Content uploaded by Svetluša Surova
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Svetluša Surova on Sep 10, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rdst20
Diaspora Studies
ISSN: 0973-9572 (Print) 0976-3457 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rdst20
Identity from a conceptual and empirical
perspective: a case study of the multiply
identifications of Slovak diaspora living in Serbia
Svetluša Surova
To cite this article: Svetluša Surova (2020): Identity from a conceptual and empirical perspective:
a case study of the multiply identifications of Slovak diaspora living in Serbia, Diaspora Studies,
DOI: 10.1080/09739572.2020.1761206
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09739572.2020.1761206
Published online: 13 May 2020.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Identity from a conceptual and empirical perspective: a case
study of the multiply identifications of Slovak diaspora living
in Serbia
Svetluša Surova
Department of political science, Comenius University in Bratislava, Bratislava, Slovak Republic
ABSTRACT
The current challenges stemming from migration, globalism, and
the highly interconnected world, underline the importance of
identities, not only for individuals but for social and political life
too. For the past few decades, identity has become a significant
concept in social sciences and an important political issue in
many contemporary societies. Today collective identities seem to
form a central concept in both theoretical and empirical studies
of social movements, political mobilization and democratic
legitimacy. This paper examines identity in multilevel contexts,
from both conceptual and empirical perspectives. The paper seeks
to critically analyse how the term ‘identity’is used, defined and
conceptualized in the social sciences, the national laws of Slovakia
and Serbia; how it is built and constructed in Slovakia and how it
is performed on the ground in diaspora. A mixed research design
was applied, combining qualitative and quantitative approaches.
The study concludes that scholars today agree on what identity is
in the social sciences, however academic, state and ordinary
usages and understandings of the concept of identity vary in
different contexts. Further, the study argues that Slovak national
identity and other collective identities, together with Slovak-ness,
are perceived in different ways at a state level and among
ordinary people in the Slovak diaspora. Studying identity
construction and identity performance on different levels, such as
the state level and on the ground, both at home and in diaspora,
can contribute to our understanding of the complexity of the
identity concept and identification processes.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 13 February 2019
Accepted 23 April 2020
KEYWORDS
Identity; collective identities;
multiply identities; Slovak
national identity; Slovak-ness;
Slovak diaspora in Serbia
1. Introduction
The current challenges stemming from migration, globalism, and the highly intercon-
nected world emphasize the importance of identities not only for individuals but in
social and political life too. Identity has become a significant concept in the social sciences
in recent decades, and an important political issue in many contemporary societies. Recent
voluntary and forced migration has considerable implications for identity politics and
other issues, such as citizenship, not only in Europe, but also in the Americas, Asia,
Africa and Australasia. ‘People on the move’have notably in Europe prompted a focus
© 2020 Organisation for Diaspora Initiatives, New Delhi
CONTACT Svetluša Surova svetlusa_surova@biari.brown.edu Gnarum, s.r.o. Bratislava and BARI-Global Network
DIASPORA STUDIES
https://doi.org/10.1080/09739572.2020.1761206
on discussions about identities, particularly the national identities of Europeans compared
to the ethnic and religious identities of migrants. Today, collective identities seem to form
a central concept in both theoretical and empirical studies of identity politics, social move-
ments, political mobilization and democratic legitimacy. This paper therefore examines
identity in multilevel contexts, from both the conceptual and empirical perspectives.
The main objective of the study is to critically scrutinize identity from a conceptual and
empirical perspective, and at multiple levels of analysis, from state to individual levels.
Firstly, the paper investigates how identity is conceptualized and operationalized in the
social sciences, mainly in the political science and sociology. Secondly, the empirical per-
spective explores identity construction, understanding and identity performance at home
and abroad: in Slovakia and in the Slovak diaspora. In other words, the formation and con-
struction of the Slovak nation and Slovak national identity is analysed, especially in the
context of the Slovak constitution, citizenship law, state language law and diaspora policies
since 1993. Thirdly, the way identity is understood, constructed and defined is examined
in the context of the Serbian legal system, particularly within the context of minority rights
policies. Finally, the paper explores the multiple identifications of the Slovak diaspora
living in Serbia. This focus is on the intensity of different collective identifications and
the relationships between identifications with different collectives of Slovaks in Serbia.
The research topic is analysed from the perspective of political science, combining
qualitative and quantitative research methods. The study concludes that scholars agree
on what identity is today in the social sciences, no matter how academic, state and ordin-
ary usages and understandings of the concept vary in multiple contexts. Further, the study
argues that Slovak national identity and other collective identities, together with Slovak-
ness, are perceived in different ways on a state level and among ordinary people in
Slovak diaspora. Studying identity construction and identity performance on different
levels, such as the state level and on the ground, both at home and in diaspora, can con-
tribute to our understanding of complexity of identity concept and identification
processes.
The structure of the paper is as follows. The next section provides a critical literature
review of identity from a conceptual and empirical perspective. The third section intro-
duces the main theoretical framework and explains the methodology used in this study.
The fourth section provides a detailed analysis of the findings and the fifth section con-
cludes the main findings of the study.
2. Literature review: identity from a conceptual and empirical perspective
For the past few decades, identity has become a significant and one of the most used con-
cepts in the social sciences, and specifically in political science and sociology. Despite its
popularity and extensive use, the term ‘identity’is rather vague and difficult to define, but
scholars have come to a consensus to some degree on what identity is, rather than how it is
manifested or what it is based on. They agree that identity is not a ‘thing,’‘property,’or
something that one can have or not –rather, it is a process of identification, something
that one does, and a product of social relations (Nagel 1995; Burke and Stets 2009;
Jenkins 2014; Lawler 2014). Identity is understood in the relevant literature as a
process, and something that is achieved rather than as something ‘owned’or ‘inborn’.
In a similar manner, the idea that identities are not inherited, but constructed is becoming
2S. SUROVA
more and more accepted in political science (Laitin 1998; Gibbons and Ashdown 2010;
Ashdown et al. 2011; Chandra 2006,2012). It has become a general rule to speak about
identities in the terms of construction and choice rather than blood and inheritance
(Laitin 1998). Recent literature predominately considers identities as fluid, multidimen-
sional, and personalized social constructions that reflect socio-historical contexts
(Howard 2000). It has been suggested that people can hold multiple identities because
of their multiple positions in society (Burke and Stets 2009; Chandra 2012; Koos 2012).
Moreover, scholars are reaching consensus that identities can be stable and changeable
at the same time (Howard 2000; Burke and Stets 2009; Chandra 2012; Swayd 2014).
In political science, the concept of identity currently refers to a social category, defined
by membership rules and alleged characteristic attributes; to expected behaviours; or to the
socially distinguishing features in which a person takes a special pride, or views as
unchangeable and socially consequential (Fearon 1999). This term also denotes dignity,
pride, or honour, which is linked to social categories. Fearon (1999) uses the term identity
in two linked senses: ‘social’and ‘personal’identities. However, Fearon’s idea emphasizes
one side of the identity concept, which focuses on who a person is and what kind of
characteristics a group has. Other approaches, such as multiculturalism, stress the
second aspect of identity, differences, and argues for recognition of these differences. In
the study of multiculturalism, human identity is connected to recognition. From this per-
spective, identity is viewed as dialogically created in response to our relationships and our
dialogue with others. As Taylor (1994, 32) points out, ‘we define our identity always in
dialogue with, sometimes in struggle against, the things our significant others want to
see in us’. For Taylor (1994, 33), the concept of identity refers to ‘who we are and
where we are coming from’.
In sociology, identity is seen as a link between the individual and society. The currently
dominant identity theory has evolved from symbolic interaction and perceptual control
theory. Identity theory suggests that individuals exist only within the context of social struc-
ture and that an individual’s identities can be derived from their roles in society, the groups
they belong to and from their personal characteristics (Burke and Stets 2009). Identity is
also seen as an agent and theoretical construct. Identity theory suggests that identities
can have both cognitive and emotional component processes and that they can function
at conscious and unconscious levels. Burke and Stets (2009) distinguish between role,
person and social identities. In their view, role-based identities are person identities and
are based on different social structural positions that a person holds (e.g. spouse, worker,
parent). Person identities relate to the person as a unique individual, distinct from other
individuals. Social identity is based on an individual’s identification with a social group.
