for instance: for see The thesis of underclass is often misinterpreted. Ladányi and Szelényi do not claim that that claim not do Szelényi and Ladányi misinterpreted. often is underclass of thesis The e, a opsd o neo to opposed (as mes, ; ; ) SzelényiLadányiand 2001 M .

107 the dynamicsthe rsikv 2008 arushiakova

ethnic groups, like Gypsiesthegroups, ethnic - liberalRomapreciselythatmore They (more perceived‘Gypsy’)claim are only regimes. those ( s voluntary Durst 2011 Durst

enoc ec other each reinforce cked outside civil society and the class structure” structure” class the and society civil outside cked

of constructing ;

aal 2004 Mayall td dmntae, eea Rm ae e ue r e at stateless. facto de or jure de are Roma several demonstrated, study ‘

Gypsy - patrimonial regimes) “tend promote mobility into middle class even among among even class middle into mobility promote “tend regimes) patrimonial ; cultural difference ofcertain members. Gay y Blasco 2002 Blasco yGay ; or Szuhay2002

externally imposed ethnic markers stigmatiz markers ethnic externallyimposed aig akr skin. darker having ’

(depending on the contex the on (depending ecent middle class neighbourhood and having ‘proper’ job. ‘proper’ having and neighbourhood class middle ecent ;

” Roma/Gypsy ethnicity. ihls n Ssn 2004 Susan and Nicholas

pected by each member of the demos in order to to order in demos the of member each by pected ( 26 ; ) and an an and Tauber2006 . the

required to shift from ascribed ethnic categories to to categories ethnic ascribed from shift to required ; is

Horváth 2011 Horváth respect respect 142

that underclass

; n h ohr ad oemy es being cease may one hand, other the On ifrne epcig ie multicultural) (i.e. respecting difference Tesar 2011 Tesar of this this ; Horváth and Kovai 2010 Kovaiand Horváth ; t) if living in extreme poverty extreme in living if t) 106 choice. Althoughchoice. kl 1996 Okely develops -

) liberal transition, economic and and economic transition, liberal

(

06 26 2006, a third, legal dimension can can dimension legal third, a

, ( 2011 zlni n Ladányi and Szelényi ) .

e ; oee, neo However, legal

ua 2011 Pulay and exclu and one ; Marsh and Strandand Marsh

oa om an form Roma may argue it it argue may recognition. ; de be able be studies Stewart Stewart -

liberal . or The in in

CEU eTD Collection cosmopolitan alternativescosmopolitan ofparticipation inclusion. and terms legal and economic, social, in excluded exclusion. of forms these of all or any from of Greek term study, thecase terms maintain scholars most tsigan,were cigány, etc. called be may exclusion of forms three all from suffering Those etc.)may elites academic, lives being comfortable have demos. the of life economic t citizens, the of residents wealthiest the be even could they called be can citizens Athens, ancient of terminology the Following res into forced being Italy, in instance For ( 110 109 residency.permanent 108 Achim2004

Incontemporary politicalMich philosophy, ci age te term the argues Achim The ident (and (and Italianlater ident citizen) ap nomadi campi heir exclusion is legal is exclusion heir ) .

TheJewish saysEncyclopedia ”the Athínganos Athínganos

s o rcgie a a ofca rsdne n h bss f hc oe a apy for apply may one which of basis the on residence official an as recognized not is metics Athínganos Athínganos

meaning outcast . 109 For instance, members of highly mob highly of members instance, For

, Their lower lower Their although they might be completely integrated into the social the into integrated completely be might they although is eerd o hrtcl et r o ecmr t te yatn Empire Byzantine the to newcomers to or sect heretical a to referred

blocked by themselves. authorities the ael Walzerth revived ael campi nomadi, campi Athinganoi

or untouchables status is not based on their socio ontheir based isstatus not On the basis of the case study, I argue that being that argue I study, case the of basis the On 143

eiet les aig o oe o become to hope no having aliens resident provides sound reasons for looking for for looking for reasons sound provides maybeasJews.”regarded polis. the metic

isconcept

possibility of becoming permanent becoming of possibility aig o ces o h rgt of rights the to access no Having . 110 s .

Romani individuals may suffer individuals maysuffer Romani

( athinganoi. 1983 ile derived from derived from ancient the

) transnational (business, (business, transnational .

108

economic stat economic

As noted in the in noted As us ;

CEU eTD Collection h crls f nlso ae etd n oelpig Ctznhp ihs r primarily are rights Citizenship level overlapping.state on guaranteed and and determined nested are inclusion of circles The t chart the of inverse The mayrecognition equally important. be ca However,the as environment. work and residential, arena primary The citizens. its of rights the protect to fail state the if especially vital, be also may o citizenship rights citizenship o

o recogni for zing , have a respected and legal job, and can choose freely choose can and job, legal and respected a have ,

one’s

reveals three dimension revealsthree voluntary Figure

ethnic

Dimensionsexclusionof ;

however 144

dniy a cmrs te meit local, immediate the comprise may identity s

of , inclusion.

local local se of Roma demonstrated, international demonstrated, Roma of se and European and

The privileged haveprivileged citi their

zenship regimes zenship

own identity. own

full

access

CEU eTD Collection European Union will promote indeed to European the of social inclusion European Romani citizens. inclusion social efficient more promote to order in support international for aim often excluded the by advanced claims Cosmopolitan inclusion. social of terms in states of failures the revealed educ inclusive for actors providing capable most the are states that appears it inclusion, social of terms in Finally, trans of autonomy transnational of forms supplementary developing of possibility the embraced Furthermore, assimilation. voluntary and identities multiple for allows that nation Romani of conception with self Romani and solidarity Roma theories. cosmopolitan in outlined Th e

- ia catr f h dsetto rltd y ruet o tasainl democrac transnational on arguments my related dissertation the of chapter final demands border nations and diasporas, for instance within diasporas, the and framework nations forinstance border ofEuropean Union.

n oa ad tt lvl. t s o e en hte te eet fot wti the within efforts recent the whether seen be to is It levels. state and local on the first chapter to the case ofRoma case the the to chapter first I reje I

o (ea, oiia, n sca) qaiy a wl as well as equality, social) and political, (legal, for cted the general vision of dete of vision general the cted As for the former, I analysed the limitations of limitations the analysed I former, the for As toa, aor ad efr sses Hwvr te ae study case the However, systems. welfare and labour, ational, inclusion social social Figure - determination 19 choose choose identity

freedom freedom to Dimensionsof 145 ;

and drew and

age fr coupli for argued ; rritorialization of political communities, but communities, political of rritorialization of citizenship liberalization liberalization in clusion

conclusions from the case study the from conclusions for

ng claims of recognition recognition of claims ng

an open and dynamic dynamic and open an existing forms existing of

pro y -

CEU eTD Collection forms ofexclusion. tripartite a offered and rule); capacity and solidarity, democratic (affectedness, demos of boundaries I Furthermore, democracy. neutral ethnic state Rejecting political ethnicity, of thickness required the including democra for As citizenships,multiple places ofresidence, attachments. national and as well as nationality, and residency, citizenship, of disentanglement increasing the account citizens their system state society civil global of conception Concerning

esn for lessons I lo fee a e tplg o ctznhp oseltos ht ae into takes that constellations citizenship of typology new a offered also I . but but prahs I rud n aor of favour in argued I approaches, - centric and global conceptions of democracy, as well as the nationalist nationalist the as well as democracy, of conceptions global and centric i ter, otie a he dmninl oe o tertcl options theoretical of model dimensional three a outlined I theory, tic seeks

to reinforce states’ capacities states’ reinforce to

internati maintained

typology of exclusion embracing legal, social, and economic economic and social, legal, embracing exclusion of typology

onal that does not necessarily aim to counterbalance the inter the counterbalance to aim necessarily not does that

ht h co the that oiia ter, I theory, political 146

difference - xsec o tre atr dtrie the determine factors three of existence for diminishing the social inequality of of inequality social the diminishing for culture - put forward a more nuanced nuanced more a forward put epcig trans respecting ad h lcs f citizenship. of locus the and ,

of authoritative self authoritative of - state om of forms and - - CEU eTD Collection to determine boundaries determine to ofdemos.the sufficient decision and deliberation democratic of problems the evading of forms transnational of emergence the democracy. for sufficient not but necessary are they that (1) democracy borders state beyond answer dissertation soughtto The ofSummary findings makes questions, research the contributio explicit main the to answers the summarizes chapter concluding The the and security, availability technological innovations. ofcertain economic and physical competencies, and skills democratic diversity, spaces, discursive shared framework, institutional an requires self of form egalitarian and inclusive institutionalized, stable, conscious, i.e. o rather ties cultural deep nor histories shared attachments. national and primacy I ofcommunal al I hand, other the On f the polity. Democratic solidarity, I maintain, stems from the desire to collective self collective to desire the from stems maintain, I solidarity, Democratic polity. the f

C on cerning the normative relevance of transnational solidarities for democra for solidarities transnational of relevance normative the cerning answer I refuted theories of global civilglobalsociety and of theories Irefuted s to s

either how citizens how either

n of dissertation,the perspectives outlines and the ofthe o eetdcmuiain n ntoait ruet avctn the advocating arguments nationalist and communitarian rejected so

in the the casein light ofRoma. of the

three

Conclusion

questions concerning the desirabilityfeasibilityof the and questionsconcerning

shall decid shall it entails entails it 147

argued e on matters of common concern common of matters on e democratic solidarity democratic

multitude for beingpost for multitude

that democracythat - making

a culture of equality and and equality of culture a . They . requires requires

amongst members members amongst

- do not not do government. It government. study. - p neither olitical, i.e. olitical, cy, I argue argue I cy,

provide provide or -

rule, rule, long how how

CEU eTD Collection is bound to be entirely be is boundto expressive symbolic. and decision collective global of subject proper nor the on reached was consensus if Even emerge. to unlikely is polity democratic global a Nonetheless, structure. federal a in levels local and national to it as competenciesallocateother global and level the competenciesto state onlyshift limited to possible world powerful a imply necessarily not does democracy global that argued state both refuted I citizenship, of locus the Concerning liberal thick thin to republicanfrom conceptions. desirable. nor th demonstrated difference neutral, ethnos of dimensions the distinguishing theories democratic of typology dimensional three a developed cosmopolitan the deconstructed communi I solidarity, democratic of conception my on Relying 111 justified. be can democracy The (2) experimentation, and dissent as well as voluntary assimilation. and dynamic nation within it accommodate to seek polities nested and words: other for argue I Consequently,

See 140 pagetableon 7

, tarian eod question second

demos trans

pn ocpin f culture of conception open The dimension of demos refers to the ‘thickness’ of ‘thickness’ the to refers demos of dimension The at divide, , and locus and ,

ethnic

- - ( tt multiculturalism state epcig ad ainls apoce. ae o te ae td, I study, case the on Based approaches. nationalist and respecting, local, national, European national, local, .

neutral and nationalist conceptions of democracy are neither feasible neither democracy of nationalistare and conceptions neutral eetd oh rgesvs ad mosbls perspectives, impossibilist and progressivist both rejected

a drse te odtos ne wih rnntoa fo transnational which under conditions the addressed . 111 On the basis the above typology, the question can can question the typology, above the basis the On trans

As for As - state

- the role of ethnic attachments, I differentiated I attachments, ethnic of role the

states. difference

ht leave that - -

making, democratic control over global decisions global over control democratic making, ht recognizes that 148 ) and and )

t s motn t und to important is It

- appreciates respecting s

room for multiple identities, voices of of voices identities, multiple for room - eti ad global and centric e r mmes f overlapping of members are we

ocpin f democracy of conception cultural cultural mative framework and and framework mative

political culture ranging ranging culture political erline that I embrace a a embrace I that erline diversity ist

approaches

but does not not does but be précised

m of rms ethnic

– and and the

I . in in is - - :

CEU eTD Collection pcs a utr o eult ad iest, eortc kls n kolde ad minimal and knowledge, and skills democratic diversity, and equality of culture a spaces, racial, of forms all of religious elimination the i.e. law, of rule the under citizen each of equality governance other. each with resources they as members significant its to be must boundaries These for membership. criteria andboundaries as its well norms fundamental the implies, membership our duties self collective to desire a implies solidarity Democratic forparticipation self framework in dec those backing rights, citizens’ author ofall principle legit and effective of boundaries the determine factors three that can conditions what under self authoritative of capacity and most Although exclusion, and social the citizenship regime. renegot continuously also but identity, one’s s polity democratic a Furthermore, promise. of recognition the life, of spheres various solidarity. democratic of absence the in root case The security.physical economic and itative self itative ,

of Roma n gender and is

also required. Furthermore, democratic solidarityFurthermore, democratic required. also -

affected states - government i.e. government have

reveal

- efr pol maue aant h ciei o d of criteria the against measured poorly perform ae discrimination. based to be willing to cooperate to willing be to - interests; democratic solidarity amongst members; s

hat difference respecting multicul difference (i.e. hat An institutional fr institutional An trans

state difference state - capacity to deliver authoritative and binding definitions of definitions binding and authoritative deliver to capacity - rule. ue they rule, isions with legitimate use of force, and providing the the providing and force, of use legitimate with isions

