ICircassia Digital Capitalism and New Transnational Identities

Yıl 2015, , 1 - 32, 19.09.2015

Lars Hansen

https://doi.org/10.21488/jocas.89796

Cited By: 3

Öz

The significantly increased production of Circassian content on the Internet could be labelled as a form of virtual re-territorialisation of Circassia – especially considering the strong focus on identity and history. I apply the label ‘iCircassia’ as an addition to the classical understanding of the Circassian World as consisting of Circassians of the homeland and the diaspora. I suggest to apply the term ‘digital capitalism’ as an update of the terms ‘print capitalism’ and ‘electronic capitalism’ used by Benedict Anderson and Arjun Appadurai, respectively, to assign earlier periods of mediated mobilisation among nationalities – with or without a nation-state. In the case of the Circassians this is not just exemplified by the many different Circassian websites but also by the Circassian’ use of social media such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter (Web 2. 0) – transnational and (partly) interactive by definition. A concrete empowerment of Circassian actors through the Internet is taking place. This illustrated how the development of ‘digital capitalism’ has both quantitatively and qualitatively new implications for a dispersed people such as the Circassians compared to earlier periods. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

‘Digital Capitalism’, Internet, ‘Transnational Identity-building’, Globalisation, Empowerment

ICircassia Digital Capitalism and New Transnational Identities [E-Çerkesya: Dijital Kapitalizm ve Yeni Ulusaşırı Kimlikler]

Öz

    Başta ulusal kimlik ve tarih konularına odaklananlar olmak üzere,
internette sayısı giderek artan Çerkeslerle ilgili materyaller, bir
anlamda siber alemde Çerkesya’nın sınırlarının yeniden çizilmesi olarak da değerlendirilebilir. Bu makalede ‘e-Çerkesya’ (‘iCircassia’)
terimini, genel olarak anavatan ve diasporadan oluştuğu kabul
edilen klasik Çerkes Dünyası kavramına ek olarak kullanıyorum.
‘Dijital Kapitalizm’ kavramının, erken dönem milliyetlerde (ulus
devleti olsun ya da olmasın) yaşanan mobilizasyonları tanımlamak
için Benedict Anderson tarafından üretilen ‘matbaa kapitalizmi’ ve
Arjun Appadurai tarafından üretilen ‘elektronik kapitalizm’
kavramlarının bir güncellemesi olarak kullanılmasını öneriyorum.
Çerkesler özelinde bu durum sadece değişik Çerkes internet
sitelerinin varlığıyla değil aynı zamanda Youtube, Facebook ve
Twitter gibi tanımları gereği ulusaşırı ve bir ölçüde interaktif olan
sosyal medya araçlarının Çerkesler tarafından kullanımıyla da
örneklendirilebilir. Çerkes dünyasının aktörleri, internet aracılığıyla
giderek güçlenmekteler. Bu durum, ‘dijital kapitalizm’in gelişiminin
geçmiş dönemleriyle karşılaştırıldığında Çerkesler gibi dağınık
yaşayan halklar için hem nicelik hem de nitelik olarak çok ciddi
etkileri olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

‘Digital Capitalism’, Internet, ‘Transnational Identity-building’, Globalisation, Empowerment