All these distinct bases of identities (role, person and group) operate in the same way.
A critical review of the relevant literature shows that identity is a very widespread term,
conceptualized in different ways. This has led some scholars to question the concept itself.
Scholars, such as Brubaker and Cooper (2000), and Swayd (2014), condemn the concept
because its overuse has made it meaningless. Many others find identity a useful and func-
tional analytical concept, however, for the study of different identification processes. It has
also been argued that identity matters. According to Jenkins (2014), who we are and who
we are seen to be can matter enormously. The following offers a summary of the literature
review on national and ethnic identities.
DIASPORA STUDIES 3
2.1. National identity
National identity is a collective, political identity. It is considered to be the central identity
in the modern world (Smith 2010). Usually, national identity is defined as a socio-territor-
ial psychic construct. For a long time, national identity has been related to nationalism and
the nation (Guibernau 1999; Greenfeld and Eastwood 2009; Smith 2010; Koos 2012).
Nationalism is a theory which requires that ethnic boundaries should not cut across pol-
itical ones (Hobsbawm 1992; Gellner 2003). The notion of nationalism is discussed from
two perspectives, the primordialist and constructivist paradigms. Primordialists (or peren-
nialists) regard national identities as singular, fixed, exogenous to all other social phenom-
ena, and as master identities in relation to other collective identities. Conversely,
constructivists perceive national identities as malleable, and as subject to a number of
social influences. The difference in the positions of primordialists and constructivists is
based on how the concept of nation is defined. Classifications of nationalisms vary but
are usually distinguished into two types: ethno-cultural nationalism, involving the con-
sciousness of a shared ancestry and history; and civic nationalism, relying on the idea
of belonging to the same state. Both approaches try to explain national identities by
strongly connecting them to the previously mentioned ambiguous and contested concepts,
such as nationalism and nations. In opposition to this, McCrone and Bechhofer (2015)
consider national identity to be a clearly distinct idea from the concepts of nationalism
and nation. They point out differences between the state and the nation. Going even
further, they differentiate between national identity and nationality or holding the pass-
port of a state.
Today it is held that national identity can be linked to both a nation or a state: to a pol-
itical or ethnic community and/or to a territory. The literature on nationalism has been
criticized for being essentialist and for a tendency to consider nations as static groups
(Brubaker 1996).
2.2. Ethnic identity
Ethnic identity is a key concept in the study of ethnicity. It is very often understood as the
central essence of ethnicity (Nagel 1995). The term ethnicity has multiple meanings.
Firstly, ethnicity denotes a group or community of people and/or membership in a
social group with some shared features. Secondly, ethnicity connotes a field of study,
the classification of people and group relationships, which consider themselves and are
regarded by others, as culturally distinctive. It can also include minority issues or race
relations (Eriksen 2010). Various definitions of ethnic identity reflect the distinct mean-
ings of the term. The first meaning of the term ethnicity suggests some attributes or qual-
ities that are common to a community, a group or individuals, and which define them in
ethnic terms. This definition reflects a more essentialist view of ethnicity. The second con-
notation of the term ethnicity expresses the social classification between different groups
of people in terms of ‘we’vs. ‘them’. A third understanding of the term ethnicity is used in
reference to minority rights, minority issues and minority relations.
Since ethnic identity is closely related to the concept of ethnicity, various definitions
reflect distinct comprehensions of this concept. There are two broad approaches to
studies of ethnicity-primordialism and instrumentalism and a number of alternative
4S. SUROVA
approaches –Barth’s transactionalist, Horowitz’s social psychological, and Armstrong’s
and Smith’s ethno-symbolic accounts (Hutchinson and Smith 1996). Different accounts
emphasize various understandings of ethnicity while focusing on contrasting features of
ethnicity and ethnic communities, but in the past fifty years scholars have emphasized eth-
nicity more and more as a socially constructed phenomenon (Nagel 1995; Penn 2008;
Chandra 2006,2012; Fedor 2014). Currently, the predominant views suggest that ethnicity
is fluid, relational and situational. Many scholars view ethnic boundaries as continually
changing, although not without constraints (Nagel 1995). As Wimmer (2013) points
out, ‘by the end of the 1990s constructivism prevailed over essentialism, instrumentalism
over primordialism and circumstantialism over perennialism’. Nevertheless, a vast array of
literature in comparative politics still views ethnic identity as something singular, timeless
and fixed for all time (Chandra 2006,2012).
Scholars from all camps and approaches in the study of ethnicity have proposed
either a classification or some definitional characteristics of ethnic identity (Weber
1978; Horowitz 2000; Smith 2010). The most widely used definitions of ethnic identity
emphasize descent as an important defining feature of an ethnic group. The role of
descent is specified in different ways, including a common ancestry, a common
myth of ancestry, a common language, a common culture, or a common homeland.
Contrary to this, Chandra (2006,2012) has suggested leaving out almost all previously
used definitional criteria when defining ethnic identity in comparative politics. Chandra
(2006,2012)defines ‘ethnic identity’as a subset of identity categories in which mem-
bership is determined by attributes associated with, or believed to be associated with,
descent or descent-based attributes.
To briefly summarize, national and ethnic identities are today both regarded as con-
structed rather than ‘natural’(Eriksen 2010). In discussions of national and ethnic iden-
tities, constructivism has obtained a dominant position. It has been suggested that national
and ethnic identities are changeable, multi-layered, nested, non-hierarchical, and non-
conflictual relations between the components.
2.3. Empirical literature
Recent empirical literature examines social identities such national and ethnic identities,
mainly from the perspective of social constructivism and using a discursive approach.
Research into national identity is situated within the political sociological and political cul-
tural approaches, resting on behaviourism and working with surveys (International Ency-
clopaedia of Political Science 2011). Scholars mainly investigate the intensity of collective
identification (Glaser 1958; Parenti 1967; Bollen and Medrano 1998; Hadler, Tsutsui, and
Chin 2012; Masella 2013; Surova 2018b), the relationships between identifications with
different collectives (Hristova and Cekik 2016;Kun2015; Waechter and Samoilova
2014; Isaacs-Martin 2014; Koos 2012; Örkény and Székelyi 2011; Duchesne and Frognier
2008; McCrone and Bechhofer 2015,1998; Surova 2018b) or the content and meanings of
identity (Billig 1995; Rusciano 2003; Kiely et al. 2001,2005a,2005b; Bechhofer and
McCrone 2007; Kunovich 2009).
When it comes to multiple identifications of national minorities or diasporas (e.g.
ethnic, national and supranational), especially those living in Central and Eastern
Europe (CEE), empirical research has shown that members of these minorities do not
DIASPORA STUDIES 5
identify themselves as members of their kin-states, do not feel a connection to CEE, and
that Europe is also a distant concept for them (Örkény and Székelyi 2011). The most inter-
esting findings concern Hungarians living in Slovakia, who perform so-called homeless-
ness. They feel closest to their own ethnic group and they are attached to their
residences, but they do not feel close to Slovakia or Hungary (Örkény and Székelyi
2011, 19). On the other hand, Slovaks in Hungary feel strong attachments to their
country of residence, while Slovakia is not a mark of identity to them, nor do they feel
strong attachments to CEE, but they feel closer to Europe than Hungarians in Slovakia.
Others empirical studies didn’tfind a correlation between ethnic and European identity
(Waechter and Samoilova 2014).
Empirical literature on identification is diverse, and in most cases offers contradictory
results and conclusions. There are still too many challenges to empirical research into
identities, which limit the applicability and validity of empirical findings. Firstly, there
is a problem in the definition of the terms and concepts used in the studies. Without a
proper definition and operationalization of the concept of identity, we cannot talk
about it, or do research into it. Logical and rational claims cannot be made about the
effects of identity (whether national or ethnic) without firstly defining the concepts that
we use. Secondly, the data that we collect and analyse in empirical studies must correspond
with our own definitions. This will enable us to do research ‘properly’from the methodo-
logical perspective, and to come to valid and reasonable conclusions. The next section
introduces main theoretical framework and explains the methodology used in this study.