149 voluntary al o ol gaate h fedm o choose to freedom the guarantee only not hall ae h rlto bten eortc solidarity, democratic between relation the iate amework for deliberation, decision deliberation, for amework Other preconditions include shared discursive discursive shared include preconditions Other ucin relatively function As long as ethnic stigmatization prevails in in prevails stigmatization ethnic as long As

- ; respecting

make decisions together decisions make utrl ifrne ean a hollow a remains difference cultural and and - ue big wr of aware being rule, procedur democracy be justified? be democracy implies imate democratic agency: democratic imate tural) citizenship cannot take tural)

still es of the community, as as community, the of es

etr hn alternative than better

the recognition of recognition the mcai solidarity emocratic and and ; share power and and power share ; the the capacity of the rights and and rights the - making and making

I argue argue I

the the the CEU eTD Collection upsd o ersn te ags ‘uoen ioiy cmrsn 10 comprising minority’ ‘European largest the represent to supposed sinc Roma of weight political the reduces further it contrary, the On citizens. Romani of marginalization political the counterbalancing for allow not does the Moreover, rights. European of limitations the 2010 demonstrated of summer the in France from immigrants Romani of expulsion targeted The limited. very is bodies EU to access direct their and fragile, and obscure remain citizens decision struct deliberative, complex Its underdeveloped. remains advanced most allegedly The governance. pri the provide states reducing substantially of guarantors principle E and interconnectedness economic transnational polities. etc.) European, (local, poorly accountable. self self Romani of forms existing Roma autonomous of development the hinder and hegemony trans or Romani of Concerning itself idea the not inclusion, self Romani of forms existing literatu vast the Reviewing nations. (3) citizens.

The last question addressed the self the addressed question last The - governance, ures are dominated byures are Member

xsig pro existing

and criticized it for being tokenistic, inadequate, overtly decentralized, and decentralized, overtly inadequate, tokenistic, being for it criticized and

inequalities. inequalities. cpl rmwr fr eortc deliberation, democratic for framework ncipal the - Roma activism, I demonstrated that solidarity can easily turn into into turn easily can solidarity that demonstrated I activism, Roma fundamental rights of their citizens and the only polities onlythepolities and citizens their rightsfundamentalof existing - determination or the primacy of self of primacy the or determination -

eemnto, I determination, vn though Even Even S e n h tpc I rud th argued I topic, the on re tates. As dissertation tates. the form form - determination of Roma, and in general of transof general in and ofRoma, determination

in the world of overlapping and nested jurisdictions, jurisdictions, nested and overlapping of world the in of 150 their sovereignty has been been has sovereignty their

transnational democracy, the European Union European the democracy, transnational

nlsd h Hnain ytm f minority of system Hungarian the analysed rpa itgain they integration; uropean - odr ainl self national border

demonstrates, rights the ofEU e ni ny n o to Es are MEPs two or one only - making, and governance governance and making, uoen lcoa system electoral European - at

determination over social social over determination civi

most most - decision 2 ilo European million 12 c

limited initiatives. As for for As initiatives. critiques address address critiques - determination. - r sil the still are

making and and making y growing by

capable of capable tragically - border border ,

CEU eTD Collection open conception of Roma nation shall be embraced that allows for multiple identities, identities, multiple for allows that embraced be shall nation Roma of conception open dismissed be not should nation Roma of recognition the for Iidentity, national reactive and homogenizing a developing of dangers or nation Roma of reality social the The disentangled. struggle the identity, of id for aims struggle recognition spheres various in face citizens Romani discrimination and prejudice the pop Romani of disenfranchisement historical the as well as identity, and culture Roma of recognition The citizen. each for rights social equal policies the for approach autonomy) cultural (and rights minority the of inadequacy the out pointed I Furthermore, justified. cannot be states, no feasible nation a by protected be to is that nation homogenous one to individual nationalist belongs each program which view universal to according onthe is based boundarie membership or anti of trans idea the Concerning negotiate, recollect, reaffirm develop, and t to opportunity the have should citizens Romani assimilation. voluntary and experimentation, entify live and oneself - idea Westphalian and post and Westphalian ’

without effective education, employment, and social policies providing tangible and tangible providing policies social and employment, education, effective without of Romani self Romani of r desirable. desirable. r

oil nlso o Roma, of inclusion social In a similar manner, similar a In s - as Roma. as

determination determination s so that t that so s

for democratic equality democratic for - Westphalian - border national self national border both

As long as non As as long

he transhe lgl pltcl n sca) equality social) and political (legal, underscoring its underscoring has been has claims. The first first The claims. heir own identityheir culture. and - border nation border anti 151 s el s h hollownes the as well as -

- Westphalian

debated on the grounds of either qu either of grounds the on debated determination, I identified Iidentified determination, ulations are no less urgent. However, given However, urgent. less no are ulations - Romani citizens can overwrite one’schoice can citizens Romani and recognition cannot and should not be be not should and cannot recognition and

reactive reactive

implies the ‘ the implies becomes a proper nation proper a becomes altogether, rather a dynamic and dynamic a rather altogether, self - character state. This program is neither is program This state. - determination correction argue that the struggle the that argue o adopting of s

. Acknowledging . and of life, life, of new Westphalian,new

the the , ’

i.e. negating negating i.e. of territorial of the Romani Romani the freedom freedom - state. This This state. estioning ‘ Roma Roma

the the to to CEU eTD Collection ial, h dsetto dmntae te mes poieain f post of proliferation immense the demonstrated dissertation the Finally, to resources and power sufficient having effectively tra exercise Parliament Roma European genuine a into framework legal provide fortransforming the could the enjoy Hun the could to similar autonomy, Roma, the as such diasporas, and hand, other the On desirable. nor feasible neither is communities political nationalism. universal non be a promoting may thus ethnos humanity with demos rest the the replacing as to interpreted nation Roma stateless of example the offering However, world(orEu throughout the order r ‘ of experiences originatesfrom cosmopolitanism Romani European citizenshipand stigmatizatio wel as exclusion of mechanisms novel revealed Roma of case the However, participation. solidarity and democratic of perspectives new open affiliation national Multiple detached. increasingly are residency and nationality, Citizenship, constellations. citizenship eject country home

ion guaranteeing the liberty, self liberty, the guaranteeing

of the n and social exclusion are coupled with the discriminatory the with coupled are exclusion social and n ’

universal nationalist program nationalist universal r s eues n ayu seekers asylum and refugees as or

ns I demonstrated that that demonstrated I - . state non state

rope) s , garian model, but on but model, garian dual citizenships, dual

without mediation ofstates.the - - territorial cultural autonomy.territorial determination 152 the

and and

aall eiece ad etd jurisdictions nested and residencies parallel eea vso o dtrioilzto of deterritorialization of vision general ,

the demand for demand the and fundamental rights of Romani citizen Romani of rights fundamental and . n h post the In l. the

in a a in upeetr non supplementary European Roma Roma Travellers and European European level European exclusi ‘ eevn country receiving

on and hostility either in their in hostility either on and

- Westphalian order, ethnic ethnic order, Westphalian a global or Eu or global . Accordingly, the EU the Accordingly, . - territorial version of of version territorial practices of national national of practices - territorial territorial dispersed nations dispersed ’ .

t mle the implies It - Westphalian Westphalian ropean legal ropean cultural cultural

Forum all all s CEU eTD Collection themselves are not sufficient not themselves are forthe emergence increasing are residency and nationality, self of capacity determiningcommunity: who belongs democratic a to foressential are factors three that study,Iargue the case basisof the Ondemos. of boundaries alike. democracy cosmopolitan or Second, conceptions,nationalist argued and for sta both rejected I locus. and demos, ethnos, of dimensions the distinguishing theories democratic of typology cosmopolitan the s contribut dissertation The Contributions pro transnational immigration, politics. international in issue’ provides studies, Romany for As racial pushed stranger the poor and are theto polis. margins ofthe exclusion. triple and double citizenship. of denial and exclusion, Third, tudies. rvae tre iesos f exclusion of dimensions three revealed I

The contribution to internation to contribution The

I outlined the shortcomings of theories envisioning a global civil society, multitude society, civil global a envisioning theories of shortcomings the outlined I –

to my knowledge knowledge my to

- rule. te - communitarian divide and offered a more sophisticated three dimension three sophisticated more a offered and divide communitarian - centric and globalist visions of democracy, as well as ethnic as well as democracy, of visions globalist and centric

I demonstrated that citizenship constellations proliferate as citizenship, as proliferate constellations citizenship that demonstrated I tlat four least at es

to two field two to As these these As -

– Roma advocacy, the inadequacy of the international minority international the of inadequacy the advocacy, Roma I studied studied I

the most most the

None of them provide sufficient answer to the problem of problem the to answer sufficient provide them of None

y tdig h cs o Rm, rvae shrs of spheres revealed I Roma, of case the studying By otiuin a b etoe. is, h dissertation the First, mentioned. be can contributions racialized the other, each reinforce exclusion of forms a l oiia ter i threefold is theory political al s difference

five distinct but related factors: the fear of Romani of fear the factors: related but distinct five of study: international political theory and Romany Romany and theory political international study: of comprehensive comprehensive y eahd hwvr tee eeomns in developments these however, detached; ly 153

of transnational formsof transnational ofdemocracy.

- rm demos from respecting trans democratic soli democratic analysis ehi simtzto, social stigmatization, ethnic :

- of the genesis of ‘Roma ‘Roma of genesis the of state state darity, and affectedness, . F irst, I deconstructed deconstructed I irst, approach. - neutral and neutral

al , CEU eTD Collection nations to the case of Roma, the dissertation the Roma, of case the to nations trans and immigrants, diasporas, on literatures the relating By nations. stateless and Third, level European and national both on citizens Romani to accorded be may rights political special basis of onthe participation cultural non and electoral state of options into non inclusion social and discrimination, I claims. Second, self c the regime, rights trans tra of forms supplementary developing of possibility the embraced but communities, political of deterritorialization of vision general the rejected I Furthermore, assimilation. voluntary and identities multiple for allows dynami that and nation Romani open of an conception as well as equality, social) and political, (legal, for demands with claim Romani of analysis th opened and - - determination. discrimination (equal rights) to special rights and autonomy. I translated this hierarchy hierarchy this translated I autonomy. and rights special to rights) (equal discrimination - s border nations and diasporas, for instance within diasporas, the and framework nations forinstance border ofEuropean Union.

for instance in the ofquotas in for instance form orreserved seats. h dsetto stae Roma situated dissertation the autonomy) the dissertation provide dissertation the itd h tre oiat icuss ( discourses dominant three the fitted e way for c for way e - lcoa forms. electoral

hanging role of the EU, and the struggle for transnational recognition and recognition transnational for struggle the and EU, the of role hanging ant elc efcie anti effective replace cannot - bounded and trans and bounded s of self of s omparative studies. omparative formal political equality does not appear to be adequate, therefore therefore adequate, be to equality appear does not political formal s

a comprehensive framework for analyzing for framework comprehensive a - determination. I determination. argued I ) in the hierarchy of rights ranging from the principle of principle the from ranging rights of hierarchy the in ) i lisaogt hs avne b ohr trans other by advanced those amongst claims ni - state forms state

154 ht oai self Romani that provided a novel novel a provided

Fourth, I provided a comprehensive normative normative comprehensive a provided I Fourth,

- iciiain oiis However, policies. discrimination argued for coupling claims of recognition of claims coupling for argued of political participation embracing both both embracing participation political of ouig n self on focusing

- typology of nationalist claims, claims, nationalist of typology eemnto ( determination nsnational autonomy of of autonomy nsnational - deter

Romani iain anti mination, n h fr of form the in

political political - border border - state state

c -

CEU eTD Collection solidarity, the foundations of European democracies, and the project of European integration European of project the and democracies, European of foundations the solidarity, no are and strength re theoretical serious no having primitive, them P anti hand, attent increasing paying are they hand, one On citizens. have to institutions Janus appear a citizens. Muslim of case the to compared be could Roma of case The level? deficiencieslimitations and of European a on solidarity democratic have to desirable and possible existing exclusion. and solidarity broad but comprehensive a provided dissertation The Perspectives dutyis the of ltcl hoit hv lrey elce xnpoi ad ainls approaches nationalist and xenophobic neglected largely have theorists olitical icuss patcs ad institutions and practices, discourses, - Roma and Islamophobic and Roma discourses and

not

only longer limited to extreme right movements. right extreme to limited longer

politica This theoretical frame theoretical This

l thinkers.l

the presentthe forms? - faced relation visfaced

155

work could be further elaborated by studying studying by elaborated further be could work

f uoen oiaiy n exclusion. and solidarity European of

levance.

