Karim .A.H.A. Hasan
Professor 2012 – present
Postdoctoral Fellow in Political Science, 2008-2012
PhD, Sociology and Anthropology 2005-2007
PhD Candidate: Carleton University, 2004 – 2008
MA Sociology: Carleton University, 2003 – 2004
MA Legal Studies/Political Science: Carleton University, 2000 – 2002
BA, Honors, Law: Law, Policy and Government: Carleton University, 1994 – 2000
I left Canada on June, 3rd, 2015, because Canada has become very inhospitable and dangerous for Americans and their Kurdish allies…etc.
Please note, all my articles and texts, in whatever form they may have been written have been published under my own name, many of which have been made public. A number of my articles, academic and research papers, theses, articles, comments, conversations may be found in this bog and on facebook.
Please note, I am still working under conditions of distorted communication. The texts I write get distorted most of the time. I have posted a number of my working papers, my master theses, doctoral comprehensive accounts on this blog. My written work is three times the volume of the papers, theses, articles, notes published on this blog.
A simple note on PhD studies: This year – 2011 seventh year has passed since my registration in the PhD program . I still do not know how many more years it is going to take to received my PhD. I studied 4 years in Carleton University, and now about three years in the wilderness – searching, ultimately I become an independent scholar/academic. Universities can be brutally oppressive and exploiting – as I have experienced.
* Advice to students interested in PhD: When you decide to pursue a PhD degree, consider the suitability of the university, the program and the faculty whom you will be working with.
I am secular Kurdish Dr./Professor Karim .A.H.A. Hasan. After over nearly twenty long years of educational journey in the fields of social, legal and political sciences of the European and North American scholarship traditions, researching and answering questions central to my disciplines of study, I, at the PhD level turned my attention to the study of Kurdish and Kurdistan society, and the Middle East.
Two most pertinent queries in the field research about study of Kurdish and Kurdistan society, and the Middle East I encountered are: practices of knowledge production in Kurdish and Middle Eastern Studies Scholarships, and the question of Kurdish state-formation and the division of Kurdistan (“Kurdistan proper” – Bruinessen: 1994). I first encountered the term “Kurdistan proper” (Bruinessen: 1994). As the byproduct of these two central research fields, I formulated the third field: Sovereignty and state formation in Middle East, which is my dissertation proposal.
* My lines of communications have been distorted for many years, which have been having negative impact on my written work and …etc. The working papers posted on this page have been written & submitted under similar conditions. I have not revised the papers, left them as samples of distorted communications. In later date, when an opportunity arrives for formal publication – I will revise the papers.
Current research, teaching skills and interests:
Philosophy and sociology of science and technology: political communication, media and politics – theory and methodology (genealogy, historiography, discourse), knowledge formations and discoveries (epistemology, ontology, discourse) – political sciences: governance, political economy, political sociology, state-formation, nation-state, nationalism, international relations/foreign relations – globalization, education, development, public policy, human rights, democratization, modernization, population studies (qualitative) – law and legal studies: cultural studies, sociology of religion, sovereignty, constitutional law, public policy, justice system, social inequality, migration, organization, risk, conflicts – geographical focus: Middle East/Near East, Europe, Americas, Australia, New Zealand.
***** Extra curricular interests, arts: poetry, short story, novel, playwright, painting, theater.
* Please see the following website for my comprehensive research and working papers: http://www.xing.com/profile/Karim_Hasan
Currently I have 8 ongoing projects:
I have three ongoing projects about the Middle East and Kurdistan:
Practices of Knowledge Production in Kurdish and Middle Eastern Studies Scholarships
Scholars are endowed with the responsibility to produce accurate, responsible and justifiable knowledge grounded in the realities of their discoveries. Scholars and academics discover realities, which are either fact, constructed, and/or invented through social, economic and political practices. My study applies epistemological-ontology of the present to Kurdish Studies and Middle Eastern Scholarships to investigate the ways in which accurate knowledge of Kurdish and Kurdistan society has been distorted through ‘unjust’ policies of ‘denial, repression, exploitation and peripheralization’.
Many of the practices designed for the governance of Kurdish society attest to injustice and distortion of accurate knowledge of Kurdish and Kurdistan society. These ‘unjust practices’ may not always be malpractices of administrators, government agencies, practitioners and decision makers about who gets what, where, when, how and why. My paper argues that academics and scholars must bear a greater burden of proof and responsibility in production, interpretation and construction of knowledge. An example that my paper analyzes for examination of ‘just and unjust’ practices of knowledge production is ‘the Kurdish Question/Case’ through analysis of an inventory of different conceptualization of the Kurdish Question in relation to the local, regional and global political rationalities in four main periods.