3. Theory and methodology
This study builds largely on sociological literature, especially identity theory and Kanchan
Chandra’s concept of ethnic identity. The main questions of the study are following: What
is the nature of Slovak identity and how it is expressed at a formal state level and at the
level of ordinary people belonging to the Slovak diaspora living in Serbia? What kind of
collective identities and attitudes do members of the Slovak diaspora hold in contempor-
ary Serbia? How do they identify themselves in national and ethnic terms? What kind of
citizenship do they hold? Do they have single, dual or multiple citizenship? What kind of
national pride do they hold? What kind of national consciousness do they claim? What
kind of ethnic pride and ethnic consciousness do they hold? This study is also mapping
the respondents’different collective identifications, the intensity of these identifications
and the relations between them. In other words, this study inspects how respondents pos-
ition themselves in relation to the concepts of national, ethnic, and territorial identities,
what it means for them to be ‘truly’Slovak and what kind of group membership criteria
matters to them.
This research builds on identity theory, where an identity is constituted of four key
elements: an input, an identity standard, a comparator and an output. Each of these
elements is in fact a process dealing with meanings within the environment and within
the self (Burke and Stets 2009, 62). The defining principle of identity is a set of meanings
or so-called identity standards. The main characteristics of national or ethnic identities
can then be viewed as having citizenship, ethnicity, being born in some place, having
certain ancestors, names and physical traits, speaking certain languages and so on. To
determine a Slovak or Serbian respondent’s national and ethnic identity means to
6S. SUROVA
examine what it means to the respondents to be Slovak or Serbian in their own
perceptions.
This research departs from some conclusions of previous studies, especially when it
comes to the issues of identity change, organization and relations between different iden-
tities or different components of identity. According to identity theory, identities are
defined by the meanings held in the identity standard. A change of identity would there-
fore imply that the meanings held in the standard are changing. An identity standard is
not fixed or static. Burke and Stets (2009) assume that identity meanings are always chan-
ging, but for most people this change is successive over a period of time. Identity theory
suggests that identities tend to resist change and that consequently there is stability.
We have noted that people can have multiple identities due to their multiple ties to
social structure. While constructivist studies suggest that different components of multiple
identities do not necessarily have to be hierarchically ranked (Koos 2012), identity theory
proposes that they are hierarchically structured. This means that there are higher and
lower level identities. All these identities need to be verified, and there are different
levels of commitment and salience for each of the identities. In other words, different iden-
tities, which seek their own verification, are coordinated by a common higher-level iden-
tity. The implication is that identities at a higher level are more general than identities at a
lower level (Burke and Stets 2009, 136).
3.1. Research design
This study applies mixed research design, combining qualitative and quantitative
approaches. The qualitative research methods applied in this study are the case study,
archival analysis, and text- and document-based techniques. This study also applies quan-
titative research methods such as a web-based and paper surveys and basic statistical
analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the data obtained. Data collection
was made through desk and field research, in both Slovakia and Serbia.
3.1.1. Operationalization of the key terms and concepts
Defining collective identities is by no means easy, either for researchers or for the people.
In this study, nation is understood as a group of people who are citizens of a nation-state
and who are united by specific factors which define them as one nation, however nation
can be also a group of people who share some characteristics, such as language, descent,
culture, tradition, and history and they do not necessarily have to live in one area or state.
The definition of the term diaspora proposed in this study captures former classifications
employed in diaspora studies, and partly builds upon and partly departs from previous
work. My ontological position on diasporas is that they are real entities, which exist inde-
pendently of our knowledge of them. My realist epistemology is derived from this onto-
logical position, seeking causal relationships between studied phenomena, while
admitting that these relations can be both directly observed and directly not observed.
The term diaspora is here understood as referring to a group of people, to processes
and to spatial references where diaspora(s) live. Diaspora(s), as referring to people, are,
on very abstract level, dispersed groups of people, who share at least one common
feature, such as citizenship, ethnicity, religion, language, or culture. A more concrete
definition postulates that diasporas are clusters of individuals who either migrate
DIASPORA STUDIES 7
themselves or are the descendants of migrants who moved, by will or coercion, from one
place to a different places or parts of the world and who hold diasporic identity (Surova
2018a).
National identity is here understood as identifying with the state, or as emotionally
attached to the state. It follows that national identity is a measurement of the feeling of
belonging to a particular state. Chandra’sdefinition of ethnic identity is applied here,
meaning that ethnic identity is a subset of the category in which descent-based attributes
are necessary for membership. National consciousness refers to one’s awareness or percep-
tion of citizenship. Similarly, ethnic consciousness refers to one’s awareness or perception
of ethnicity. Place attachments are the emotional attachments that respondents hold to a
particular location, while place identity refers certain location. Salient identity is under-
stood here as activated in a specific situation. Identity salience is measured using an indi-
vidual’s self-report.
Slovaks living in Serbia today are either a result of historical migration, which began in
the late eighteenth century and continued throughout the entire nineteenth century within
Austria and later the Austro-Hungarian Empire, or of recent international migration. A
multi-ethnic, multi-faith, and multilingual country, Serbia is home to more than 31
ethnic communities. Of its 7,186,8625 people (without Kosovo), 52,750, about 0.7%,
self-identify as Slovak according to the most recent census (Republički zavod za statistiku.
‘Popis stanovništva, domaćinstava i stanova 2011. u Republici Srbiji.’Republički zavod za
statistiku). Nearly all of them, 50,321, live in Vojvodina, which has a total population of
1,931,809. Based on census data, people who declare themselves members of the Slovak
ethnic group form the third largest ethnic group in Vojvodina after Serbs (1,289,635)
and Hungarians (251,136). It is important to emphasize that the number who self-identify
as Slovak in the former Yugoslavia and contemporary Serbia has been steadily declining
from 77,837 since 1961, a 32.23% drop in the last 50 years. That slide was particularly
noticeable in the last three censuses (1993, 1995, 2002, 2014). Scholars attribute the
decline in ethnic identifications among all ethnic groups in Serbia to natural population
growth, migration, and changes in individual declarations of ethnic identity (Djurić
et al. 2014). Although we do not know the exact number of those who once declared them-
selves Slovak but no longer do, statistics indicate that members of the Slovak diaspora can
and do change their ethnic identities (Surova 2018b).
What does this mean for the study of collective identities in the contemporary Serbia? If
we define national and ethnic identity as categories based on membership rules, namely
citizenship and descent-based features, then census data and other quantitative data col-
lected on individuals in Serbia cannot be the most suitable method of identifying members
of minorities and the majority or estimating their numbers. This is especially true because
the categories ‘Serb’,‘Hungarian’,‘Bosniak’or ‘Slovak’as defined by the Serbian census of
2011 would not be an ethnic category according to Chandra’sdefinition of ethnic identity.
The census in 2011 permitted respondents to declare their ethnicity or membership of
ethnic categories freely and completely based on subjective self-identification, without
paying attention to descent. To conclude, the ethnic categories as used in censuses in
the former Yugoslavia and Serbia since the Second World War
1
would not be considered
ethnic categories, because respondents could state their membership freely based on self-
identification irrespective of their descent.
8S. SUROVA
3.1.2. Research method
This study applied both web-based survey, which is an alternative to the traditional mail-
out technique, and paper survey. For the purposes of this survey, the unit of analysis are
individuals who are living in Serbia, with an active and chosen Slovak ethnic identity. This
means that only those individuals who claim their membership in the Slovak ethnic cat-
egory, who use Slovak ethnic category to describe themselves, and who spent most of the
last year in Serbia were included in this sample. Because overall data on the size and struc-
ture of the Slovak diaspora in Serbia according to the definition used in this study is not
available, probability sampling could not be applied in the sampling procedure. Non-
random or non-probability sampling was therefore deployed in study. The mixed mode
survey of identifications of the members of Slovak minority was conducted in the
Slovak language from September to October 2017. The next section considers how identity
is formed and constructed on a state level in Slovakia and particularly in the context of
Slovak diaspora policies, and how the question of identity, especially of national minorities
in Serbia, is dealt with in the Serbian legal system. Finally, the data from a survey on the
collective identities of members of Slovak diaspora living in Serbia will be analysed in more
detail.