political parties political are thriving. - à - vis both Romani and MuslimEuropean vis and Romani both o hi ‘nerto’ o te other the on ‘integration’; their ion

oee, uh discourses such However, normative Reflecting upon democratic democratic upon Reflecting vision of democratic democratic of vision uoensae and states European

ht r the are What

deeming deeming gained

Is it it Is CEU eTD Collection today, when the new society and the new economy are concretely and progressively crossing progressively and concretely economyare new the and society new the when today, do we And State. Roma a creating for looked never have We Nation. a are we language; same the origin, same the culture, same the tradition, same the share we of Nation, victim marginalized, discriminated, often too into fergotten individuals a in of exterminated Nation were persons a million Holocaust, a half over which of Nation a We, o and Roma of sake the for Nation, a as recognized being for ask We State. a become to want not does which Nation their of representation a for call Nation Roma the to belonging Individuals WE, THE ROMA NATION distributedverbatim reproduced thetext at the 112 adequacy newworld. the to of needs the to Nation, Roma the We, individuals. adequate anymore not evidently is which cohincidence, a such through cuts Nation Roma the of history The massacres. and disasters wars, and tragedies to leading Natio a of concept the consubstantiate to will The organize individuals how waythemselves. the as State the of adequacy the and importance the over 1.

h mnfso s t is manifesto The llerance and persecutions, we have a dream, and we are engaged in fulfilling it. We are a are We it. fulfilling in engaged are we and dream, a have we persecutions, and llerance Declaration of Nation f non f - Roma individuals, who share the need to deal with the nowadays new challenges. challenges. new nowadays the with deal to need the share who individuals, Roma

kn from aken

112

( co ad Klímová and Acton

offer to the individuals belonging to the other Nations our Nations other the to belonging individuals the to offer Fifth Appendix WorldRomaniCongress 156

- lxne 2001 Alexander n and the one of a State has led and is still is and led has State a of one the and n

) in2000. Atn n Klímová and Acton .

not want a State a want not - Alexander - CEU eTD Collection concrete. It is what we offer the entire world community. The International Romani Union Romani International The community. world entire the offer we what is It concrete. dre Our rules. and institutions international existing the of reforms needed the regarding question crucial the to answer an find to help Nation request Roma that convinced representationthe itself also We ofa forthe great are is a is involvingin personalities theEurope in and prominent society global the of needs changing the to State the of adequacy the regarding debate shy a that know do We any independentlyindividual, by he Nation or ofthe a shared is needs need a one such that believe Roma do we the evident; is as this law: Nation of rule transnational transnational A needs. new the to adequate norms, agr individuals how way concrete, pragmatic, A "value". a not and method, being oflaw a rule ofthe one the dream, changing a Wethe have economy. society, changing the world, changing the to adequate being everybody, and each to liberty de assure to able system juridical a to thanks and frame the in everybody, and each for rule the being law of rule the of dream concrete political the dream, a have We community. world the for functioning successfull the of and individual, each for legality and freedom establishm the for searching Nation without a being of one the Nation, Roma the of carachteristic main the that aware are We for Roma;rights. need is a the so will Such a isonly it forRama? on Charters international the where world a need and for look it to belonging individual every and each Nation, Roma

a global society which should not be organized exclusively from above from exclusively organized be not should which society global a Human Rights are Laws, are perenptory rules, providing exigible exigible providing rules, perenptory are Laws, are Rights Human n o a tt, s oa a ra, dqae eore of resource adequate great, a today is State, a of ent m s hrfr o get cult ad t s very is it and actuality great of therefore is am 157 she belongs to.

entire UNentire Community. e n ue, ntttos juridical institutions, rules, on ee

mocracy, freedom, mocracy,

CEU eTD Collection start walkingstart together. on path, needed possible, concrete, a path, a offering and proposing a while question, propose we offer, we And rights. human fundamental their of violations and starvation indi of needs nowadays the to adequate not is politics Nowadays nation. another to or one to belonging their from apart individuals representing of ways new and representation, a for look we why of most refusal the state: a historic for searching our in is which resource the tradition, our culture, our offer to are We the to adjusted constantly and necessarly changingofindividuals. needs adequate rules juridical and institutions of creation the assured only be can through which oflaw, rule the equal to freedom We and know democracy would request such a to let the humanityentire forward. substancialstep a make request a humanity the to offer it:we of implementation the engagedin are we and dream, a have We at look them as atcan existing, co that each individual soRights,Human Charteron existingInternational of the implementation respect, representation, a for asking by right share, to something have Nation, Roma the We, , the one of having a representation as a Nation, the Nation we are. Giving an answer an Giving are. we Nation the Nation, a as representation a having of one the , viduals in a changing world; and to the needs of all those persons still suffering suffering still persons those all of needs the to and world; changing a in viduals

adequate resource of awareness to the nowadays world. That's world. nowadays the to awareness of resource adequate ncrete warranties orhis todayncrete forher future. and

158

which to which

CEU eTD Collection so in children other from segregated or education to access denied regularly are children Our 8. average. is determined every Ourby in everyday life segregation oflife; area Europ the below far is life people'sexpectancy Our services. health public to access equal denied frequently are people Our 7. cond deplorable in the from ofsocietysegregated rest rejection to discrimination. and subjected and live people Our 6. bywritten gypsyiologists. linguists and far. has been determined5. Our by fate self so group minority t problem national social a a as group, as fringe "integrated" recognition ofdisciplinary repression. by means state and measures social a of as regarded deprived are we been Traditionally, have Roma We 4. concealed, ignored,been treated history, footnote to as a orsimply forgotten. peopl our against crime and injustice This camps. concentration in gassed and on Holocaust the Parraijmos, the pseudo for abused mania, race Nazi of the of name the victims in murdered Roma, were people our of thousands of Hundreds 3. and violence expulsion, persecution, discrimination, slavery, history this genocide; with written has been ourpeople's blood been has Antiziganism, history Our Europe. by in here lived marked have Roma we centuries, six than more For 2. Islamization ofthe course ofIndia expelled during and towards Europe the in subcontinent Indian the in enslaved were People our ago, centuries seven than More 1. 113 relatives and sisters, parents and forced fight were to against each other armies. different in were people our of Thousands 13. ofourpeopleare 12. Millions slums,forced nofuture, live with noto with ethnic in hope. International the antigypsytheir and through reward. silence policies by condemned not are people Community; our of expropriations and Expulsions 11. are Roma of images between. far few and media Positive infrequent. are Roma the of unwant conditions the of and accounts criminal a as people our of image public the year; by year increasing are media the in us against campaigns Hate 10. ofEurope parts even some in higher. and cent is 80per rate our people's unemployment work is commonplace; at 9. Discrimination 2.

http://www.ertf.org/images/stories/documents/ERTF_Cha called "special schools".called ERTF Charter ERTF Charter on the contrary, authorities are encouraged by the Public Opinion to continue continue to Opinion Public the by encouraged are authorities contrary, the on

o n the Rights ofn theRoma the Rights

sent to battle against each other in European wars; brothers wars;brothers European in other each against battle to sent than higher much is mortality infant our average; ean

- appointed experts specialists; and ourhistoryappointed has been ed menace has long been current. Balanced media media Balanced current. been long has menace ed tos oprbe ih h Tid ol, often World, Third the with comparable itions 159 113

rter_EN.pdf (accessed 15 Septemberrter_EN.pdf(accessed15 2011)

the Islamic the wars. - medical experiments medical

e has too often often too has e

hat is to be be to is hat

CEU eTD Collection of Roma themselves.of Roma day this self to toled has and Antiziganism of feature striking most the is suspicion general of system Rom We 21. for Europe's Human insure ourPeople. to Civil to and liberties Rights failure neo of kind This problem. our of part integral an is a practice constitutes fate our on deciding o infringement specialists blatant and experts to adherence traditional The 20. rightsminority national as a other ofequalwith treatment people lack and nations.and so a as people our of defamation The 19. our through thread be red a to like runs forced that parents, people's history. measure a their roots: from their from away away taken torn and been adopted have children Roma of Thousands 18. our history ouridentity, breeding and ground Ant the forEuropean of falsification by culture, and tradition customs, language, our against discrimination By 17. violence rejection.defamation, and cultural of path the self chosen have us of some exclusion, and expulsion of centuries After 16. a girlsYoung particularly and violencewomen to are of and vulnerable opportunities. lack life often and Romani movement; as rights society; women's in the women in as women discrimination: triple to exposed are women Romani 15. asbehaviour. asocial nomadism, Roma fighting are institutions international fleeing, for refug causes the fighting of Instead 14. prejudice, xenophobia, this reducing in succeed only will stereotyping emerging through fear and systematic ignorance continuous from and education. we Yet longer. any for exist to Antiziganism sufferfrom segreA Roma and which in 25. Europe wewish achieve.aims to decision in Roma of contribution common and participation and roots common on draw to perspectives needs process participation The society. of areas all in of Roma participation the include must Europe just and democratic Aconstitutional, 24. acknowledge must position.Europe special this kin minority,without national European pan a as politically, and historically both Europe, in position unique a occupy Roma The 23. and antiziganism.xenophobia comb to commitment the their of well sincerity as minorities, of liberties civil and rights human the of implementation their of test critical a be will century 21st the in Roma the towards States European of behaviour The 22. - eemnto ad travelling a and determination ees. Our people's attempt to flee from discrimination and Antiziganism is interpreted as interpreted is Antiziganism and discrimination from flee to attempt people's Our ees. - appointed experts being entrusted with making decisions concerning Rom concerning decisions making with entrusted being experts appointed

a, as well as our organisations, live in an atmosphere of general suspicion; the suspicion; general of atmosphere an in live organisations, our as well as a, beyond citizenship, group affiliation, or country of residence. Ensuring the the Ensuring residence. of country or affiliation, group citizenship, beyond

n kn o pols rgt f self of right peoples' of kind any f

a o lf ad r priual afce b prejudices, by affected particularly are and life of way ating any kind of racism, anti racism, of kind any ating - state. Efforts to improve the situatio the improve to Efforts state. cial fringe group is the basis of deprivation of our of deprivation of basis the is group fringe cial 160

- making processes is one of the principal the of one is processes making s scapegoats in our own community. community. own our in scapegoats s - eemnto; hs discriminatory this determination; - colonialism is actually to blame blame to actually is colonialism gation should not be allowedgation be should not iziganism wasiziganism created. - semitism, discrimination semitism,

n of the Roma in in Roma the of n a instead a

- CEU eTD Collection As such, we proclaim the following:As such, weproclaim Roma all with impleme the promote to ourselves commit actively and by authorised binding as Roma Europe of rights in the on Charter Roma this of principles of the declare representation processes, democratic legitimate only the as ERTF the We, 30. beyond perspectives common and roots common on groupcitizenship, or affiliation, draw to needs process participation they their live in; countries minority ofthe Europeannational citizens a and are Roma 29. The in Charter, this in principles and rights the of collaboratio implementation the promote to ourselves commit actively and processes, democratic by authorised Europe in Roma of representation Representations, Roma declare Rights the Europe as binding in onthe principlesofthis ofRoma Roma Charter forall the ourselves and Europe of Council partner the of spirit the Recalling 28. institutions, international and states as opinions; revise well their our as societies, is that it ensure Furthermore, to duty needed. and urgently R obligation is the rights and equal institutions on international based representatives states, legitimate the has of date collaboration to a situation Roma's unsuccessful, the been improve decisively to attempt every that Considering 27. developmentcultural pol their determine freely they self to right Action,the of of importance Programme fundamental and Declaration Vienna the as well as Rights, Cultural Int the Nations, United the of Charter The 26. 115 114 group and/or state and/or religious affiliation. citizenship, of independent Roma, as identity national shared a have We who common languagewho the avowsto oneself ofRomanes, who is; avows commonRoma the to Indo historical oneself

Reference to allReference byto Article declared1 peoples I),ACONF.157/24(Partchap. III.

avows oneself to the common the avows to cultural oneself Romanipe, heritage ofthe n with all Roma everyoneand of good will. 115

and everyoneand ofgoodwill.

ntaie ad atclry o te RF a te ny legitimate only the as ERTF, the for particularly and Initiatives

country residence. of tcl tts n fel pru ter cnmc sca and social economic, their pursue freely and status itical

ship agreement signed on December 5 2004 between the between 2004 5 December on signed agreement ship European Roma and Travellers and Roma European