This inventory explains the ways in which ‘the Kurdish Question/Case’ has been described differently in different periods, and explains three main malpractices of mischaracterization of ‘the Kurdish Question/Case’ in Kurdish Studies and Middle Eastern Scholarships. My purpose is to present ‘the Kurdish Question/Case’ as accurate as possible and invite scholarly attention to rethink the ways in which ‘the Kurdish Question/Case’ has been characterized in the scholarly literature. This engagement helps better categorization, classification, characterization and historical periodization of the Kurdish Question, culture and identity in Kurdish Studies and in Middle Eastern scholarships.
The division of Kurdistan: Kurdish National Case/Question
The division of Kurdistan, a historic and a geographic region, between the semi-sovereign states of Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria after the end of First World War excluded Kurds from the right to full ‘citizenship’ and the right to a Kurdish state ‘a homeland’. These states governed Kurds and Kurdistan through most repressive techniques of political economy, apparatuses of security, and communication technology. Kurds challenged these states’ exercise of sovereign right over Kurdistan, and they deemed the borderline drawn between parts of Kurdistan unjust, against rules of natural law, natural justice, and cause of instability to Kurdish and Kurdistan society. In the present, most democratic member states of the international community favour a lasting settlement to the Kurdish Question through the foundation of Kurdish right to a sovereign ‘homeland’.
What is sovereignty? Sovereignty is a Westphalian conceptualization of ‘juridical-political-social’ autonomous administrative structure founded on non-intervention principle. Any empirical and, or, imagined engagement with sovereignty needs to be realized in the context of its domain time, space and its people, citizens. Time and space history and geography-territory are critical for the realization of sovereignty. They are indication of sovereign’s period-duration, province and allocation of the right to citizenship for its residents.
The passage of Westphalian sovereignty begun after the end of the Cold War, and practices of post-sovereignty in the Middle East emerged. Post-sovereignty is a global governance model. It is synonymous to post-colonialism, cosmopolitics and diaspora. It is an approach and a practice concurrent with the emergence of globalization, global governance of the fragile and failed states through defence, diplomacy, prevention of refugee exodus, humanitarian intervention in conflict areas, and development through aid. Has the emergence of post-sovereignty in the Middle East contributed to improvement of justice, human rights, stability and inclusive societies?
State Formation and Sovereignty in Middle East
Universal Principles of Justice: Social Scientific & Scientific Remedies to Religious Domination
Proposal, which I have submitted in June, 2011, to UNIVERSITY OF AGDER, Norway, “APPLICATION FOR POSITION AS PHD RESEARCH FELLOWSHIP IN RELIGION, ETHICS AND SOCIETY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF AGDER, FACKLTY OF HUMANITIES AND EDUCATION REF. NR. 56/11”
This proposal probes the recent recurring debate about the role of religious orders and the secular which after religiously motivated movements by political ‘Islamist extremists’, and examples like Norway and political ‘extremist Christian right’, political ‘radical- extremist Judaism’, ‘extremist religious groups’ in the last decade have led the world to the verge of the most unrest periods in the history since the Second World War. Everywhere in North America, Europe, Middle East…etc., the government officials and secular communities attempted to cool down war of words and clash between different sects and religious orders. The world was on the verge of “clash of civilizations” (Huntington, 1993).
This project calls for re-evaluation of the relationship between religious sphere and secular. We have little time, the academic community, the scholars in the relevant fields do not the time to waste, now it is the time, we must be precise, accurate, never waste time, always be on time in particular about sensitivities the different religions, ethics, moralities and cultures may stimulate tensions. A just system of governance which does not allow mismanagement and misuses of religion, ethics, morality and secular is vital for a healthy, stable, and prosperous international community, in which human communities and nations are not diverted to conflict as the result of ideologies, beliefs, and unreasonable cultural prejudices.
This project mainly focuses on Europe, North America and the Middle East, with assistance from sociology of religion theories (Weber, 1964, 1993), and universal social scientific principles and methods of justice (Habermas, 2002; Kant) to neutralize the role of religious belief systems and their culture in the private and public spheres of societies and communities in which religion is still central in the governance and management affairs of the public and private social, political and economic spheres of life. We must focus on the contemporary problems which are caused by certain aspects, and, or certain religious practices, ethics and morals in a comprehensive manner.
A comprehensive scholarly study of the problems which are elicited by certain religious, ethical, cultural conducts in social, political, economic and legal spheres of life in contemporary world has to pay attention to the ways in which religion and ethics constitute formal and informal social, political, legal, economic views and practices and vise versa. Advanced societies, communities, in liberal democratises of Europe, North America have separated and limited the participation of religion in formal affairs of the state. The Middle Eastern societies are yet to accept practicing separation and limitation of participation of religious institutions in the affairs of the state. The former societies and their communities have been secularized. They have ingrained an informal relationship between the state, the society and religious institutions.