4. Analysis
Firstly, this section investigates the nature of Slovak national identity and how the concept
of identity is used and understood at a formal state level and in the context of Slovak dia-
spora engagement policies.
4.1. Identity at home
The Slovak state and Slovak nation are of recent history although we know that many
nations imagine themselves as old. Until the 1830s and 1840s the Slovak intelligentsia
still believed in the theory that the Slav inhabitants of Czechia, Moravia, Silesia and Slo-
vakia formed one nation (Kolářin Pekník 2000, 493). This nation was called either the
Czechoslovak nation or the Czech nation. The younger generation of intelligentsia
around Ľudovít Štúr rejected the idea of a common Czechoslovak nation and emphasized
the uniqueness of the Slovak people. In 1843, Štúr codified the Slovak language and in
1848 the political secession of the Slovak nation into the Austrian Empire was declared
in the Requests of the Slovak Nation.
2
The founding fathers of this document understood
the Slovak nation in a perennial way, as something always existing, contrary to the older
generation of Slovak intelligentsia, according to which there was only one common nation
of Czechoslovaks. A Slovak national revolution in 1848–1849 in the Austrian Empire was
not successful. In the aftermath of this revolution, the Slovak intelligentsia again turned
back to the idea of Czechoslovakism, but now the emphasis was on cooperation and
good relations between Czechs and Slovaks, rather than on the belief in one common
nation. The idea of a common Czechoslovak state became realized when Czechoslovakia
declared its independence from the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1918. The Czechoslovak
state existed with little interruption (during the Nazi protectorate from 1939 to 1945) from
1918 until 1993.
DIASPORA STUDIES 9
After the peaceful division of Czechoslovakia in 1993, also known as the velvet divorce,
the Slovak republic became an independent state. Slovak nationalism and nation-building
projects since 1993 refer to a strong link between Slovak ethnicity and the state. The origin
of the Slovak nation-state was built as ethnic in character, and in order to represent the
interests of the Slovak ethnic group. Slovak diaspora policies were built in the same
manner. Even today, Slovakia is dominated by the Slovak ethnic group, whose markers
of identity, especially language and religion, are embodied in its official legislation and
symbols. This can be best seen in the Slovak constitution,
3
language law
4
and diaspora pol-
icies (Surová 2017).
Notions of the Slovak nation are predominantly based in ethnicity in the Slovak con-
stitution and Slovak language law. The constitution clearly separates the Slovak nation
from other nations which form national minorities and ethnic groups in Slovakia. The
main argument for this claim was the provision in the preamble of the Slovak Consti-
tution, which starts with ‘We, the Slovak nation …’. If we look more closely at the text
of the constitution and other laws, we can find counter arguments to this claim. The pre-
amble indeed starts with the provision ‘We the Slovak nation,’but it continues and further
states ‘together with members of national minorities and ethnic groups living on the ter-
ritory of the Slovak Republic,’and ends with expression ‘we, the citizens of the Slovak
republic.’Secondly, the overall spirit of the preamble indicates that the Slovak nation is
defined in ethnic terms and covers ethnic, linguistic, cultural, and historical links
between the members of this nation. Thirdly, the conception of the Slovak language in
the preamble of the language law also supports an ethnic understanding of the Slovak
nation. It states that the ‘Slovak language is the most important feature of distinctiveness
of the Slovak nation, the most esteemed value of its cultural heritage and an articulation
of the sovereignty of the Slovak Republic.’
5
The Slovak language is established by this
law as the state language and thus has priority over other languages in the Slovak Republic
(Article 1, section 2). Fourthly, by 1999 the Slovak parliament had recognized Slovak co-
ethnics living abroad as an integral part of the Slovak nation and as spiritual holders of
Slovak statehood (Declaration of NCSR on foreign Slovaks 1999).
6
To summarize, the Slovak constitution, language law and even diaspora policies
emphasize an ethnic understanding of the Slovak nation and differentiate between
ethnic Slovaks, the Slovak language, and other Slovak citizens who are members of
national and ethnic minorities. Nevertheless, citizenship is defined in a mixed ethnic
and civic sense. Citizens are individuals who hold citizenship and they may belong to
the Slovak nation or to other nationalities and ethnic groups. Slovak citizenship can be
obtained in three ways; through birth, by adoption, or it may be granted.
7
Acquisition
of Slovak citizenship by birth usually means descent
8
; it refers mainly to ius sanguini
and not to unconditional ius soli.
From its independence, Slovakia tried to engage its diaspora living abroad and started
to build diaspora policies and institutions (Surová 2017). Today, the term diaspora or
phrase ‘Slovaks living abroad’is defined broadly, including both citizens and non-
citizen co-ethnics living permanently abroad. In the strict legal sense, a ‘Slovak living
abroad’is a person who resides permanently abroad and is either a Slovak citizen or a
non-citizen Slovak co-ethnic.
9
The new legal definition of diaspora: Slovaks living
abroad, includes two distinctive groups of people: citizens and non-citizen co-ethnics
living outside Slovakia. The Law on Slovaks Living Abroad grants Slovak citizens and
10 S. SUROVA
Slovak co-ethnic non-citizens residing outside Slovakia the same legal status. Including
two distinct groups of people, such as citizens and aliens, in one category raises important
questions about the nature of this kind of community. The next section shows how the
concept of identity is legally embodied in Slovak diaspora policies.
4.2. Identity in diaspora policies
National awareness, identities, and loyalties of the two distinctive groups of Slovak dia-
spora are handled differently in Slovak diaspora policies. While Slovak citizens living
abroad don’t have to maintain Slovak awareness, Slovak co-ethnic non-citizens must
both have Slovak ethnicity and preserve Slovak national awareness. They must have
direct ancestors, such as parents, grandparents or great grandparents, with Slovak ethni-
city. For the purpose of the law, ‘national awareness’is understood as an active declaration
that the person belongs to the Slovak nation and adheres to the values represented by the
Slovak language, Slovak cultural heritage, and traditions.
10
Slovak co-ethnic non-citizens
living abroad should be able to speak the Slovak language and moreover should publicly
perform their national awareness. If an individual does not have any evidence of public
activities exemplifying their national awareness, then the formal Slovak organization or
institution in their country of residence must write a testimony as evidence of the
person’s national awareness.
This asymmetric approach concerning the identities, membership, and loyalties of dia-
spora members has different consequences for the two respective groups. Slovak citizens
living abroad are assumed to be loyal to Slovakia and to be dedicated to the preservation of
their Slovak culture, language, religion, or heritage due to their Slovak citizenship. On the
other hand, Slovak co-ethnic non-citizens must prove that they have Slovak ethnicity and
maintain a Slovak national awareness. It is not sufficient that individuals declare them-
selves to be an ethnic Slovaks. Public manifestation of this awareness is also required.
The law does not recognize self-declaration of these characteristics. It is compulsory to
demonstrate Slovak awareness in a written declaration or testimony and to prove
Slovak ethnicity using official documents such as birth certificates or an extract from
the registry of births and marriages.
11
The definition of Slovaks living abroad has shifted from its initial meaning to include
Slovak citizens living abroad. The meaning and understanding of the term Slovak diaspora
has been redesigned. Two distinct groups, citizens and aliens, have been defined as equal in
status by Slovak diaspora policies. The boundaries between members of the Slovak politi-
cal community were not erased, just slightly redrawn in favour of Slovak co-ethnic non-
citizens. Citizenship still remains the main demarcation line between Slovak citizens and
Slovak co-ethnic non-citizens.
4.3. Identity in Serbian minority rights policies
Similarly, to the Slovak constitution, the Serbian constitution
12
differentiates between the
Serbian nation and ethnic communities living in Serbia (see Preamble). The constitution
guarantees special protection to national minorities for the purpose of the presentation of
their identities (Article, 14, second paragraph). Minority rights in Serbia are thus reserved
only for citizens. The constitution guarantees the freedom of expressing national affiliation
DIASPORA STUDIES 11
and prohibits the obligation of declaring it (Article 47), however data on national and
ethnic identities are collected for statistical purposes (census) and there are official regis-
tries held by public authorities about employees, birth certificates and voting registers for
minority councils.