Article 2 Article 1 Article

- determination of all peoples, by virtue of which of virtue by peoples, all of determination 161 ernational Covenant on Economic, Social and Social Economic, on Covenant ernational

ntation of this charter in collaboration in charter this of ntation

- Greek origin,Greek

Forum (ERTF), we the the we (ERTF), Forum

114

fim the affirm oma's oma's CEU eTD Collection discr or obstruction of kind any of own our on freerepresentation our on decide programmes to right the aswell; implementthem appropriate, where and, and projects, partners, our select to and development cultural and to right autonomy,the one'scultural cultivate to right the self to right the have Roma We Union European Europe Universalof Council thethe of Treaties Nations, the Rights, Human United of Declaration the of Charter the in secured contracts, as opportunities in and stipulated protection duties and rights the in engage agr Roma we minority, national a As orclaim state. fora state own our without Europe in minority national a be to ourselves declare hereby and Europe of We world. the in people other every to equal people a are Roma We onunityisRomanipe based through diversity. self to right tradition. the has people community our of person Every 119 118 Convention ofEurope Protectiontheof SexualChildrenon against AbuseSexualExploitationand succession, State to relationin statelessness Human ofavoidance the on inConvention Europe Trafficking Councilof Beings, against Action on Convention C Europe of Council European Nationality, on Languages, Convention European Minority or Regional for Charter LocalLevel,European at Lifein Public ForeignersParticipation ofConvention the on Punishment, or Treatment of Governmental Transfer on Agreement European Self Local Children, of Custody Crimes, European of EuropeanofConventionofCharter PersonalVictimsof Compensation Violent the on Data, of reg with Individuals Restoration of Protection the for Convention on Refugees, for Responsibility Mutual and on Children Convention of European Workers, Custody Migrant of Status Legal Matters inCriminal Assistance the on Convention European the Crimes, on Convention European Non the Rights, on Convention Human European of Court and Commission European Interim European the of inProceedings Personsparticipating relatingto Agreement the Refugees,European for Visas Abolition of the to Protocol Security, Europe Children, of Adoption the on Social Convent of Convention European Framework Survivors, and Code Invalidity Age, Old for Schemes Charter, than other European Security Social on Agreement Social Minorities, European National Freedoms, of Fundamental Protection and Rights Human of Protection the for Convention the to Protocols additional all and Freedoms, Fundamental and Rights Human of 117 116

EC EC Treaty Particularlyplan OSCE oftheaction the of Recommendations AllParticularly: Roma,Kalé,Sinti,Gypsy, inZigeuners,Tsigans,groupsTravellers Europe related and eements and declarations both collectively and individually. Roma have the right to the the to right the have Roma individually. and collectively both declarations and eements -

Government, European Convention on the Recognition of the Legal Personality of InternationalNon LegalofPersonality the Recognition of the EuropeanConventionon Government,

116

raiain, uoen ovnin o te rvnin f otr ad nua o Degrading or Inhuman and Torture of Prevention the for Convention European Organisations, .Every person has the right to freely practice his/her religion, culture and and culture religion, his/her practice freely to right the has person .Every 119 , as well as all further, as well national international and civil rights.

, European Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions concerning Decisions of Enforcement Recognitionand Conventionon European , - plcblt fSauoyLmtto oCie gis uaiyad War and Humanity against Crimes to Limitation Statutory of Applicability

an Convention on Social and Medical Assistance, European Agreement on on Agreement European Assistance, Medical and Social on Convention an - determination in accordance with international law including: law international with accordancein determination

imination and to vote on it democratically. We refuse any any refuse We democratically. it on vote to and imination Council of Europe Bodies on Roma, Convention for the Protectionthe for ConventionRoma, on BodiesEurope Council of Article Article Article 6 Article 4 Article 3 Article 162

162 onvention on the Exercise of Children's Rights, Rights, Children's of Exercise the on onvention

- determined designation, identity and and identity designation, determined

freely promote our economic, social economic, our promote freely

117 Roma live in every state state every in live Roma ard to Automatic Processing Processing Automatic to ard

, the OS the , Repatriation of Minors, Minors, of Repatriation

118 ion for the the for ion

and the and Council - CEU eTD Collection shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of and redress for: Any action which has which action Any for: redress and of prevention for mechanisms effective provide shall our of destruction or abandonment or to assimilation forced to subjected be not to right the have individually, and collectively Roma, We achieve. to wish we aims principal Participation aimsprincipal wewish achieve. to the of one is processes decision their to contribution and society of areas all in Participation all use to right law. international the have we People our th measures protect appropriate To children. removing hard forcibly of or forms labour all resettlement, forced expropriations, compulsory internment, sterilisation, pog genocide, of act any to the subjected be of security and liberty integrity, mental and security and not peace shall and livefreedom, to in physical right collective haveperson. We the Roma life, to right the have Roma We opportunities, equal securityto a protection to right the freedom, to peace, in our lives lead torightcollective the have Roma Weprejudices.and defamation from right the integrity, physical to right the services, health social citizenship, and nationality a to right the have Roma We byor appointed parties, third self who are behalf our on speakers or experts heteronomy; representations, of kind of Council the of values the and liberties civil Europe. and rights human toward sensitivity and a Antiziganism, and xenophobia as well as stereotypes, and prejudices counteract their to order in in employees their campaigns among and education departments authorities, appropriate public initiate shall institutions international and States offences orcommit incitement punishable by that are understanding. existing international or defamation humiliation, allow they press, the of freedom of name the in if, revised be shall Ro against violence and hatred incite cannot media the that measures appropriate of means by ensure shall States or incitement of form Any violence, humiliation, defamationhatred, reportingor false against them. integration; or organi assimilation individuals, (by forced promotion of form or resettlement Any transfer, population expulsion; forced of form Any possessions; or housing land, their h which Anylanguage;action or identities ethnic or valuestheir cultural orof peoples, their integrityof distinct depriving as of effectRoma the

in all areas of society and contribution to their decision processes is one of the of one is processes decision their to contribution and society of areas all in

a hog fle eotn ad ae apin. diinly statutes Additionally, campaigns. hate and reporting false through ma at are foreseen by the international community and in accordance with community international bythe accordance foreseen in at and are

nd equal treatment. nd equal

sations the media or any other source) of discrimination, discrimination, of source) other any or media the sations Article 12 Article 11 Article 10 Article rom or any other act of violence, including forced forced including violence, of act other any or rom Article 9 Article 8 Article 7 Article 163

as the aim or effect of dispossessing them of of dispossessing of them effect or aim the as

nd to raise awareness of injustice of awareness raise to nd

life, to have access to public to access have to life,

culture. States culture. - appointed appointed

CEU eTD Collection ebr tts o ar ot hi dte udr hs hre. h E sal sals, in establish, shall EU The Charter. Commission take all possible shall European this under duties The society. civil Roma of stabilisation the for their fund aid special a ERTF,the with cooperation out carry to competencies all States respective take Member shall their institutions its within the and EU measures for The solutions appropriate Roma. effective of conditions develop living institutions, the of Roma improvement with collaboration in shall, States educationaltheir systems. into delay without them integrate and institutions Roma with develop collaboration shall in curricula institutions such international and States end, this origin To curricula. history, school in Roma included that ensure shall States language own their in report to opportunity the with discrimination; without Roma particularlythis state to media. applies the provide shall radio, and b media, mainstream The tongue. mother their in media own their establish to able are Roma that means, appropriate by ensure, shall States schools. at classes Minor or Regional for Charter European the public in promote stipulated measures to all and measures Romanes of taking acceptance includes This language. European living a as protected instit international well as languages.States, European other all with equatedbe shall Romanes language, our As the to sectoreducation applies particularly This sustainably and effectively fought and removed is kind influence any that ensure shall States to appeals also ERTF The groups corporate international increasingly show courage to and more regard. employ Roma. this in models role as act to efforts particular make shall OSCE the Europe, of Council the Commission, European the of The members. employeesand/or Roma their of number proportion the in reflected is states their in Roma the gover that ensure and to action, positive service appropriate, where public including measures, universities, and institutions parties, Political ofRoma live.large number particularly a which in EU the of regions disadvantaged support to used are Funds, Social as ity Languages, as well as support our own educational institutions and native and institutions educational own our support as well as Languages, ity

tos sal hrfr esr b al prpit mas ht oae is Romanes that means appropriate all by ensure therefore shall utions,

f ergto ado aated ihn hi shr of sphere their within apartheid and/or segregation of Article Article Article 15 Article 14 Article 13 Article Article 18 Article 17 Article

164 measures that StructuralFunds, ensure to as well oth state and private and including television television including and private and state oth

164 and fate, persecution and community are are community and persecution fate, and

and other international institutions international other and

to support the efforts of its its of efforts the support to mns hl take shall nments -

language language CEU eTD Collection iiay evc; huh hs os o afc te ih o idvda Rm t vlner for volunteer to Roma individual of right military service. the affect not does this though service; military acts in participate to wish not do who pacifists As the upon infringes that way a in interpreted be shall CharterCharter's positive and intentions. spirit this of articles the of None legal their or states to claims compensation examining blame to successors, are f which begin instantly shall ERTF The ofpoliticalpartiesmembers orfounding one's own party. implie This states. their in processes political the in participate actively to Europe in Roma the upon calls ERTF The strategiesof appropriate as the ofstate, as well cooperation economy Roma. and positiv bydrastically reduced be to has Roma of long be shall Roma of employment the increase short indirect and direct fordisadvantages experien or compensate prevent to action against provisions include positive shall take employers to allow also They shall harassment and victimisation discrimination, These Roma against employment in implement shall again effective action States enforcestrong lawsand and and the on including advice, legal bono pro granted are Roma that of implementation rightsexisting human and civillib ensure shall States mus representationslegitimate ofinterests and ofgovernments.partners Roma of organisations umbrella forum/alliance. National umbrella Roma national each to assistance financial sufficient provide shall statenationalThe state's national the parliament. seat in granteda shall be then alliance/forum national a form to na Each influence. state unite of free is to which alliance/forum umbrella enabled Roma are organisations Roma existing that ensure shall state independent of establishment the national each model, ERTF the on Based financially. supportand actively society, both Roma civilian shall institutions, international as well as States, - em rjcs hc mrl dvlp yblc au Sae pnoe porme to programmes sponsored State value symbolic develop merely which projects term

s participating in elections actively as well as passively, becoming becoming passively, as well as actively elections in participating s

or violence Roma the against in the past.

Article Article Article 21 Article 20 Article 19 Article Article 25 Article 24 Article 23 Article 165 -

e actions; this also includes the development the includes also this actions; e b acpe, rmtd n spotd as supported and promoted accepted, be t 165 term and sustained. The unemployment rate unemployment The sustained. and term

of war, we Roma shall not be forced into forced be not shall Roma we war, of

erties

ced by Roma. We explicitly refuse refuse explicitly We by ced Roma.

tional Roma umbrella Roma tional

st discrimination

CEU eTD Collection compelling most and just the democratic ofa requirements society.meeting for and others of freedoms and rights the for respect recognit due securing of purpose the for solely non necessary strictly be and shall discriminatory limitations such Any obligations. rights human international with accordance declar this in forth set rights the of exercise The respected. be shall all of freedoms fundamental and rights territo human declaration, the present the in enunciated rights the part, of exercise the In states. independent in or or dismember totally would which impair, action any encouraging or authorising as construed or Nations United the of Charter the to contrary act any perform to or activityany in engage to right any a for implying as interpreted be may charter this in Nothing respect the special to and forthe situation of ourpeople states the among people our of treatment unequal present the of abolishment the to contribute binding legall legallyof kinds These charter, necessary. are OSCE this the and United of Nations the Union, European parts the Europe, large of Council the of of states member implementation the of the agreements in succeed to order In

ation shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law, and in in and law, by determined are as limitations such to only subject be shall ation

rial integrity or political unity of sovereign and and sovereign of unity political or integrity rial Article 27 Article 26 Article 166

y binding agreements only could could only agreements binding y ny state, people, group or person or group people, state, ny ion and ion - CEU eTD Collection paua, ru. 1996. Arjun. Appadurai, Helmut, Anheier, 2002. ed. James, Anderson, 19 O'G. R. Benedict Anderson, 1997. Mundy. Gary and Thomas, Acton, Klímová Ilona and Thomas, Acton, Minority, nowhere: and world the of Citizens 2001. Gheorghe. Nicolae and Thomas, Acton, Nation Discourseof Scholarship, the RomaniPolitics, and 2006. Thomas. Acton, 20 Viorel. Achim, faceLesfrançaises permanent.contrôle circulationautorités libre au De la 2009. Ilsen. About, Italie en l’identification de policière science d’une Naissance 2005. Ilsen. About, Mobi Ethnic 2002a. Zoltan. Bárány, 2000. Bertrand. Badie, 1995. Bertrand. Badie, the On Citizenship: Transnational of Conditions institutions: 2007.BuildingBader, strong tie European beyond Veit. Cultural The 1997. Veit. Bader, Pan the Imperialism: Continental 1973. Hannah. Arendt, Review. A Critics: its and Democracy Cosmopolitan 2004. Daniele. Archibugi, 2000.Cosmopolitan Archibugi,Democracy. Daniele. Daniel Archibugi, Oxford:University Press. Oxford New York: Routledge. spread nationalism of Hertfordshire:Hertfordshire University Press. of Hertfordshire Press. Roma East Europe and Eastern In Roma. for rights human and ethnic Institute Istanbul: Strand. D. E. Marsch and Research Istanbul.in Swedish contest contructedand : contextual, identities of problem the and Gypsies UniversityEuropean Press. tsiganes mobilités aux transfrontalières, 1860 1922). Gypsies. spaces durespectsociale New ; York:Petranovic. Cambridge University Cambridge Press. In ofPolitical Interpenetration and Cultures.Ethnic totalitarianism Relations International of Journal D.and Held. MA: Cambridge, ; Oxford, UK Press. Polity order world new a for agenda an : democracy Cosmopolitan Minn.:Minneapolis, Press. University ofMinnesota dniis aflain, n allegiances and affiliations, Identities, - European Answer to West European Questions? In Questions?European WestAnswer to European

. Stanford, Calif.:. Stanford, University Stanford Press. f eta ad atr Europe Eastern and Central of Les Sécurité la Cahiers de World Politics Mary Kaldor, and Marlies Glasius, eds. 2001. eds. Glasius, Marlies and Kaldor, Mary . 95 Fo te ntd ain t Csooia Dmcay In Democracy. Cosmopolitan to Nations United the From 1995. e. 04. . New Y The imported state : the westernization of the political order political the of westernization the : state imported The e international désordre le sur essai territoires des fin La h Rm i Rmna history Romanian in Roma The , L'espace dupolitique.L'espace

, edited by, edited Guy.W.Hatfield: Hertfordshire University Press. of oent a lre clua dmnin o globalization of dimensions cultural : large at Modernity crossings border and spaces political Democracy: Transnational . Rev.London extended and ed. York:Verso. New ;

ork: Harcourtork: Brace Jovanovich.