Kaynakça

• BELLER, M. and J. Leerssen (eds.). 2007. Imagology. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi Publishers.
• BESLENEY, Z.A. 2014. The Circassian Diaspora in Turkey: A Political History. London and New York: Routledge.
• BRINKERHOFF, J. M. 2009. Digital Diasporas: Identity and Transnational Engagement. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• COHEN, D. J. and Roy Rosenzweig. 2006. Digital History. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania University Press.
• CONVERSI, D. 2012. ‘Irresponsible Radicalisation: Diasporas, Globalisation and Long-Distance Nationalism in the Digital Age’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies Vol. 38, No. 9, November 2012.
• ERIKSEN, Thomas Hylland. 2007. ‘Nationalism and the Internet’. Nations and Nationalism, Vol. 13 (1), 2007.
• EVERETT, A. 2009. Digital Diaspora: A Race of Cyberspace. New York: Suny Press.
• FORTE, M. 2006. ‘Amerindian@Caribbean: Internet Indigeneity in the Electronic Generation of Carib and Taino Identitites’. In Native on the Net:
• Inspired by Camilla Gibb (2006). Indigenous and Diasporic Peoples in the Virtual Age, Kyra Landzelius (ed.). New York and Abingdon: Routledge.
• GIBB, C. 2006. ‘Deterritorialized People in Hyperspace’, in Native on the Net. Kyra Landzelius (ed.). London and New York: Routledge.
• GLADWELL, M. 2000. The Tipping Point: How Little Things can Make a Big Difference. New York: Little, Brown and Company.
• HANSEN, L. F. 2003. ‘Demografiske ændringer i Nordkaukasus’. In Korsvej og minefelt – kultur og konflikt i Kaukasus. Ib Faurby and Märta- Lisa Magnusson (eds.). Århus: Systime Academic.
• HENZE, P. B. and S. Enders Wimbush: ‘The Return of History’. www.circassianworld.com/pdf/Return_History.
• HIMPELE, J. D. 2008. Circuits of Culture: Media, Politics, and Indigenous Identity in the Andes. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.
• HOOSON, D. 1994. Geography and National Identity. Oxford: Blackwell.
• JENKINS, H. 2009. ‘If it doesn’t spread, it’s dead (part five): Communities it_doesnt_spread_its_dead_p_4.html (20-02-2009). users’.
• http://www.henryjenkins.org/2009/02/if_
• KAYA, A. 2014. ‘The Circassian Diaspora In and Outside Turkey. Problems of Post-Communism, Vol. 61, Issue 4.
• KRAIDY, M. M. and S. Mourad. 2010. ‘Hypermedia Space and Global Communication Studies: Lessons from the Middle East’. Global Media Journal, Vol. 9, Issue 16, Spring 2010.
• MANOVICH, L. 2001. The Language of New Media. Cambridge Mass: MIT Press.
• LANGE, P. G. 2009. ‘Videos of Affinity on YouTube’. In The YouTube Reader. Pelle Snickars and Patrick Vonderau (eds.). Stockholm: Mediahistoriskt Arkiv 12.
• RICHMOND, W. 2013. The Circassian Genocide. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
• SAID, E. 1978/1995. Orientalism. London: Penguin Books.
• SCHAEFER, J. P. 2006. ‘Discussion lists and public policy on iGhana’. In Native on the Net. Kyra Landzelius (ed.). London and New York: Routledge.
• SHAMI, S. 1998. ‘Circassian Encounters: The Self as Other and the Production of the Homeland in the North Caucasus’. Development and Change, Vol. 29, Issue 4. October 1998.
• SMITH, L. T. 1999. Decolonizing Methodologies. London and New York: Zed Books Ltd./ Dunedin: University of Otago Press.
• SNICKARS, P. 2009. ‘The Archival Cloud’. In The YouTube Reader. Pelle Snickars and Patrick Vonderau (eds.). Stockholm: Mediahistoriskt Arkiv 12.
• TURNER, F. 2006. From Counterculture to Cyberculture. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
• VALTYSSON, B. 2012. ‘Facebook as a Digital Public Sphere: Processes of Colonization and Emancipation’. Triple C Vol. 10 (1) 2012.
• WAHLBERG, M. 2009. ‘YouTube Commemoration: Private Grief and Communal Consoloation’. In The YouTube Reader. Pelle Snickars and Patrick Vonderau (eds.). Stockholm: Mediahistoriskt Arkiv 12.
• WALLSTEN, K. 2010. ‘“Yes We Can”: How Online Viewership, Blog Discussion, Campaign Statements, and Mainstream Media Coverage Produced a Viral Video Phenomenon’. Journal of Infomation Technology and Politics, Vol. 7, Issue 2-3. 2010.
• VAN DIJCK, J. 2007. Mediated Memories in the Digital Age. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
• ZHEMUKHOV, S. 2012. ‘The Birth of Circassian Nationalism’. Nationalities Papers, Vol. 40, No. 4, July 2012.