It is interesting that data collection regarding identity for the purpose of realizing min-
ority rights is done in different ways. For example, public censuses today in Serbia respect
the right of self-identification of national or ethnic identity. In official censuses ethno-
national categories are not pre-listed, rather questions about ethno-national belonging-
ness, language and religion are open and individuals can freely declare their identities
regarding objective conditions. The legal definition of national minority in Serbia,
which was introduced in Serbian legal system in the year 2002, however, encompasses
both subjective and collective criteria.
13
Secondly, it is required for the elections of national
minority councils of national minorities in Serbia, that members of perspective minorities
register themselves in special electoral registers. Registration is voluntary and free, but
minority identity is inspected by public authorities. How precisely this is done is not
specified in the Rulebook on the manner of keeping special electoral rules for national
minorities.
Public censuses are of great importance for minority policies creation and the realiz-
ation of minority rights in Serbia. Voting rights for the national minority council is pre-
disposition for collective rights realization and right to self-government of minorities. It is
striking governmental ambition to collect data on national or ethnic identities in public
registries and to enter sensitive information on citizens into official certification and
identification cards.
4.4. Identity in diaspora: results of quantitative survey
A survey was undertaken with members of the Slovak diaspora living in Serbia, over a
period of two months. After data cleaning, there were a total of 577 completed paper ques-
tionnaires from adults. This study analysed data from those respondents who declared that
they feel like Slovaks and actively claim membership in the Slovak ethnic category (n =
515). In the 577 questionnaires gathered, 93.98% respondents declared that they feel
like Slovaks. Of those who disclosed their gender, 63.60% were female (n = 325) and
36.40% were male (n = 186). Female respondents were over represented with respect to
the whole population, where the female population is 51.31% and males 48.69%. Respon-
dents ranged in age from 20 to 65 and over with a mean age of 30–39 years. Most respon-
dents had finished at least primary school (25.20%, i.e. eight or nine years of compulsory
education), the others had attended three years of middle school (22.57%) or four years of
middle school (22.18%) and 23.73% of respondents had achieved a university degree.
Respondents were employed in the private sector (23.67%), or state and public sector
(21.30%). A small percentage of respondents were running their own business (3.55%)
or were small entrepreneurs, such are registered farmers (8.28%). The percentage of pen-
sioners in the sample was 5.72%, those employed on contract was around 2%, 16.37% were
individuals at home and 14.20% were unemployed. The mean of monthly income of
respondents was in the range of 40,000–49,999 Serbian dinars (which is in between
330–410 euros). The vast majority of respondents live in small towns, the suburbs of
cities, or villages (93.75%). Of those who declared their faith, the majority of respondents
12 S. SUROVA
belong to the Protestant church (88.75%). Most respondents (48.72%) irrespective of
official residence, live in Serbia for more than thirty years. The respondents were the resi-
dents of more than thirty different Serbian towns or cities.
14
4.4.1. National identity of the members of the Slovak diaspora living in Serbia
National identity in this study refers to a territorial point of reference or identification with
one’s state. All respondents in this survey reported having Serbian citizenship. At the time
they were born, both of their parents held Serbian or Yugoslav citizenship (96.64%). When
asked how proud they were to have Serbian citizenship, 50.15% of respondents reported
that they are proud on this fact, and almost the same number of respondents were not
proud of this fact (49.85%). National pride is particularly linked to Serbia’s achievements
in sports (94.43%), arts and literature (73.33%), history (57.99%) and science and technol-
ogy (53.16%). Respondents are not proud of the treatment of different groups in Serbia
(53.30%), the armed forces (57.05%), the way democracy works in Serbia (83.98%), its pol-
itical influence in the world (86.82%), its social security system (89.24%) and lastly its
economic achievements (92.86%) (see Figure 1). Analysis shows feelings of greater
Figure 1. National pride.
DIASPORA STUDIES 13
closeness to Serbian citizenship among respondents, rather than feelings of national pride.
The majority of respondents (78.61%) feel ‘very close’or ‘close’to Serbian citizenship. The
respondents also feel more at home in Serbia (69.51%) than elsewhere (30.49%), but most
respondents (56.86%) would rather not be citizens of Serbia than of any other country in
the world. The majority of respondents believed that individuals should live in the country
where they find better conditions (71.51%), rather than in the country where they were
born (28.49%).
The great majority of respondents do not hold Slovak citizenship (93.96%), meaning
that only a small percentage of respondents have Slovak citizenship (6.04%). A very
small number of respondents have dual citizenship that includes beside Serbian citizenship
also Croatian, Hungarian, German or Romanian citizenship (2.14%). If life circumstances
allowed respondents to migrate, most would be willing to move to Slovakia (58.33%) or
anywhere outside of Serbia (54.79%). They would not be willing to relocate themselves
within their region, out of Europe or within Serbia.
4.4.2. Ethnic identity of the members of Slovak diaspora living in Serbia
The vast majority of respondents are proud to be Slovaks (97.41%) and feel connected to
their ethnic identity (93.49%). Most respondents define their ethnic identity as ‘very
important’or ‘important’(84.45%). The majority feel like Slovaks ‘almost always’
(68.8%), or ‘often’(22.68%), and a small percentage had this feeling only ‘sometimes’
(5.77%), ‘not so often’(2.47%) or ‘never’(0.21%). When asked what makes a person
‘truly Slovak’the following things were important for the majority of respondents:
language (90.07%), self-identification (85.11%), Slovak ancestry (84.26%) and Christianity
(66.74). Other things, such as having Slovak citizenship, living most of one’s life in Slova-
kia, and being born in Slovakia were not seen as important, see Table 1.
4.4.3. Other identities and their importance
The majority of respondents –72.09% –consider themselves Slavs, and this fact is ‘very or
somewhat’important to them. A smaller percentage –25.21% of respondents identify as
Slavs but this part of their identity it is not important to them, see Figure 2.
Respondents were also asked to choose one group only that they identify the most with.
They reported the highest sense of belonging with people who share the same life beliefs
Table 1. Perceptions of ‘true’Slovaks. ‘Some people say that the following
things are important for being truly Slovak. Others say they are not
important. How important do you think each of the following is to
consider someone as truly Slovak?’
Answer choices Responses in % Base
To be able to speak Slovak 90.07 453
To consider oneself Slovak 85.11 450
To have Slovak ancestry 84.25 451
To be a Christian 66.74 427
To have Slovak citizenship 31.18 433
To respect Slovak laws 31.17 401
To have been born in Slovakia 17.44 430
To have lived in Slovakia for the most of onés life 16.63 421
* Those who did not answer the question, or said ´dont know´ or ´cant choose have been
excluded.
14 S. SUROVA
(20.60%), with people who belong to their state (19.96%), with those living in the same
town or region (17.28%), with those who speak the same language (9.67%) and with
those belonging to their nation (8.23%). A sense of belonging to the same social class,
people with the same religion, of the same generation or ethnic group, or people with
the same occupation or gender scored relatively low, see Table 2.
4.4.4. Collective identities nexus
Individuals can have many identities and each of these identities is important, because
identities provide ties to others and a basis for behaviour in certain situations. Collective
identities relationships can be very complex when referring at the same time to different
ethnicities or nationalities, political entities such as nations, or to different places and ter-
ritories. Beliefs about commonalities or territorial points of reference were assessed via a
modified Moreno’s question
15
to find out more about collective identities that are based on
a sense of belonging. Respondents were asked how they see themselves in terms of dual
ethnicities: Slovak and Serbian. The majority of respondents (51.68%) chose being exclu-
sively Slovak compared to 23.96% who said they felt equally Slovak and Serb, and 19.60%
felt more Slovak than Serb, see Table 3.
A modified Moreno question was used to examine the nexus between respondents’
ethnic identity and subnational territorial Vojvodinian identity. The majority of
Figure 2. Slav identity and its importance.
Table 2. Sense of belonging to social groups.