54 (3):277 91.

- Bibliography mgnd omnte : elcin o te rgn and origin the on reflections : communities Imagined An Union. Romani International The 2001. Alexander. iain ihu Peeusts Te at European East The Prerequisites: without lization

56 (1):167

10 (3):437 - 307. 167 oai utr ad ys identity Gypsy and culture Romani Between Past and Future: the Roma of Centr of Roma the Future: and Past Between

eie b W Gy Htil: nvriy of University Hatfield: Guy. W. by edited ,

Paris: Fayard.Paris: eie b S Bnai, . hpr ad D. and Shapiro I. Benhabib, S. by edited , - - - 200. 1930. 473. New Lef New

Political Theory

. Budapest ; New York: Central Central York: New ; Budapest .

Cultures &Cultures Conflicts - oeet. In Movements. t Review t

Between Past and Future: the Future: and Past Between

Global Civil Society 2001 Society Civil Global s and weak commitments.s weak and , edited by D. Archibugi Archibugi D. by edited ,

(4).

25 (6).

h oiis of origins The

(76):14

- ed

t sur l'utilité sur t Building. In Building. . Hatfield, Hatfield, . ,edited by European European , Mestizo Mestizo (1902 - 38.

al al

- . . CEU eTD Collection Brunkh In communities. and spaces transnational Diasporas, 2010. Michel. Bruneau, Holocaust Berlin's Networks: Memorial to Hierarchies Victim From 2011. Nadine. Blumer, nemzetépítés Race Kindsof 2007. Three Lawrence. Blum, roma A 2008. Mátyás. Binder, etnikai romák/cigányok magyarországi A nép…" a ez "Felébredt 2006. Mátyás. Binder, B B research. In political 2008.Normative theory Bauböck, Rainer. empirical and In Democracy. Multilevel a in Boundaries Political 2007. Rainer. Bauböck, Citizen 2005. Rainer. Bauböck, 2002b. Zoltán. Bárány, David.'FromBelow'?Civil Building Society 2004a. Chandler, Global des L’affaire 2010. Atger. Faure Anaïs and Sergio, Carrera, 2007. J. Craig Calhoun, Calh of Critique a Toward Travelers: Frequent of Consciousness Class The 2002. Craig. Calhoun, Self Minority 2007. Governance Andrew. Global Burton, of Legitimacy The 2006. Keohane. O. Robert and Allen, Buchanan, of Typology A Autonomy: of Options European 2002. Küpper. Herbert and Georg, Brunner, Solidarity the Democratic in of Destiny GlobalizingThe Solidarity:2007. Hauke. Brunkhorst, enhabib, Seyla. 2004. Seyla. enhabib, theory constellationsidentities: about 2010.Cold hot Political questions and Rainer. auböck, oun, Craig. Imaginary. 2003.‘Belonging’in Cosmopolitan the rt Hue 2005. Hauke. orst, Studies in contemporary in Studies German thought social Faist: UniversityAmsterdam Press. Methods and Theories Concepts, Transnationalism. P Socialism. National of Victims Roma University Toronto. ofToronto, and Sinti to Memorial 38 (1):53 keresztmetszetben. Gergely.Budapest:by Történelemtudományok J. ELTE Iskola Doktori önsz nemzeti lectures Seeley and Methods In diaspora. and transnationalism M.and Keating.University Cambridge:Press. Cambridge perspective pluralist a : sciences social the in methodologies UniversityPress. Allegiances and Affiliations Working Monnet PaperJean Ethnopolitics 339. Freedom, Brussels:Area Security Policy of Justice. forEuropean and Studies. Centre London New ; York:Routledge. Actually Existing Cosmopolitanism. Hungarian Roma. Institutions. byK.edited Budapest:Gál. OpenSocietyInstitute. Self Minority of Models Autonomy Philosophy Time

s of Global Capitalism, Global Religion, and the Global Public.Global the and Capitalism,Religion, GlobalGlobal of s - 72.

38 (1):93 Ethics & InternationalEthics Affairs , edited by R. Bauböck and T. Faist: by, edited UniversityBauböck T. and Amsterdam R. Press.

erveződési folyamatairól. In folyamatairól. erveződési . Cambridge:Press. University Cambridge . Cambridge New ; University York:Cambridge Press. The rights of others : aliens, residents, and citizens and residents, aliens, : othersof rights The

h Es Erpa Gpis Rgm Cag, agnlt and Marginality Change, Regime : Gypsies European East The Ethnopolitics ain mte : utr, itr, n te ompltn dream cosmopolitan the and history, culture, : matter Nations Eszmélet oiaiy fo cvc redhp o goa lgl community legal global a to friendship civic from : Solidarity - 111. ship and National Identities in the European Union. European the in Identities National and ship

20 ( eie b S Bnai ad . hpr: Cambridg Shapiro: I. and Benhabib S. by edited , 97 (4). -

governan 6 (1):67

77). Diaspora and Transnationalism. Concepts, Theories Concepts, Transnationalism. and Diaspora

South Quarterly Atlantic Governance. In Governance. - 168 Related Solidarity. Related - e Mnrt Rpeetto i Fu fr the for Flux in Representation Minority ce:

88.

A múlt feltárása feltárása múlt A 20 (4):405 -

ötnt é kluái antropológiai kulturális és történeti . Cambridge, Mass.:. Cambridge, MIT Press.

Minority Gover Minority - eie b R Buök n T. and Bauböck R. by edited , Roms. A Challenge to the EU’s the to Challenge A Roms. 437.

Journal of Social Philosophy of Journal

Ethnicities -

előítéletek nélkül előítéletek edited by D. Della Porta Porta Della D. by edited 101 (4):869. Millennium , nance in Europe in nance Journal of Socialof Journal

The John Robert Robert John The D dissertation, hD

Approaches and and Approaches 3 (4).

Diaspora and and Diaspora

33 (2):313

Identities, Harvard Harvard

, edited ,

e - - . , ,

CEU eTD Collection Durst, Judit. 2011. "What Makes Us Gypsies, Who Knows...?!": Ethnicity and Reproduction. Reproduction. and Ethnicity Knows...?!": Who Gypsies, Us Makes "What 2011. Judit. Durst, Lewis1984. A.andCoser. Émile, Durkheim, 2009. Csaba. Dupcsik, 2007. R. Mark Duffield, 2007. Costas. Douzinas, Hun in Autonomy Cultural of Functioning and Development The 2007. Balazs. Dobos, 1999. eds. Rucht, Dieter and Kriesi, Hanspeter Donatella, Porta, Della 1995. David. Crowe, M. Shirin Rai, and Robin, eds. 2000.Cohen, New Constructing 1999. M. Richard Clewett, and history the gipsy': a subdued never but enraged often has 'Severity 2004. Colin. Clark, Thomas. Christiano, Biopolitical the of Limits The Cosmopolitanism? Liberal Critiquing 2009. David. Chandler, 2004b. David. Chandler, Introdu 2005. Diasporas: eds. Kenny, Michael and Gypsy/Roma D., Randall Germain, 2002. Paloma. Blasco, y Gay the to Approach P in Multiculturalism Belonging: Anthropological of Dilemmas 2010. Catherine. Frost, an Nationalism: and Diaspora 2003. László. Fosztó, Van 2002. László. Fosztó, Nation:Feys, ofthe Roma New Patrin. ofthe 1997.Towardsa Paradigm Case Cara. The In Falk, 1995. Richard. partners? dance of kind What transnationalism: and Diaspora 2010. Thomas. Faist, oil hoy hoeia taiin i te oil sciences Macmillan. social the in traditions theoretical theory social 1890 tükrében, peoples cosmopolitanism Ethnopolitics WorldGlobalizing Martin'sPress. Kentucky(Gypsies)Europe. Central in Eastern University. Liverpool: Susan.Liverpool T. and University Press. counter In stereotypes. Romani European of making UniversityPress. Law International of Philosophy Approach. International Relations Ethics And And Globalizing InA Ethics Politics Era Perspective. Palgrave York: New ; Hampshire Macmillan. Basingstoke, Houndmills, O'Neill. S. postnationalism and and Breen nationalism on reflections critical : nation? the Romani Movement.International Alapítvány. Közép önazonosság Methods and Theories Faist: Bauböck T. and Amsterdam University Concepts, Transnationalism. and Diaspora Stewart: EuropeanUniversity Central Press. In Multi . Cambridge: Polity. - mgs f Gpis/oais n uoen cultures European in "Gypsies"/Romanies of images - icpiay prahs o oay Studies Romany to Approaches Disciplinary International PoliticalSociologyInternational

Social Social Anthropology

On Humane Governance 6 (3):451 A history of the gypsies of Eastern Europe and Rus and Europe Eastern of gypsies the of history A

00 Dmcai Lgtmc ad nentoa Isiuin. In Institutions. International and Legitimacy Democratic 2010. - 2008. A magyarországi cigányság története. A történelem a cigánykutatások cigánykutatások a történelem A története. cigányság magyarországi A . London. York: New ; Routledge

Development, security and unending war : governing the world the governing : war unending and security Development, . London: Macmillan PressLondon:Ltd.. Macmillan - osrcig lbl Ci Global Constructing - Európá Human rights and empire : the political philosophy of of philosophy political the : empire and rights Human Budapest:Kiadó. Osiris cgn nmetdt In nemzettudat. cigány e . New York: Palgrave Macmillan. -

469.

ban

eie b C Fdnc Bdps: eei László Teleki Budapest: Fedinec. C. by edited ,

Regio 10 (2). , edited by S. Besson and J. Tasioulas: Oxford Oxford Tasioulas: J. and Besson S. by edited , Global social movements social Global 169 :Press. Polity The division of labour in society in labour of division The

(1).

:Routledge. Political and Social Identities Among Roma Roma Among Identities Social and Political

3 (1):53

Press. The role of the Romanies : images and images : Romanies the of role The vil Society, Morality and Power in in Power and Morality Society, vil h Ie O Goa Cvl oit : Society Civil Global Of Idea The -

Cavendish. Társadalmi önismeret és nemzeti nemzeti és önismeret Társadalmi

70. eie b M Rövi M. by edited ,

Bsnsoe Hampshire: Basingstoke, .