The latter societies are dominated with religious views and practices at the formal and informal levels. Communities of different religious views and practices have been at the point of constant conflict and war – religion is yet the source of formal and informal social, political, legal and economic life. My proposed project provides evidence with the support of Weberian theoretical reading of sociology of religion and social scientific method to conclude that, religion is a belief system, it acquires validation and justification from relevant ethical and moral programs are sources of spirituality and its principal proof methods are ‘magic’, ‘miracle’ and ‘stories of creation’ (Weber).
Religion as a powerful ideological belief system with specified ethical, moral and spiritual programs is capable of formation of social cohesion, unity, justice, or can bring communities and societies of different religious beliefs and cultural practice to tension and war. Taking this explanations and definition of the status of religion and ethics in society into account, religious belief systems must be limited and governed with the general universal principles of justice, fairness, equality, inclusion (Habermas, 1996 ; Kant, 1996), principles which are supported by social scientific and natural scientific methods and rules of evidence (Weber, Hume, Bacon). The practice and application of such universal principles of justice are able to limit and neutralize religious tensions and their irrational, unfair cultural prejudices.
The process of neutralization of religious problems imposed by religious institutions and practices of secularization in Europe has a lengthy tension between the state and the church institutions, its history may be traced to King Henry VIII’s reign. In fears tensions between King Henry VIII and Archbishop of Canterbury, St. Thomas More (Reynold, 1985; Monti, 1997), who was a member of King Henry’s Court and Pope’s representative (Bernard, 2007). The King ended the power of Papacy and the Church over the British Monarchy, King’s court and the parliament, for which he was excommunicated from Papal institution. The Church no-longer had independent authority in running affairs of the state, the Church gained a new auxiliary support status to the King, King’s Court and the parliament. European states in similar manner have transformed their system of government to secular system of governance and privatized religion. This process has taken centuries to transpire and succeed.
In Middle East, separation of “Mozg” from the state has not taken effect. “Mozg” is directly involved in the administration of the state through the ministry of “Awqaf”, an Arabic word, which could be closely be given a contextual English translation “ministry of religion”. The direct interference of “Awqaf” in social, political, economic and legal life of the Muslim Middle Eastern societies has significant impact on the formal and informal spheres of life. Secularization of the state and privatization of religion has not transpired after 1400 years of the emergence of Islam. Islam has been the governing religion of the Middle East for the past 1400 years (Hodgson, 1977).
In this time period, those Middle Eastern societies have not successfully produced secularizing social, political, economic, and legal system which can be accepted for the governance their societies. ‘Time’ is not indicator, in this context, time has been just there and travelled through the living and non-living objects, 1400 year of time has passed, no evidence of secularization process can be found. It is the Middle Eastern ‘actor’, ‘subject’ who lacks the capacity and the willingness to decide and to commence practicing change. The Middle Eastern ‘actor’, ‘subject’ lacks the capacity and the willingness to instil secularization process.
The Middle East ‘actor’, ‘subject’, in this context, has spent over a millennium without any success in creating the conditions for secularist programs which can privatize religion and its associated irrational non-scientific cultural and ethical prejudicial practices. In particular, Iran is theocratic system it has been a problem, which has been having recurring and remerging impact for religious domination over the state, the public and private life of people of Iran and the Middle East. Turkey is still provoking and working to elaborate Ottoman imperial desire of expansion, Turkish society is deeply Muslim, they consider non-Muslim as the other in very exclusionary manner. The religious, cultural and ethical wars which are encouraged by certain religious belief systems are mainly by-product competition for natural and human resources, and the desire for power and control.
The Middle East needs a libertarian change which has to focus on programs of universal justice and fair system of governance that does not enforce any religion on the public and private life – a program which permits the democratic and libertarian means of peaceful development and progress in international and domestic spheres. In the recent popular movements for change, it is clear that the people of Middle East want comprehensive reassessment approach to their ways of living, a process which can take place as systemic change and progress. If timely steps for secularization and modernization are delayed possibility of “re-religionization” will increase in Middle East.
In modern social, political and economic system, ideologies and religious belief system do not directly run social, political, legal, and economic life of the administration and governance with respect for their cultural activities which do not impose irrational prejudices against others. Ideologies are categories of ‘beliefs’. Modern systems of governance, administration and management are no-longer built and function on ‘beliefs and ideologies’. “Social-sciences” are accurate methods which do relay on scientific foundations, from natural and physical sciences, empirical studies, evidence, proof…etc. Thus, to rebuild governing religion, ethics and morality on grounds of social, political, economic, legal sciences is not to deprive religion, ethics and morality of practicing but it is to balance religious and ethical life with universal principles of justice which are founded and supported with rules of evidence in scientific methods.