Answer Choices Responses in % Number
Belonging to people with same life beliefs 28.60 139
People belonging to my state 19.96 97
People belonging to my area/region 17.28 84
Belonging to people who speak same language 9.67 47
People belonging to my nation 8.23 40
People belonging to my social class 5.56 27
People belonging to my faith/religion 3.70 18
People belonging to my generation 2.88 14
People belonging to my ethnic group 1.85 9
People belonging to my occupation/profession 1.85 9
People belonging to my gender 0.41 2
Total 486
* Those who did not answer the question have been excluded.
DIASPORA STUDIES 15
respondents –55.91% felt equally Slovak and Vojvodinian, while 18.41% felt more Slovak
than Vojvodinian, and only 16.59% of respondents chose an exclusively Slovak identity
over their subnational identity, see Table 4. If we compare the relationships between
different ethnic and territorial identities, the data shows that respondents identify at the
same time with the Slovak ethnic identity and more with a subnational territorial Vojvo-
dinian identity, than with a Serbian ethnic identity.
The respondents were also asked about the relationship between their ethnic and
national, political identities. In reference to Slovak ethnic identity and Serbian national
identity in the political sense, most respondents –49.30% identified themselves as both
members of some particular ethnic group and Serbian citizens. Some respondents con-
sidered themselves only members of another nation that lives in Serbia –19.16%,
others identified themselves more as a member of a different ethnic group –14.17%,
10.78% respondents considered themselves only as Serbian citizens and 6.59% respon-
dents thought of themselves more as Serbian citizens than a member of another ethnic
group, see Figure 3.
4.4.5. Place attachments and identities
Respondents demonstrated various levels of attachments to different places. After combin-
ing variables feeling ‘very close’and ‘close’under one label ‘close’and the feeling of being
‘not very close’and ‘not close at all’under the label ‘not close’, the results are as follows.
Regional and local attachments of respondents were very high. The vast majority of
respondents –84.35% felt ‘very close’or ‘close’to the region where they live, i.e. Vojvo-
dina, and 79.35% of respondents felt the same towards their towns or cities. Respondents
also felt close to Serbia –55.35%, however the majority of respondents did not feel close to
Table 3. Slovak and Serbian identities among the members of the Slovak
diaspora in Serbia. ´Which of the following statements best describes how
you see yourself?´
Answer choices Responses in % Number
Slovak not Serb 51,68 261
Equally Slovak and Serb 23,96 121
More Slovak than Serb 19,60 99
Other 2,97 15
More Serb than Slovak 1,78 9
Only Serb 0,00 0
Total 505
* Those who did not answer the question have been excluded.
Table 4. Ethnic and subnational, territorial identities nexus. ´Which of the
following statements best describes how you see yourself?´
Answer choices Responses in % Number
Equally Slovak and Vojvodinian 56.25 279
More Slovak than Vojvodinian 17.74 88
Slovak not Vojvodinian 17.14 85
Other 3.83 19
More Vojvodinian than Slovak 3.43 17
Only Vojvodinian 1.61 8
Total 496
* Those who did not answer the question have been excluded.
16 S. SUROVA
Slovakia, Europe or the world, see Figure 4. Analysis did not find a significant difference
between the genders, age groups or education categories in feelings of place attachments.
Place identity is the sense of belonging to a certain location. The respondents ident-
ified themselves mostly as denizens of Vojvodina (34.51%), further as denizens of the
world (25.49%), their town or city (12.94%), Serbia (11.57%), a particular area of Voj-
vodina (9.61%) and lastly as denizens of Europe (4.51%) or other places (1.37%), see
Figure 5.
4.5.6. Homeland(s) of Slovak diaspora in Serbia
When asked to choose between two countries, Serbia and Slovakia, the majority of respon-
dents-62.95% felt that they belonged to Serbia, and 28.13% felt that they belonged to both
Figure 3. Ethnic and national, political identities nexus.
Figure 4. Place attachments.
DIASPORA STUDIES 17
Serbia and Slovakia. The smallest percentage –8.93% chose Slovakia as their first country
of belonging, see Figure 6.
This questionnaire included questions on which country would be supported in sports
competitions between Serbia and Slovakia. The majority of respondents would support
Serbia (48.72%), others would support both (29%) or neither (15.08%), and only a very
small percentage of respondents would support Slovakia (7.19%).
5. Conclusion
This study examined identity in multilevel contexts, from both conceptual and empirical
perspectives. A critical literature shows that the term identity has been used and defined in
different ways at different points of time in the social sciences. Today the most common
usage of the term identity is in reference to personal, role-based and social or collective
identities. It is very common in the literature to link identity to other categories such as
nation, ethnicity, class, gender, religion, language, culture and so on.
Figure 5. Place identity.
Figure 6. Country belongingness.
18 S. SUROVA
The main findings can be summarized in a few points. Firstly, academic, state-formal
and ordinary usages and understandings of the terms and concepts of identity, national
and ethnic identity (among others such as racial, and religious identity) have been evolving
over time and have changed significantly. While primordialism still insists that nations
and ethnicity are fixed, permanent, and static, constructivism challenges these ideas by
claiming that identities are socially constructed, changeable, and dynamic. The latter para-
digm is prevalent in social science today.
Secondly, the term identity can be used to refer to a wide range of phenomena.
Identity can refer to my sense of self, others’perceptions of me, my reaction to
others’perceptions, the social categories that are attached to me and to which I
attach myself (Lawler 2014). Thirdly, it has been acknowledged that identities can be
static and dynamic, multiple, multi-faceted, and flexible. Fourthly, the empirical litera-
ture on social or collective identification is diverse and in the most cases offers contra-
dictory results and conclusions. There are still too many challenges for empirical
research on identities, which limit the applicability and validity of empirical findings.
Fifth, the term and concept of identity is used and understood in different ways on
a formal state level and at the level of ordinary people. It can be concluded that iden-
tities are a very complex phenomenon under constant development and change, for
which we still lack a full theory.
This study has analysed how Slovak identity is formed, constructed and enacted at
home in Slovakia and abroad in the Slovak diaspora. Slovak nation-building projects
and Slovak nationalism refer to a strong link between Slovak ethnicity and state.
The Slovak nation-state was originally built as ethnic in character and in order to
mainly represent the interests of the Slovak ethnic group. Evidence that the Slovak
nation is prevalently based in ethnicity can be found in the Slovak constitution,
language law and diaspora policies. It can be seen in the Slovak diaspora policies
exactly how far state obsession with Slovak ethnicity has gone. Slovakia considers
co-ethnics or descendants of Slovak emigrants an integral part of the Slovak nation
and holders of Slovak statehood, however co-ethnics living abroad have to prove
their Slovak ethnicity and have to publicly maintain their Slovak national awareness
in countries where they live. Ethnicity and national awareness have to be demonstrated
in writing. Pure self-identification or a free choice of Slovak ethnic identity is not
recognized by the Slovak state.
A survey of collective identities among members of the Slovak diaspora living in
Serbia indicates that respondents do hold multiple collective identities and that they
assign different importance and meanings to them. This study identified multiple
and diverse collective identity nexuses and showed the complexity of relations
between ethnic, national and subnational, and territorial identities. Members of the
Slovak diaspora do hold different national, ethnic, regional and other social identities,
which can co-exist and vary in salience to them. Different multiple identities and the
relationships between them tell us something about the salience of these identities, but
they do not tell us anything about the behaviour that can derive from them. Further
research is therefore needed to identify the consequences, or patterns of behaviour,
of these associations with identities.
DIASPORA STUDIES 19
Notes
1. In all of the censuses from 1948 to 2011 particular attention was paid to the ethnic features of
the population in former Yugoslavia and Serbia. The respondents could declare their ethnic
belonging freely and based on self-identification. Information was obtained from Statistical
Office of the Republic of Serbia (25.02.2016) by email.
2. Žiadosti slovenského národa in Rapant.
3. Ústava Slovenskej republiky č. 460/1992 v znení neskorších predpisov.
4. Zákon č. 35/2011 Z. z., ktorým sa mení a dopĺňa zákon Národnej rady Slovenskej republiky č.
270/1995 Z. z. o štátnom jazyku Slovenskej republiky v znení neskorších predpisov.
5. Zákon Národnej rady Slovenskej republiky č. 270/1995 Z. z. o štátnom jazyku SR v znení nes-
korších predpisov.