:Athlone Press. Nicholas S. by edited , lural Societies. In Societies. lural Social Movements in a in Movements Social cing a Comparative Comparative a cing sia . New York: St. York: New . eie b R. by edited , , eie b K. by edited , Contemporar d and M. M. and d

gary. gary. After After The The

of of y CEU eTD Collection acc, a. 2002. Ian. Hancock, In Nationalism. Romani of Roots European East The 1991. Ian. Hancock, Cronin.Habermas, 2006. Ciaran Jürgen, and Habermas, Jürgen. 2001. Nation European The 1999. Jürgen. Habermas, 1987. Jürgen. Habermas, post and identity Romani 2001. Will. Guy, O. Robert and W., Ruth Grant, Solidarities. Transnational 2007. C. Carol Gould, Gosepath, non to claim Romani The 2004. Morag. Goodwin, and A roles and potential Nicolae, paid:Gheorghe, be to prices and made be to Choices 2011. Nicolae. Gheorghe, in Travellers and Gypsies Roma, research: and advocacyActivism, 2010. Nicolae. Gheorghe, Roman of construction social The 1997. Nicolae. Gheorghe, In policies. national and myths Global 2000. Grahame. Thompson and Paul, Hirst, ‘Anti 2000. Herbert. Heuss, tamed? globalisation Cosmopolitanism: 2003. David. Held, in democracy Rethinking community. political of contours changing The 2000. David. Held, 1995. David. Held, problems: boundary problems, Binding 2007. Rile. Clarissa Hayward, 2001. Negri. Antonio and Michael, Hardt, Eastern Europe Eastern P. and DeGreiff.Cronin Massachusetts: Cambridge, MIT Press. In Citizenship and German contemporary thought in social Europe Eastern and Hertfordshire Central Press. of Roma The Politics. 164. Lab. Stanford:N. Zalta. Metaphysics The Research legal international an perspective. Relations. onEthnic Policy Project Paper. Roma in consequences activism policy and Eur in Mobilities Romani at read UniversityRefugee Centre, Studies ofOxford. Paper Europe. and UK the identityTraveller democracy :keydebates democracy Hatfield: acton. T. Press.Hertfordshire University of Instudy. of field new a of creation the 29 (4):465 London: Routledge. In globalization. of context the Cambridge York: governance New ; Cambridge Petranovic. D. and UniversityPress. Shapiro I. Benhabib, In citizenship”. “democratic Press. UniversityHertfordshire Press. of Stefan. 2011. Equality. In Equality. 2011. Stefan.

American Political Science Review - 480. Cambridge:Polity Press. Democracy and the global order: from the mod the from order: global the and Democracy e are t e o ani eo le le eo o ani e t are e

, edited by, edited J. and Kolsti.Armonk, D. Crowe N.Y.:

, edited by, edited Acton: Hertfordshire T. University Press. of The PostnationalPolitical Constellation. Essa The philosophical discourse of modernity : twelve lectures twelve : modernity of discourse philosophical The The Inclusion of the Other. Studies in Political Theory Political in Other. Studies the of The Inclusion

dzj ig. 97 Te oa n h Twenty the in Roma The 1997. Mirga. ndrzej - Gypsyism’ is not a new phenomenon. Anti phenomenon. new a not is Gypsyism’ Keohane. 2005. Accountability and Abuses of Power in World in Power of AbusesAccountabilityKeohane. 2005. and , edited by B. Holden. London: by, edited B.Holden. Routledge. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Encyclopedia Stanford The dniis aflain, n allegiances and affiliations, Identities, Global democracy : key debates key : democracy Global

Roma rights - Communist policy. In policy. Communist

Empire The Divided WestThe Divided 170 Scholarship and the Gyp the and Scholarship . Mass.:Cambridge, MIT Press. - State: On State:

making. Inmaking. ora o Sca Philosophy Social of Journal 99 (1):29 -

Cmrde Ms. Hrad University Harvard Mass.: Cambridge, . territorial nation status: recognition from recognition status: nation territorial

(1). eie b W by edited ,

the Past and Future of Sovereignty of Future and Past the

- a i identity. In identity. i 43. eiw f nentoa Studies International of Review Price of RomaIntegration of Price . Cambridge ; Malden: ; . Cambridge Polity.

Between Past and Future: and Past Between

ern state to cosmopolitan cosmopolitan to state ern r o . Guy: University of of University Guy: . ys , edited by B. Holden. B. by edited ,

sy Struggle sy - ope, 15 January, at at January, 15 ope, a : Polity Press. M.E. Sharpe. Gypsyism research: Gypsyism

n Gypsy politics and politics Gypsy

- e h tobe with trouble the is Cnuy A Century: First

The Gypsies of of Gypsies The eie b S. by edited ,

, edited by E. E. by edited , e , edited by C. , edited

n 8 (1):148 38 e , edited by by edited ,

Hatfield: , Studies Studies Global Global

CEU eTD Collection Khagram, Sanjeev, James V. Riker, and Kathryn Sikkink. 2002. Kathrynand Riker,Sikkink. V. James Sanjeev, Khagram, HughPoulton. and Donald, Kenrick, Kastoryano, 20 Slawomir. Kapralski, nationalism. political Roma Holocaust: the and building Identity 1997. Slawomir. Kapralski, In Practice. and Theory [1784]. 1983 Immanuel. Kant, Half Last the During Population Roma Hungarian The 2002. Ernő. Kállai, of Kaldor, idea Mary. 2003.The Eastern and Central in Roma The Trap. Dependency the Avoiding 2003. Andrey. Ivanov, 2006. Osamu. Ieda, 1999. Kimberly. Hutchings, 2010. Kovai. Cecília and Kata, Horváth, "PassKata.Horváth, 2011. Symbolic The Rights: self Gypsy Minority1997. Martin. Kovats, on Attitudes Roma Hungarian 2005. Robert. Koulish, creed universalistic the Utilising politics: Romani international and Diasporas 2010. Maria. Koinova, Contemporary Exposing Class: and Ethnicity Gender, 2011. historical An Angéla. Europe. Kóczé, Central in representation political Romani 2002. Ilona. Klímová, Klímová Klímová rnntoa Sca Mvmns Ntok, n Norms and Networks, Movements, Social Transnational Consciousness East in New ; York:Petranovic. Cambridge University Cambridge Press. allegiances and affiliations, Identities, LiverpoolLiverpool: UniversityPress. cultures European in "Gypsies"/Romanies In Identity. PapersNationalities andmoralspolitics, history, Foundation. Society Hungarian in Roma the Gypsies/ Bratislava:Europe. Development Nations United Program. Sapporo: Center, Hokkaido Slavic Research University. Sage Publications. észak byedited EuropeanUniversity M. M. and Stewart: Rövid Central Press. In Colour. Skin of Possibilities Socialism of Identification.Ethnic Violence In purposes. nationalist and Faist: UniversityAmsterdam Press. Methods particularistic and Theories Concepts, for Transnationalism. liberalism of University,European Budapest. Pol and Issues Women’s survey. Cla determination and Non Press. - - Alexander, Ilona. 2007. Transnational Romani and Indigenous Non Indigenous and Romani Transnational 2007. Ilona. Alexander, 2005. Ilona. Alexander,

ia 20. rnntoa ntoaim rdfnn nto ad ertr. In territory. and nation redefining nationalism: Transnational 2007. Riva. magyarországi faluban. faluban. magyarországi Romani Studies Romani - State Actors State , edited by, edited F.Bridger and S. Pine: Routledge.

eod oeegt : rm tts law status from : sovereignty Beyond h rl o te oais iae ad counter and images : Romanies the of role The ims. ims. 4 Rtas f eoy n osrcig atr Erpa Roma European Eastern Constructing in Memory of Rituals 04.

ing": Rebeka and the Gay Pride. On the Discursive Boundaries and and Boundaries Discursive On GayPride. the the and Rebeka ing":

25 (2):269 . Aldershot:Ashgate. International political theory: rethinking ethics in a global era global a in ethics rethinking theory: political International - Ethnopolitics central central Europe

12 (5).

global civil society. itical Activism, Sociology and social anthropology, Central Central anthropology, social and Sociology Activism, itical - The Romani Voice in World Politics. The United Nations Nations United The Politics. World in Voice Romani The governments in post in governments . Indianapolis: 1784. Pub. Hackett Co.Original edition,

2001. 2001. AnBlokk

283. Multi Europe

Roma Rising. The Growth of Transnational Gypsy Transnational of Growth The Rising. Roma 6 (3):395

cigány A 171 :Hurst. C.

- (4). icpiay prahs o oay Studies Romany to Approaches Disciplinary eie b S Bnai, . hpr ad D. and Shapiro I. Benhabib, S. by edited , , edited by E. Kállai. Budapest: Teleki Lászlo Teleki Budapest: Kállai. by E. edited , - Asia Studies Asia

eie b S Ncoa ad . Susan. T. and Nicholas S. by edited , International Affairs International - -

ayr üöbéttl lkls egy alakulása különbségtétel magyar 416. -

Perpetual peace, an peace, Perpetual socialist Hungary. In Hungary. socialist

eie b R Buök n T. and Bauböck R. by edited ,

7 (2):311 o rnntoa citizenship? transnational to Restructuring WorldPolitics. Restructuring

University :

326. 79 (3). d other essays on essays other d - etr. In Century. -

Surviving Post Surviving Diaspor

territorial Self territorial

of Minnesota Minnesota of

- images of of images and a The The

- - : ,

CEU eTD Collection Liégeois, Jean Nationhood. of Narratives Competing Nation? Roma 2007. Andre. Liebich, 2004. Ditte. Lauritzen, Nation Cosmopolitanism, 1999. Straehle. Christine and Will, Kymlicka, 2007. Will. Kymlicka, Natio 2004. Will. Kymlicka, 1995. Will. Kymlicka, Mar Kovats, of Respect in Accountability Political and Intellectual of Problems 2001e. Martin. Kovats, Self Minority Gypsy National first the of Significance Political The 2001d. Martin. Kovats, 2011. Martin. Kovats, In equality. and difference politics, Hungary: 2001b. Martin. Kovats, In policy. Roma European of emergence The 2001a. Martin. Kovats, Case (The Dimension. European New in Identities Gypsy/Roma 2008. Elena. Marushiakova, 2006. Strand. Elin and Adrian, Marsh, Self National 1990. Raz. Joseph and Avishai, Margalit, 2001. Anna. Marchand, 2006. eds. Vizi, Balázs and Balázs, Majtényi, In territory,identity. place, there": "Being 2007. S. Charles Maier, 1982. Niklas. Luhmann, Koenig Mathias and Christian, List, Ethnic Politics Ethnic identity Roma. interests among common European and 7 (1). Literature. Recent of Review Critical A Nationalism: div UniversityPress. Transition Democratic to Values York:University Press. Oxford 2October 2011]. 2003 [cited (Commentary). Issues Europe Minority in Policy Roma European Emerging Government. diaspora H Europe Eastern and Central of Roma the future: Hertfordshire Press. R The Future: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Scholars Cambridge pr the In Europe). Eastern of and contructed contested Philosophy de éléments l'approche internationale the Documents Regarding Roma York: Cambridge allegiances UniversityColumbia Press. Agency ertfordshire Press. ertfordshire ersity

i. 2011. tin. cs o Erpa integration European of ocess - Pierre. 2007. Pierre. - Based Approach. Based . OxfordNew ; York:Press. Oxford University

2001c [cited 2October 2011]. [cited 2001c

, edited by S. Benhabib, I. Shapiro and D. Petranovic. Cambridge ; New ; Cambridge Petranovic. D. and Shapiro I. Benhabib, S. by edited , 87 (9):439 Journa oma of Central and Eastern Europe Eastern and Central of oma

13 (4):539

Opportunities and Challenges EU. Enlargement and the Roma/Gypsy the and Enlargement EU. Challenges and Opportunities Is there a basis for a "Roma nation"? A critical evaluation of Romani of evaluation critical A nation"? "Roma a for basis a there Is Rights Minority of Theory Liberal A Citizenship: Multicultural h pltc o Rm iett: ewe ntoaim n destitution and nationalism between identity: Roma of politics The Multicultural odysseys: navigating the new international politics of of politics international new the navigating odysseys: Multicultural

La protection des droits des Tsiganes dans l'Europe d'aujourd'hui : d'aujourd'hui l'Europe dans Tsiganes des droits des protection La

University Press. h dfeetain f society of differentiation The

l on Ethnopolicits and Minority Issues onEthnopolicits Europe l andMinority in Roma in EuropeRoma in nalism, Transnationalism and Postnationalism. In Postnationalism. and Transnationalism nalism, - 461. Dynamics of national identity and transnational identities in in identities transnational and identity national of Dynamics . Istanbul: Istanbul. Institute in Swedish Research - . Philosophy & Affairs Public Philosophy

554.

- rhbg. 00 Cn hr B a lbl eo? An Demos? Global a Be There Can 2010. Archibugi.

. Budapest: Kiadó.Gondolat , edited by R. Dworkin. Budapest: Central European Central Budapest: Dworkin. R. by edited , yse ad h polm f dniis contextua : identities of problem the and Gypsies

: ofEurope. Council 172 . Paris:Harmattan. eie b E Mrsikv. ecsl, UK: Newcastle, Marushiakova. E. by edited ,

A Minority in Europe. Selected International Selected Europe. in Minority A

, E eie b W Gy Uiest of University Guy: W. by edited , , edited by W. Guy: University of University Guy: W. by edited , rpa perspectives uropean - Determination. Philosophy of Journal European

ora o Ehooiis and Ethnopolitics on Journal

38 (1):76

Identities, affiliations, and affiliations, Identities,

- 110. - States and Minority Minority and States Between Past and and Past Between ewe ps and past Between

Nationalism and and Nationalism (1). The Journal of of Journal The From Liberal Liberal From . New York: York: New .

