Representation of National Identity on the Net

Introduction. The purpose of the article is to study and construct the typology of situations of the  national  identity actualization  of young people  in the  digital space.  The scientific novelty of the work lies in the study of the constructing national identity process  as a result of the  assimilation  of institutional  nation-building, passed  through  the  filters of personal attitudes,  that can be observed  in the variability of representing national  identity ways in various social situations.  The relevance  is conditioned by modern socio-political conditions and the need for in-depth study of the category of national identity.

Methodology and sources. The research methodology is based on the approaches of social constructivism (the nation as an “imaginary community” by B. Anderson), symbolic interactionism  (the dramatic approach of I. Goffmann), ethno-symbolism (everyday nationalism  of  J.  Hutchinson)  and  memory  studies  (cultural memory  of  J.  Assman). The research method is a discourse analysis of blogs in TikTok and Instagram, the unit of analysis is a blog as a case,  sample  size made  up 127  cases.  The collection  of empirical data took place from 01.26.2022 to 03.10.2022.

Results and discussion. The digital space provides the conditions for the maximum degree of  intensity  of  the  national  identity representation, which can  be  represented in social networks  by  a  wide variety  of  forms  (costume,   text,  music,  image,  scenery,  etc.).  The following types of representation of national identity in the network have been  identified: national identity as a “profession”, as “fandom”, national identity in the context  of constant updating  (migrants,  intercultural  marriage),  in  the  context   of  everyday  life,  situational national identity, lack of a specific national identity.

Conclusion. The conducted empirical research allows to construct the typology of situations of national identity of young people representations in the network. The typology is based on  the   degree   of  intensity  of  national   identity  representation.  The  typology  can  be represented as a continuum, on one pole of which there is a vivid representation of national identity, on the other - an active blurring and confusion of national markers.

1. Urry, Jo. (2012), Mobilities, Transl. by Lazarev, A.V., Praksis, Moscow, RUS.

2. Bauman, Z. (2008), Liquid Modernity, Transl. by Asochakov, Yu.V., Piter, SPb., RUS.

3. Bauman, Z. (2019), Retrotopia, Transl. by Silaeva, V.L., in Oberemko, O.A. (ed.), VCIOM, Moscow, RUS.

4. Huntington, S. (2004), Who are we?, Transl. by Bashkirov, A., Izd-vo ACT, OOO “Tranzitkniga”, Moscow, RUS.

5. Huntington, S. (2021), The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Transl. by Velimeev, T., Izd-vo ACT, Moscow, RUS.

6. Giddens, A. (1991), Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, USA.

7. Baudrillard, J. (2021), L'echange Symbolique et La Mort, Transl. by Zenkin, S.N., RIPOL classic, Moscow, RUS.

8. Foucault, M. (1978), The History of Sexuality. Vol. 1: An Introduction, Pantheon Books, NY, USA.

9. Renan, E. (1902), “What is nation?”, Sobranie sochinenii: v 12 t. [Collected works: in 12 vol.], vol. 6, Transl. by Mikhailov, V.N., Tipografiya F. M. Fikha, Kiev, RUS, pp. 87–101.

10. Anderson, B. (2016), Imagined Communities. Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, Transl. by Nikolaev, V.G., in Ban'kovskaya, S.P. (ed.), Kuchkovo pole, Moscow, RUS.

11. Gellner, E. (1991), Nations and Nationalism, Transl. by Berdikova, T.V. and Tyun'kina, M.K., Progress, Moscow, RUS.

12. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. The Social Organization of Culture Difference (2006), in Barth, F. (ed.), Transl. by Pil'shchikov, I., Novoe izdatel'stvo, Moscow, RUS.

13. Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1986), “The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior”, Social psychology of intergroup relations, in Worchel, S. and Austin, W.G. (eds.), Nelson-Hall Publishers, Chicago, USA, pp. 7–24.

14. Turner, Jo. (2003), Social influence, Transl. by Zamchuk, Z.S., Piter, SPb., RUS.

15. Deschamps, J.C. and Doise, W. (1978), “Crossed category memberships in intergroup relations”, in Tajfel, H. (ed.), Differentiation between social groups, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 141–158.