6. Declaration of NCSR on foreign Slovaks, 1999. It stated that ‘in the spirit of building Slovak
statehood, …, strengthening national cultural identity of members of Slovak nation home
and abroad, …, with interest of strengthening cooperation and contacts with Slovaks
living abroad, …‘Slovakia and Slovak republic always considered and consider Slovaks
abroad as integral national part, their life and history as part of Slovak national history
and their culture as part of national cultural heritage. Slovak republic is aware that Slovaks
in the world are common spiritual holders of Slovak statehood".
7. Zákon č. 40/1993 Z. z. o štátnom občianstve SR v znení zákona č. 70/1997 Z. z., zákona č. 515/
2003 Z. z., zákona č. 36/2005 Z. z., zákona č. 265/2005 Z. z. a zákona č. 344/2007 Z. z.
8. Person born to a citizen of a country (birth in that country or in a foreign country), článok 5
Zákona č. 40/1993 Z. z. o štátnom občianstve SR v znení zákona č. 70/1997 Z. z., zákona č.
515/2003 Z. z., zákona č. 36/2005 Z. z., zákona č. 265/2005 Z. z. a zákona č. 344/2007 Z. z.
9. A Slovak living abroad is a person who doesn’t have permanent residence in the Slovak
republic and is either a citizen of Slovakia or a non-citizen of Slovakia who preserves a
national awareness and holds Slovak nationality or at least has direct ancestors who held
Slovak nationality (Article 1, section 2, Law on Slovaks living abroad, 2005).
10. The national awareness should be demonstrated by the person’s declaration of their public
activities, demonstrating their national awareness, or by written testimony, issued by the
Slovaks-living-abroad organisation in their place of residence. If such an organisation or
association in the place of residence does not exist, then a written testimony regarding the
national awareness of the person by at least two Slovaks living abroad in the same country
as the person is required. The national awareness is also demonstrated by having a
command of the Slovak language, specifically in the form of a personal interview at the
time of application filing with the OSLA or abroad at the Embassy or a Consular Offices
of the Slovak Republic (hereinafter the Slovak Republic Diplomatic Mission offices or the
‘DM SR‘) (pursuant to § 2 letter b and § 7 par. 4 of the Act).
11. §7 par. 3 of the Act on Slovaks living abrad.
12. Ustav Republike Srbije, Službeni glasnik RS» br. 98/2006.
13. A national minority for the purpose of this Law shall be any group of citizens of the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia numerically sufficiently representative and, although representing a
minority in the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, belonging to a group of resi-
dents having a long term and firm bond with the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugo-
slavia and possessing characteristics such as language, culture, national or ethnic affiliation,
origin or confession, differentiating them from the majority of the population and whose
members are distinguished by care to collectively nurture their common identity, including
their culture, tradition, language or religion. Article 2 of Law on protection of rights and free-
doms of national minorities Official Gazette of FRY No. 11 of 27 February 2002.
14. Respondents according to demographic location: Nový Sad- Kysáč,Báčsky Petrovec, Kova-
čica, Hložany, Kulpín, Stará Pazova, Erdevík, Šíd, Silbaš,Báčska Palanka, Pančevo, Vojlovica,
Selenča, Laliť, Aradáč, Beočín, Padina, Belehrad, Jánošík, Pivnica, Čelárevo and others small
towns.
20 S. SUROVA
15. Moreno question provides choice between five alternatives about national and state identi-
ties: X not Y, more X than Y, equally X and Y, more Y than X and Y not X.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
This work was supported by the Slovak National Scholarship Programme for the Supports of Mobi-
lity of University Students, PhD Students, University Teachers, Researchers and Artists: [summer
semester of the academic year 2016/2017] and Seed Grant Award, Brown International Advanced
Research Institutes (BIARI) Alumni Research Initiative 2016-2017, Brown University, Rhode
Island, USA.
Notes on contributor
Dr. Svetluša Surova is Senior Researcher at Gnarum, s.r.o. and Founder of BARI-Global Network.
She was Visiting Fellow in 2017 at Department of Political Science, Faculty of Arts, Comenius Uni-
versity in Bratislava within the framework of the National Scholarship Programme of the Slovak
Republic. Dr. Surova was accepted in 2016 to the prestige international short-term residential pro-
gramme BIARI-Brown International Advanced Research Institutes at Watson Institute for Inter-
national Studies, Brown University, Providence, RI USA and together with her team, she has
won BIARI Alumni seed award for the year 2016-2017. For the years 2015–2016 she was a Research
Fellow of Erste Foundation under the Fellowship for Social Research. She received her doctorate
and graduated with honours in Political Theory at the Matej Bel University in Banska Bystrica.
Her last publication on National and ethnic identifications among the Slovak diaspora in Serbia:
stranded between state(s) and ethnicity? was published in Nationalities Papers, 46:6, 1081-1100,
DOI: 10.1080/00905992.2018.1488825. Her research interests include collective identities, ethnicity,
multiculturalism, minority rights and diaspora studies.
References
Ђурић,Владимир,Дарко Танасковић,Драган Вукмировић,Петар Лађевић.2014.’Попис
становништва,домаћинстава и станова 2011. у Републици Србији.
ЕТНОКОНФЕСИОНАЛНИ И ЈЕЗИЧКИ МОЗАИК СРБИЈЕ’[Census of population, house-
holds amd dwellings in 2011. Ethno-confessional and linguistic mosaic of Serbia]. Београд:
Републички завод за статистику.http://pod2.stat.gov.rs/ObjavljenePublikacije/Popis2011/
Etnomozaik.pdf.
Ashdown, Brien K., Judith L. Gibbons, Jana Hackathorn, and Richard D. Harvey. 2011.“The
Influence of Social and Individual Variables on Ethnic Attitudes in Guatemala.”Psychology
(Savannah, GA) 2 (2): 78–84.
Badie, Bertrand, Dirk Bergm Schlosser, and Leonardo Morlino. 2011.International Encyclopedia of
Political Science. 1st ed. London: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Bechhofer, Frank, and David McCrone. 2007.“Being British: A Crisis of Identity?”The Political
Quarterly 78 (2): 251–260.
Billig, Michael. 1995.Banal Nationalism. Los Angeles: Sage.
Bollen, Kenneth, and Juan Diez Medrano. 1998.“Who are the Spaniards? Nationalism and
Identification in Spain.”Social Forces 77 (2): 587–621.
Brubaker, Rogers. 1996.Nationalism Reframed. Nationhood and the National Question in the New
Europe. Cambridge University Press.
Brubaker, Rogers, and Frederick Cooper. 2000.“Beyond ‘Identity.’” Theory and Society 29 (1): 1–47.
DIASPORA STUDIES 21
Burke, Peter J., and Jan E. Stets. 2009.Identity Theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Chandra, Kanchan. 2006.“What is Ethnic Identity and Does it Matter?”Annual Review of Political
Science 9: 397–424. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.9.062404.170715.
Chandra, Kanchan. 2012.Constructivist Theories of Ethnic Politics. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Deklarácia Národnej rady SR k zahraničným Slovákom. 1999. [Declaration of National council of
Slovak Republic]. https://www.uszz.sk/sk/deklaracia-narodnej-rady-slovenskej-republiky.
Duchesne, Sophie, and André-Paul Frognier. 2008.“National and European Identifications: A Dual
Relationship.”Comparative European Politics 6 (2): 143–168. doi:10.1057/palgrave.cep.6110128.
Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. 2010.Ethnicity and Nationalism: Anthropological Perspectives. 3rd ed.
New York: Pluto Press.
Fearon, James D. 1999.“What is Identity (as We Now Use the Word)?”Accessed October 19, 2017.
https://web.stanford.edu/group/fearon-research/.
Fedor, C.-G. 2014.“Towards a Postmodern Approach of Ethnic Community.”Postmodern
Openings 5 (2): 71–80. http://postmodernopenings.com/archives/1583.
Gellner, Ernest. 2003.Nacionalismus. Brno: Centrum pro stadium demokracie a kultury.