. New . l, -

CEU eTD Collection Miller, David. 1995. David. Miller, 1861. Stuart. John Mill, to Responding Autonomy: Transnational 2001. H. Lukas Meyer, under parliamentary the 2010. Aidan. McGarry, Explaining nationalism? Ambiguous 2009. Aidan. McGarry, and Trust, Nationality, Rethinking Democratization: Postnationalist 2010. Cillian. McBride, 2004. David. Mayall, 2002. Yaron. Matras, The 1998. Yaron. Matras, The Marx, Karl. 1950. Gypsies. the and Holocaust 2005. Popov. Vesselin and Elena, Marushiakova, Roma The 2004. Popov. Vesselin and Elena, Marushiakova, 2007. Helen. O'Nions, Romani International first the from mobilisation political Romani 2009. Jud. Nirenberg, Susan, Tebbutt and eds. 2004. Saul, Nicholas, 2005. Mouffe, Chantal. In citizens. transnational and borders Soft 2007. Julie. Mostov, In Democracy. Global Against 2010. David. Miller, David.Miller, 2009.Democracy's Domain. Son Bourn. and Rights Peoples. Roma and Saami the of Case community minority representati Hampshire New ; York:Palgrave Macmillan. postnationalism In Accountability. Romany Ethnic Press Berghahn.Tebbut: 1945 Co entarität. li un Nazi persecution Seg entation In Mytho National New of Creation and Memory Historical the 6: of Reconstruction Integration” un Hefte Orientwissenschaftliche Tendencies. Contemporary “Differen and Background Historical VT: Ashgate.VT: series relations ethnic and migration in Research New York:Palgrave Macmillan. In Forum.order Travellers and Eur Sinti, contemporary Roma,in politics European the to Congress Union Press. "Gypsies"/Romani of images York: University Cambridge Press. allegiances HampshireBasingstoke, New ; York: Palgrave Macmillan. nati Press. Beyond camps and forced labour : current international research on survivors of of survivors on research international current : labour forced and camps Beyond nls ad postnationalism and onalism - . , edited by N. Trehan and N. Sigona. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire ; ; Hampshire Basingstoke, Houndmills, Sigona. N. and Trehan N. by edited , 1996. In 1996.

8 (2 - Communist manifesto dtdb . Benh S. by edited , on ofRoma Hungary in Romania. and 3).

On n On

Sinti and Roma in German in Roma and Sinti Romani : a linguistic introduction linguistic a : Romani . London,. York: New Routledge.

ys Iette 1500 Identities Gypsy Minority rights protection in international law : the Roma of Europe of Roma the : law international in protection rights Minority , edited by K. Breen and S. O'Neill. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Basingstoke, Houndmills, O'Neill. S. and Breen K. by edited , On the Political , edited by, edited J. Considerations on representative government representative onConsiderations Who speaks for Roma? : political representation of a transnational a of representation political : Roma? for speaks Who

ationality . New York: Continuum. eeomn o te oai ii rgt mvmn i Germany in movement rights civil Romani the of development fe te natio the After , es in European cultures European in es -

p : oet, tnc oiiain ad h neo the and mobilization, ethnic poverty, : ope Oxford political theory political Oxford D. Steinert I.Steinert and D. Weber 14. abib, I. Shapiro and D. Petranovic. Cambridge ; New ; Cambridge Petranovic. D. and Shapiro I. abib, : Routledge.

. Chicago: H.. Chicago: Regnery.

eie b K Ben n S ONil Houndmills, O'Neill. S. and Breen K. by edited ,

Philosophy & Affairs Public Philosophy ? ciia rfetos n ainls and nationalism on reflections critical : n? 173 - The role of the Romanies : images and counter :images and Romanies the of The role 00 Fo Eicas n Moon and Egipcyans From 2000. International Journal on Minority and Group and Minority on Journal International

- speaking society and literature and society speaking

After the nation? : critical reflections on reflections critical : nation? the After

. Cambridge: Cambridge University University Cambridge Cambridge: . Romani Studies Romani Adrht Egad Burlington, ; England Aldershot, . . Liverpool: Liverpool University University LiverpoolLiverpool: . . Oxford ; New York: Clarendon York: New ; Oxford . - Newth. Osnabrück: Secolo.

Nto wtot State? a without Nation a dniis aflain, and affiliations, Identities, itrcl nutc i the in Injustice Historical itiugn des Mitteilungen . 2d ed. London: Parker ed. 2d .

37 (3):201

19 (2):103 , edited by S. by edited , - e t the to men - 228. - 124. Romani Romani - liberal

logy. logy.

SFB

- - ,

CEU eTD Collection a, eai H 21. neet, om ad doay Epann te Emerge the Explaining Advocacy: and Norms Interests, on 2010. H. Notes Melanie Ram, Fool: the and Player the Vagabond, the Civilized, The 2011. Gergő. Pulay, the and Marginalization of Scylla the between ‘Roma Gypsy/Roma The Europe’s 2008. through Vesselin. Popov, Halfway Celebrate to Little 2011. Nikoleta. Popkostadinova, Karl.Polanyi, 1944. sovereignty.Pogge, and W. Thomas 1992.Cosmopolitanism Europe. Eastern and Central of Roma the and Rights Minority 2006. István. Pogány, Central of Roma Identity: The National Emergent and Accommodating 1999. István. Pogány, 2004. Roma:Petrova,Future.The Dimitrina. MythBetween a the and Second as Solidarity Cosmopolitan Cosmopolitanism: for Cheers Two 2007. Max. Pensky, SolidarityPr the and Cosmopolitanism 2000. Max. Pensky, 1971. Talcott. Parsons, Exchange: and BricolageLocation, Shared through Culture Constructing 2011. Judith. Okely, In ethnicity. Gypsy of theories of consequences political Some 1997. Judith. Okely, 1996. Okely, Judith. One 2011. Márton. Rövid, la sur internationaux acteurs des L'influence and 2004. Márton. institutionalization Rövid, Romania: in movement Romani The 2009. Iulius. Rostas, Expanding Tho an Risse, in Roma 2005. Wilkens. Erika and Orenstein, A. Mitchell Dena, Ringold, s Electoral Andrew.2006. Reynolds, 1993. John. Rawls, ilwr i a uhrs Neighborhood. Bucharest Sociologia a in Fieldwork integration European of process the UK:Marushiakova. Newcastle, Publishing. Scholars Cambridge in identities transnational Exotiz of Charybdis Decade’ Law Review Rights Eastern Europe. and Order Inclusion. Theory Identities. Cultural series edited In Roma and Gypsies of Case the Writing Culture European Roma policy.European de Mémoire mondiale. civile société la DEA, Internationales, Institute d'Etudes Relations Paris. Poltiques, de segment d'un critique analyse Hongrie: neo Houndmills,Hampshire Basingstoke, New ; York:Palgrave Macmillan. the and mobilization, In (de)mobilization. Norms ChangeInternational andDomestic Europe:Breaking Poverty the Cycle.Bank. Washington, D.C.:World MinorityGroupInternational. Rights UniversityColumbia Press. 9 (2):197 Agenda. EU's the onto Roma mas, Stephen C. Ropp, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1999. Sikkink. Kathryn and Ropp, C. Stephen mas, . Englewood N.J.,: Cliffs, Prentice

by EuropeanUniversity M. M. and Stewart: Rövid Central Press.

7 (1):64 BalkanInsight -

217. (1):115 The great transforThe great Own or culture other oiia liberalism Political - , edited by A. James, J. Hockey by, edited J. A.A. James, Dawson: Routledge. and 79. Journal of Soci of Journal h sse o mdr societies modern of system The -

134. Constellations: An International Journal of Critical & Democratic & Critical of Journal International An Constellations:

6 (1):1 - ation in New EU Realities. In Realities. EU New in ation size International Journal onMinority oai poli Romani .

Romani Studies Romani - fits - 25.

- - all Roma? On the normative dilemmas of the emerging the of dilemmas normative the On Roma? all order liberal ystems and the protection and participation of minorities. ofminorities. participationprotection and the ystemsand Ethnopolitics: Formerly Global Review of Ethnopolitics of Review Global Formerly Ethnopolitics:

mation al al Philosophy , . London. New ; York: Routledge. Multi is n otmoay uoe pvry ethnic poverty, : Europe contemporary in tics on ee esy i philosophy in essays Dewey John

174 . New York, Toronto,:Farrar Rinehart. &

- 21 (1):1 - Hall. Disciplinary Approaches to Romany Studies Romany to Approaches Disciplinary

, edited by N. Trehan and N. Sigona. Sigona. N. and Trehan N. by edited , :Press. University Cambridge

38 (1):165 tda nvriai Babes Universitatis Studia - 22. , onain o mdr sociology modern of Foundations Dynamics of national identity and identity national of Dynamics oblem: Habermas on National and National on Habermas oblem:

Ethics and Group Rights The Power of Human Rights. Rights. Human of Power The - 184.

103 (1):48.

Roma Rights

position des Rom en en Rom des position

, edited by E. E. by edited ,

Nw York: New .

6 (1).

nce of the the of nce (1). - Bolyai

Human Human

A fter fter - - ,

CEU eTD Collection pvk Gyti hkaot. 98 Cn h Sblen pa? In Speak? Subaltern the Can 1988. Chakravorty. Gayatri Spivak, form policy Roma and rights Human 2007. Eva. Sobotka, Sobotka, 2002. eds. Johnston, Hank and Jackie, Smith, Haz Smith, Travellers' and Gypsies 'Western the 2006. Katrin. Simhandl, of Dialectic The Solidarity: Global to Domestic From Resistance. 2007. M. Violent Joseph and Schwartz, Solidarity Political 2007. J. Sally Scholz, Aart.Scholte, 2000. Jan The Development:Grassroots and Capital Social 2000. Brown. L. David and A.,Kai Schafft, Sel Unencumbered the and Republic Procedural The 1984. J. Michael Sandel, social and Economic success. to Roads 2011. Greenfields. Margaret and Andrew, Ryder, Pro 2012. Kóczé. Angéla and Márton, Rövid, türelm eljárásrendi és kudarcok Elismeréspolitikai 2011. Júlia. Szalai, strugg Conflicting 2003. Júlia. Szalai, 2000.Az Júlia. Szalai, cigánykérdés. politikája és a In elismerés And Mnemonics The Commemoration: Without Remembering 2004. Michael. Stewart, 1998. Michael. Stewart, InNation. Persistence: PuzzleIdentity 1996.The Michael. Group a Without Stewart, ofRoma 2007. Vago. Raphael and Roni, Stauber, interpretation of cul of interpretation European UniversityVago: Central Press. Slovakia. In Poland. and Slovakia and Poland Hungary, Republic, Czech the andMinority IssuesEthnopolitics Europe in in Roma of movementsdimensions social of practices (1):97 Union. European the of institutions the by objects political Social of Building the Philosophy in Universal and Particular Philosophy Self ofRoma Case Theory London. forGypsiesinclusion Travellers. and byL.edited H.Kaldor, M. Moo In Roma? of instead or Demokratikus AlternatíváértDemokratikus byB.edited Hobson: University Cambridge Press. In Hungary. contemporary in ethnicity Alapítvány Társadalom Aktív Könyvkiadó.Mandátum Budapest: Szalai. J. and Landau E. Horváth, Á. les chez l'Holocauste Roma. de souvenirs Roms d'Europ des European politique et Among mnémonique : Memories commémoration Holocaust Of Politics UniversityHertfordshire Press. of identity Gypsy and culture Romani Press. perspectives social and political UniversityIllinois Press. of

Eva. 2001 Eva. el, ed. 2000. ed. el,

- 115.

12 (1):81 : Macmillan.

38 (1):131 38 (1):38 - 2002. The Limits of the State : Political Participation and Representation and Participation Political : State the Limitsof The 2002. e.

10 (3):561 - The Time of G The Time of Democracy and international relations: critical theories/problematic critical relations: international and Democracy Globalization 96. - Governance in Hungary.Governance in ture

- 52.

- 147. , edited by C. Nelson and L. Grossberg. Urbana and Chicago: and Urbana Grossberg.L. and Nelson C. by edited ,

The Roma. A Minority in Europe in Minority A Roma. The Global Civil Society 2012: Ten Years of Critical Reflection Critical of Years Ten 2012: Society Civil Global

582. .