16. Brubaker, R. (2012), Ethnicity without Groups, Transl. by Borisova, I., Izd. dom VShE, Moscow, RUS.

17. Tishkov, V.A. (1998), “Forget about the nation (post-nationalist understanding of nationalism)”, Voprosy Filosofii, no. 9, pp. 3–26.

18. Drobizheva, L.M. (2008), “National-civil and ethnic identity: problems of positive compatibility”, Rossiya reformiruyushchayasya [Russia in reform], iss. 7, pp. 214–228.

19. Sikevich, Z.V. (2011), “The influence of the ethnic factor on modern society and man”, The J. of sociology and social anthropology, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 41–58.

20. Sikevich, Z.V. and Skvortsov, N.G. (2020), “Contemporary society: the urgent issues and prospects for development”, RUDN J. of Sociology, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 277–291. DOI: 10.22363/2313-2272-2020-20-2-277-291.

21. Skvortsov, N.G. (1998), “Ethnicity and nationalism: ethnic roots of nationalism”, Relyativistskaya teoriya natsii [Relativistic theory of the nation], RNISiNP, Moscow, RUS, pp. 26–45.

22. Zdravomyslov, A.G. and Tsutsiev, A.A. (2003), “Ethnicity and ethnic violence: opposition of theoretical paradigms”, Sociological J., no. 3, pp. 20–50.

23. Pain, E.A. (2023), Etnichnost', natsiya i politika: kriticheskie ocherki po etnosotsiologii [Ethnicity, nation and politics: critical essays on ethnosociology], Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, Moscow, RUS.

24. Batler, J. (2018), Notes Toward a Performative Theory of Assemby, Transl. by Kralechkin, D., Ad Marginem Press, Moscow, RUS.

25. Goffman, E. (2021), The Presentation of Self in Every Day Life, Transl. by Antonova, E., Piter, SPb., RUS.

26. Goffman, E. (2017), Behavior in Public Places: Notes on the Social Organization of Gatherings Glencoe, Transl. by Korbut, A.M., in Sokolov, M.M. (ed.), Elementarnye formy, Moscow, RUS.

27. Kozhemyakin, E.A. (2006), “Discourse analysis in modern social and humanitarian knowledge”, Human. Community. Management, no. 3, pp. 25–39.

28. Krasina, M.N. (2018), “Discourse, discourse analysis and methods of their application to interdisciplinary projects”, Herald of Tver State Univ. Ser.: Philology, no. 2, pp. 159–165.

29. Sztompka, P. (2007), Socjologia wizualna. Fotografia jako metoda badawcza, Transl. by Morozova, N.V., Logos, Moscow, RUS.

30. Schellewald, A. (2021), “Communicative forms on TikTok: Perspectives from Digital Ethnography”, International J. of Communication, vol. 15, pp. 1437–1457.

31. Mackenzie, S.A. and Nicholas, D. (2020), “Finding ‘places to be bad’ in social media: the case of TikTok”, Urban Australia and Post-Punk, in Nichols, D. and Perillo, S. (eds.), Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore, SGP, pp. 285–298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9702-9_22.

32. McCosker, A. and Gerrard, Y. (2020), “Hashtagging depression on Instagram: Towards a more inclusive mental health research methodology”, New Media & Society, vol. 23, iss. 7, pp. 1899–1919. DOI: 10.1177/1461444820921349.

33. Otochina, M.S. (2020), “About advertising trends and development prospects in social networks”, Vestnik KhGU im. N. F. Katanova, no. 1, pp. 82–86.

34. Terskikh, M.V. and Plyusnina, N.V. (2022), “Advertising integrations in the TikTok social network: concept, functions, formats, genres”, Neophilology, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 345–357. DOI: 10.20310/2587-6953-2022-8-2-345-357.

35. Bogomolova, D.A. (2020), “Tik Tok social network as an element of integrated marketing communications”, Sciff. Questions of Students Science, no. 4 (44), pp. 572–576.