Gibbons, Judith L., and Brien K. Ashdown. 2010.“Ethnic Identification, Attitudes, and Group
Relations in Guatemala.”Psychology (Savannah, GA) 1: 116–127. doi:10.4236/psych.2010.12016.
Glaser, Daryl. 1958.“Dynamics of Ethnic Identification.”American Sociological Review 23: 31–40.
doi:10.2307/2088621.
Greenfeld, Liah, and Jonathan Eastwood. 2009.“Nationalism and National Identity: Definitional
Issues.”The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics. (C. B. Stokes, Editor) Oxford
Handbooks online, retrieved 20. December 2018.
Guibernau, M. 1999.Nations Without States. Political Communities in a Global Age. Cambridge:
Polity Press.
Hadler, Marcus, Kiyoteru Tsutsui, and Lynn G. Chin. 2012.“Conflicting and Reinforcing Identities
in Expanding Europe: Individual- and Country-Level Factors Shaping National and European
Identities, 1995–2003.”Sociological Forum 27 (2): 392–418. doi:10.1111/j.1573-7861.2012.
01323.x.
Hobsbawm, E. J. 1992.Nations and Nationalism Since 1780. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Horowitz, Donald. 2000.Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkley: University of California Press.
Howard, Judith A. 2000.“Social Psychology of Identities.”Annual Review of Sociology 26: 367–393.
doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.367.
Hristova, Lidija, and Aneta Cekik. 2016.“Hierarchy of Identities in the Macedonian Multicultural
Society. Findings from a Survey of Student Population.”European Quarterly of Political Attitudes
and Mentalities 5 (2): 10–23.
Hutchinson, John, and Anthony D. Smith. 1996.Ethnicity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Isaacs-Martin, W. 2014.“National and Ethnic Identities: Dual and Extreme Identities among the
Coloured Population of Port Elizabeth, South Africa.”Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism 14
(1): 55–73. doi:10.1111/sena.12069.
Jenkins, Richard. 2014.Social Identity (Key Ideas). New York: Routledge.
Kiely, Richard, Frederik Bechhofer, and David McCrone. 2005a.“Birth, Blood and Belonging:
Identity Claims in Post-Devolution Scotland.”The Sociological Review 53 (1): 150–171. doi:10.
1111/j.1467-954X.2005.00507.x.
Kiely, Richard, Frederik Bechhofer, Robert Stewart, and David McCrone. 2001.“The Markers and
Rules of Scottish National Identity.”The Sociological Review 49 (1): 33–55. doi:10.1111/1467-
954X.00243.
Kiely, Richard, David McCrone, and Frank Bechhofer. 2005b.“Whither Britishness? English and
Scottish People in Scotland.”Nations and Nationalism 11 (1): 65–82. doi:10.1111/j.1354-5078.
2005.00192.x.
Koos, Agnes Katalin. 2012.“Common Origin, Common Power, or Common Life: The Changing
Landscape of Nationalisms.”Open Journal of Political Science 2 (3): 45–58. doi:10.4236/ojps.
2012.23006.
22 S. SUROVA
Kun, Paul. 2015.“European Identity Between Ethnic and Civic Identities.”Journal of Identity and
Migration Studies 9 (2): 2–17.
Kunovich, Robert M. 2009.“The Sources and Consequences of National Identification.”American
Sociological Review 74 (4): 573–593. doi:10.1177/000312240907400404.
Laitin, David D. 1998.Identity in Formation: The Russian-Speaking Populations in the Near Abroad.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Lawler, Steph. 2014.Identity: Sociological Perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Law on protec-
tion of rights and freedoms of national minorities Official Gazette of FRY No. 11 of 27 February
2002.
Masella, Paolo. 2013.“National Identity and Ethnic Diversity.”Journal of Population Economics 26
(2): 437–454. doi:10.1007/s00148-011-0398-0.
McCrone, David, and Frank Bechhofer. 2015.Understanding National Identity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
McCrone, David, Robert Stewart, Richard Kiely, and Frank Bechhofer. 1998.“Who are We?
Problematizing National Identity.”The Sociological Review 46 (4): 629–652. doi:10.1111/1467-
954X.00134.
Nagel, Joane. 1995.“American Indian Ethnic Renewal: Politics and Resurgence.”American
Sociological Review 60 (6): 947–965. doi:10.2307/2096434.
Örkény, Antal, and Maria Székelyi. 2011.“Constructing Border Ethnic Identities Along the Frontier
of Central and Eastern Europe –A Research Note.”Sociologie Românească9 (1): 14–24.
Parenti, Michael. 1967.“Ethnic Politics and the Persistence of Ethnic Identification.”American
Political Science Review 61 (3): 717–726. doi:10.2307/1976090.
Pekník, Miroslav a kolektív. 2000.Pohľady na slovenskú politiku. Geopolitika. Slovenské národné
rady. Čechoslovakizmus. Bratislava: VEDA.
Penn, E. M. 2008.“Citizenship Versus Ethnicity: The Role of Institutions in Shaping Identity
Choice.”The Journal of Politics 70 (4): 956–973.
Rapant, D. Slovenské povstanie roku 1848-49. Dejiny a dokumenty I, 2. Martin 1937, s. 202-205.
https://www.gjar-po.sk/~gajdos/druhy_rocnik/Ziadosti_slovenskeho_naroda.pdf
Republički zavod za statistiku. 2014. ‘Popisni atlas 2011. Popis stanovništva, domaćinstava i stanova
2011. u Republici Srbiji’[Census Atlas 2011 Census of Population, Households and Dwellings in
the Republic of Serbia]. Beograd: Republički zavod za statistiku, 2014. http://pod2.stat.gov.rs/
ObjavljenePublikacije/Popis2011/Popisni%20atlas%202011.pdf
Rusciano, Frank Louis. 2003.“The Construction of National Identity: A 23-Nation Study.”Political
Research Quarterly 56 (3): 361–366.
Smith, Anthony D. 2010.Nationalism. Theory, Ideology, History. 2nd Edition. Revised and Updated.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Ústava Slovenskej republiky č. 460/1992 v znení neskorších predpisov Ustav Republike Srbije,
Službeni glasnik RS» br. 98/2006
Surová, Svetluša. 2017. Working paper, “How Slovakia Constructs and Engages Its Diaspora.”Erste
Foundation.
Surova, Svetluša. 2018a.“Review of Definitions and Conceptualizations of the Terms Diaspora and
Kin-minorities in the Social Sciences: Methodological Challenges for Empirical Research.”Paper
presented at the ASN 2018 European Conference, University of Graz, July 4–6.
Surova, Svetluša. 2018b.“National and Ethnic Identifications among the Slovak Diaspora in Serbia:
Stranded Between State(s) and Ethnicity?”Nationalities Papers 46 (6): 1081–1100. doi:10.1080/
00905992.2018.1488825.
Swayd, Samy S. 2014.“Identity, ‘Identology’and World Religions.”Open Journal of Philosophy 4
(1): 30–43. doi:10.4236/ojpp.2014.41006.
Taylor, Charles. 1994.Multiculturalism. Examining the Politics of Recognition. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Waechter, Natalia, and Evgenia Samoilova. 2014.“European Identity and its Relationship to
National and Ethnic Identities among Younger and Older Members of Ethnic Minority
Groups.”Slovenská Politologická Revue 14 (2): 99–120.
DIASPORA STUDIES 23
Weber, Max. 1978.Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Translated by
Ephraim Fischoff. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Wimmer, Andreas. 2013.Ethnic Boundary Making. Institutions, Power, Networks. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Zákon č. 35/2011 Z. z. ktorým sa mení a dopĺňa zákon Národnej rady Slovenskej republiky č. 270/
1995 Z. z. o štátnom jazyku Slovenskej republiky v znení neskorších predpisov.
Zákon č. 40/1993 Z. z. o štátnom občianstve SR v znení zákona č. 70/1997 Z. z., zákona č. 515/2003
Z. z., zákona č. 36/2005 Z. z., zákona č. 265/2005 Z. z. a zákona č. 344/2007 Z. z.
Zákon č. 474/2005 Z. z. o Slovákoch žijúcich v zahraničí a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov v
znení neskorších predpisov.
24 S. SUROVA