. New York:St. Marti ypsies re and S. Selchow. Basingstoke:Selchow. S. and Palgravere Macmillan. : Rowman & Littlefield. : & Rowman e fr eonto: lsig neet o gne and gender of interests clashing recognition: for les . Budapest ; New York: Central European Univ European Central York: New ; Budapest .

h Rm : mnrt i Erp : historical, : Europe in minority a : Roma The eie b T Atn n G Mny Hatfield: Mundy. G. and Acton T. by edited , :Westview. 175 - Roma global civil society: acting out for, with with for, out acting society: civil global Roma Recognition Struggles and Social Movements Social and Struggles Recognition

lblzto ad eitne transnational resistance: and Globalization

. Social Problems Social

n’s Press. - 'atr Rm' te rain of creation the Roma': ˜'Eastern ulation in the Czech Republic, Republic, Czech the in ulation

Solidarity. Cigánynak születni Cigánynak , edited by R. Stauber and R. and Stauber by R. edited , Nations & Nationalism & Nations

47 (2):201

etlenségek. eéoain sans Remémoration ora o Social of Journal axs ad the and Marxism ora o Social of Journal - 219. ora on Journal f. , edited by , edited

née a Intézet Political ersity ersity -

Új Új 12

, , CEU eTD Collection Toninato, Paola. 2009.The MakingToninato, ofthe Gypsy Diaspora P Towards Walk Long The Policy: Roma 2005. Peter. Thelen, de cersetor Romania, in traditional bun Tigan 2011. Catalina. Tesar, 1860 c. Finland, in question' 'Gypsy the outsiders: its and Nation 2012. Miika. Tervonen, Tay 2006. Elisabeth. Tauber, States National Elites, Minority National Policy: Roma European Central 2007. Pál. Tamás, Self 2002. Péter. Szuhay, Culture. National Gypsy a Constructing 1995. Péter. Szuhay, in Ethnicity Ladányi.János2006. and Szelényi,Iván, Roma of Construction Social The 2001. Ladányi. János and Iván, Szelényi, In adatairól. nemzetiségi népszámlálás magyarországi évi 2001. A 2003. László. Szarka, Politics Romani and Networks Advocacy 2001. Peter. Vermeersch, 'Time From 2011. Huub. Baar, van of significance continuing The 2007. M. Jorge Valadez, Tr soci civil European neoliberal within subaltern Romani The 2009. Nidhi. Trehan, name Inthe 2001. Nidhi. Trehan, ehan, Nidhi, and Nando Sigona. 2009. Sigona. Nando and Nidhi, ehan, lor, Charles. 1992. The Politics of Recognition. In Recognition. of Politics The 1992. Charles. lor, Frieddrich Ebert Stiftung.Frieddrich Ebert participation active to exclusion social from : Europe in Studierea pentru Institutului Problemelor Naţionale Minorităţilor romi despre sociale Cercetari re ale Politici Beyenv.Ginderachter: M. and Palgrave In 1900. Recognition" bei Sinti undFluchtheirat den Toten Estraixaria European UniversityCentral Press. In EU. the and Hungarian Society (3):111 Europe of Societies Transitional UniversityColumbia Press. in Underclass an of Making the and Hungary and Romania Bulgaria, Transition. Market During II. é köréből kér entitá i L.KovácsSzarka. Budapest: and a é etnicitá a Tanul ányok Tere . é Europe. Europe. Stewart: European University Central Press. Multi Histori New ; York:Cambridge University Cambridge Press. allegiances and affiliations, New York:Palgrave Macmillan. Palgrave York: neo the New and mobilization, ethnic ; Hampshire Basingstoke, Houndmills, Macmillan. Sigona. N. and neo the and mobilization, ethnic poverty, : Europe In voices. silent and rights human of NGOization UniversityHertfordshire Press. of Europe Eastern and Centralof Roma the and future: past Between - icpiay prahs o oay Studies Romany to Approaches Disciplinary ographies: Romany Contributions to Old and New Images of the Holocaust. In Holocaust. the of Images New and Old to Contributions Romany ographies: - 120. Journal onEthnopoliticsJournal andMinority Issues Europe in Nationhood fro Nationhood

. Princeton: University Princeton Press. - rznai pbie i tc munci etica si publice prezentarii The u is kie Eean emn : epk, i Bduug der Bedeutung die Respekt, : nehmen! Ehemann keinen wirst Du , byedited Kállai. Budapest: E. Regio - eiiin o Gpy tnc rus In groups ethnic Gypsy of definitions Roma. A Minority in Europe in Minority A Roma. m below. Europe in the long nineteenth century nineteenth long the in Europe below. m

of the Roma? The role of private foundations and NGOs. In In NGOs.and foundations private of role Roma?The of the

eie b S Bnai, . hpr ad . Petranovic. D. and Shapiro I. Benhabib, S. by edited , , edited by S. Toma and L. Fosztó. Cluj Napoca: Editura Editura Napoca: Fosztó.L.Cluj and Toma S. by edited ,

liberal order liberal Akadémiai Kiadó. Akadémiai

Patterns of Exclusion: ConstExclusion:of Patterns Romani politics in contemporary Europe : poverty, : Europe contemporary in politics Romani

- adty t te hleg o Established of Challenge the to Banditry' 176 - Macmillan.

. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire ; ; Hampshire Basingstoke, Houndmills, . . Berlin: Lit. Berlin: Verlag. Multiculturalism and "The Politics of Politics "The and Multiculturalism , edited by R. Stauber and R. Vago: Vago: R. and Stauber R. by edited ,

ethnocultural identity. In identity. ethnocultural l rmi otrr. In Cortorari. romii la i - Translocations

liberal order liberal

oai oiis n contemporary in politics Romani

, edited by M. Rövid and M. M. and Rövid M. by edited , olitical Participation. In Participation. olitical uaet eiw f Books of Review Budapest -

edited by P. Thelen. Skopje: Skopje: Thelen. P. by edited Teleki László Foundation. Teleki h Gpis te oa in Roma the Gypsies/ The Review Sociology of

- ructing Gpysy EthnicityGpysy ructing n eta ad Eastern and Central in etnicizat in strainatate. in etnicizat .

, edited by N. Trehan Trehan N. by edited , -

Kriterion. , edited by W. Guy: by W.edited , 5 (1).

eie b N. by edited , , edited by M. M. by edited ,

Nw York: New .

Spectrum. Spectrum. Identities, Identities,

7 (2). Roma Roma ety: Tér Tér

– 5

CEU eTD Collection W Biblical a of Pitfalls The Diaspora? the in Gypsies 2000. Lucassen. Leo and Wim, Willems, In studies. Gypsy of history the trap: death a as Etnicity 1998. Wim. Willems, 2001. Craig. Warkentin, 1995. ed. Michael, Walzer, In globe. the Governing 2004. Michael. Walzer, 1983. Michael. Walzer, A Zsuzsa. Vidra, holokauszt 2005.narratívái. roma Pe Vermeersch, Multiculturalism: of Ambiguities the and Advocacy, Marginality, 2005. Peter. Vermeersch, Europe: Central in Policies Rights Minority and Enlargement EU 2003. Peter. Vermeersch,

illiams, Melissa ofcitizenship. In boundaries S.illiams, .2007.Nonterritorial New York:Press. University Cambridge allegiances and Concept. London: A. and Willems Cottaar. Macmillan. itinerant other society Oxf UniversityPress. Basic Books. Europe Contemporary Central in and Culture Europe. Central in Acitivism Romani on Notes Poland. and Hungary Republic, E Czech the in Shifts Policy Explaining thnopolitics andMinority Issuesthnopolitics Europe in ord: Berghahnord: Books. :Littlefield & Rowman Publishers. ter. 2006. ter. Histoire sociale/Social history

12:451

, edited by S. Benhabib, I. Shapiro and D. Petranovic. Cambridge ; ; Cambridge Petranovic. D. and Shapiro I. Benhabib, S. by edited , rus a socio a groups:

Spheres of justice : justice of Spheres The Romani Movement: Minority Politics and Ethnic Mobilization Ethnic and Politics Minority Movement: Romani The ehpn wrd oiis NO, h Itre, n goa civil global and Internet, the NGOs, politics: world Reshaping - 478. Toward a Global Civil Society Civil Global a Toward

. Oxford Newand York:Berghahn Books. - itrcl approach historical

a defense of pluralism and equality and pluralism of defense a 177

33 (66):251

Regio (1).

run aot war about Arguing

Power in Studies Global Identities: (2):110 - , 269. International Political Currents Political International , edited by L. Lucassen, W. W. Lucassen, L. by edited ,

- 130.

Identities, affiliations,Identities, . New Haven: Yale Yale Haven: New . . New York: New . Gypsies and Gypsies ora on Journal

. CEU eTD Collection European Committee onMigration,European 1203(1993) Assemblyon Gypsies Recommendation ofEurope (1983)1onstatelessRecommendation nomads and nomads ofLocalStanding Conference ofMinistersCommittee Resolution (1975) social 13onthe 563(1969)onAssembly situation ofGypsies the Recommendation Council of Europe General Assembly, General Assembly, General Assembly, UnitedN officialCited documents forRoma Inclusion, MEMO/09/193,EU Platform PressApril Release, 2009 24 Prague, Commission, on application Report European the ofDirective 2004/38 right ofcitizens onthe 2004/38/ECDirective EuropeanParliament of and Council ofThe of29Aprilthe 2004 ont Directive 2000/43/EC Council of29June of 2000 implementing principle the equal treatment EuropeanUnion ProtectionFramework forthe Minorities Convention of National Europe problems ofpopulationssocial ofnomadic origin. role responsibilityand the authorities regional and regard in to cultural oflocal the and Europe LinguiReligious and of the Member States, Member COM(2008)of the 840final, Brussels, 2008 10December their Unionfamily and of the membe the within territory States Member ofthe Union right ofthe their ofcitizens familyand freely move reside to and members persons irrespectivebetween origin orethnic ofracial ation , 1995 . s

Declaration on Rightsthe Belonging orEthnic, ofPersonsDeclaration National to Declaration of HumanUniversal International Covenant onCivilPolitical and Rights .

stic Minorities stic

and Regional Authorities of Europe Resolution Authorities Regional 125(1981)and ofEurope on Report on The Situation ofGypsiesReport onThe in Sinti) and (Roma , 1992. rs to move and reside freelyrs move reside to and territory the within 178 .

R ights, 1948.

situation ofnomads Europe in

of .

undetermined nationality .

, 19

and other travellers other and in 95.

, 1966.

. .

he he CEU eTD Collection Human Identity: StrugglingWatch, Hungary, Rights Gypsies of The forEthnic 1993 Human Watch, Rights Roma and Forum,European 2010. Travellers Report, Annual Roma and Forum,European Travellers Repor Annual Roma and Forum,European Travellers Roma and Forum, 2004. European Travellers Statute, InternationalAmnesty InternationalAmnesty International,Amnesty Non onthe WorkingEU strategyDocument social inclusion the ofRom on RightsFundamental EUcitizens Agency, situation ofRoma moving The settling and to in inclusion ofthe onthe Conclusions Roma, Employment Relatio onEthnic Project Relations, onEthnic Project Relations, onEthnic Project Relations, onEthnic Project Relations, onEthnic Project Relations, onEthnic Project Open SocietyFoundations, No Data Open SocietyInstitute, International Comparative Data onRoma2008. Set Education, International - governmental organizationsgovernmental 1992 Liberties, Homeand Justice Lívia Affairs, 28.9.2010. Rapporteur: Járóka, States, EUMember other November 2009. EU, 10394/09, 28 May 2009 1999. 1999 Romania, the to Partic EU:Countries Romani Government and and Prospects for the Future,Prospects forthe 1997 .

Romani Union, Declaration 2000. of Nation, , , . Struggling for Ethnic Identity:Struggling Czechoslov forEthnic

Romania: rights,commitments human Brokento 1995 Bulgaria: Turning Torture a ns, Self Roma Political the Participationand Roma Roundta State Policies Romani Communities the the Toward in Candidate Leadership, and Representation, - nd ill Government in Hungary: in Government Gypsy/Romani The

and Electionsand Romania, in 2000. .

– ble Discussion ofGovernment Policie

- No Progress,No 2010. treatment of Roma, 1993 treatment ofRoma,

Charter onthe Rights 2009. ofRoma, Charter

. the blind blind the eye raci to

179

t, 2009. t,

and Social Affairs Social and Ministers ofthe

ipation i

the Status Roma,the ofthe 2002. sm, 1994 .

akia’s Endangered Endangered akia’s Gypsies, in Hungaryin Slovakia, and

n Policy a, Committeea, on Civil .

s onthe Roma in -

Making, 1999 .

Experience Experience

CEU eTD Collection Project on Ethnic Relations, onEthnic Project Relations, onEthnic Project Relations, onEthnic Project Relations, onEthnic Project

Representatives in an EnlargedRepresentatives 2004. an in Europe, Reality, 2003. Levels,International 2001.

Romani Po Roma EUAccession:and Appointed and Romani Elected Roma theand ofSelf Question LeadershipRomani Representation and National at

litics Present and Future,litics and Present 2006 180

- Determinat .

ion:Fictio and and n and