It is vital that the academic, scholarly and educational conversations and research reopen – reconstitute the relationship between religion, ethics, morality and the secular in positive manner which may end the current tensions we have been facing in the system and our everyday life in the last few decades as the result of which cultural competitions and competitions for natural and human resources have sharpened sigifincatly. Secular education with universal ethics and moral teachings must be part of curriculum vita at the high school and universities’ introductory years.
Private and public sphere need balanced education which allows students, and non-students to make rational, just, and fair choices in choosing any specified religion. Those who have a specific religion ‘ought not’ to impose their religion, they ‘ought not’ to degrade religion of others, religions which are not compatible with their religion are belief systems similar to their religion. The main reasons for such strong focus on ‘ought not’ is the fact that according to social sciences and natural sciences religion is a belief system, the truth and validity of any belief systems can not be verified by empirical social scientific and natural sciences. Henceforth, imposition of any belief system on people with methods other than ‘free will’ acquisition, is unjust, illegal and against the principles of universal legal justice.
Politics and Legality of Naming: Discrimination and Exclusion
25, February, 2012
This is a brief research result, 22 years of research observation. 100% accurate. A meticulously referenced analytical, descriptive and prescriptive article with further examples and attention to knowledge of details will be published in a later date.
Full name: Abdulkarim Hasan Abdullah: https://karimhasan.wordpress.com/about/
Commonly known as: Karim Hasan
PhD candidate, Sociology (2004 – 2008, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario)
Master of Arts, Sociology (2004, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario)
Master of Arts, Legal Studies/Political Science (2002, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario)
Bachelor of Arts with Honours, Law: Policy and Government (2000, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario).
The ways in which names and naming of individuals are viewed and interacted with in Canada in the formal and informal spheres of life need review, adjustment, sanctions and prohibition. According to a university of British Columbia research (2009, Oreopoulos) people who have English names, and I add more familiar names, have better chance in getting interviews and getting hired for the same ‘job – work, position’ than people who have non-English names with more extensive work experience and higher education. What is a “name”? What is “nominalism”? Are all of us “nominalists”? What are possible remedies for problems, injustices caused by unreasonable, prejudicial practices of “valid nominalism” and “invalid nominalism”? What are the consequences of “false nominalism” and “invalid nominalism”?
This research paper mainly focuses on the scope and the scale of “nominalism” and it’s validly in relations to political rationality and legality of naming: discrimination and exclusion. It provides analysis of “nominalism” in practice about social, political and economic consequences of “invalid nominalism”, and “false nominalism”. It proposes two remedies, first, Charter legal justice remedy; second “economic rationalism” remedy to invalid irrational nominal fallacies. ‘What is in a name’ – a name makes reference to what, which burdens employers to make such discriminatory and exclusionary decisions against certain job applicants with certain names? Who decides? How, why, when such discriminatory and exclusionary decisions are made about a person, an entity on the grounds of their name? What is work – occupation?
How and why ‘work – occupation’ is fundamental activity – component of being human? Is the only purpose of work accumulation of capital and material goods? ‘Work’ is fundamental to the successful fulfillment of human life for purpose of monetary and financial gains, for the purpose of production, creativity, and continuation of orderly productive life. According to Habermas (1972) “Work” is fundamentally linked to “language and power” that are together constituent parts of “transcendental necessity of self-preservation”, which is one of the five theses of theory and practices of “knowledge constitutive” interests and needs of human beings ‘will to action’.
The first thesis is that “The achievement of the transcendental subjects has their basis in the natural history of human species” (Habermas, 1972:312). Second, he explains this thesis imposes that “reason is an organ of adaptation for men just as claws and teeth are for animals” (Habermas 1972: 312). In this perspective, reason is an organic-equipment and a resource that has rescued ‘men’ from the hardships and threats of “state of nature”. In addition, reason has enabled ‘men’ to organize social and cultural systems of ‘self-preservation’.
The sophistication of the human faculty of reason is liked to the idea of human natural evolution and transcendence from “the state of nature” to “rational human”. ‘Knowledge-constitutive’ interest comprise activities of the human cognitive processes which are related to the intention of planning ‘just social systems’, “for it is subject to the criterion of what a society intends as the good life” (Habermas, 1972: 313). The third thesis explicates that “knowledge equally serves as an instrument and transcends self-preservation” (Habermas, 1972: 313).
Hence, transcendental necessity of ‘self-preservation’ gives rise to the need for three categories of knowledge: first, information, practical knowledge; interpretation, hermeneutics; and free consciousness, hypostatised power. “Work knowledge” is technical-informational, practical knowledge is interpretive-hermeneutic, and power knowledge is active – authoritative, which in certain instances are ‘egoistic’. “Work” operates on principles of technical knowledge, prediction, precision, skills, and experience of theoretical and practical knowledge, which ensures the highest performance of instrumental causal explanation based on positivistic, scientific, empirical, and analytical methods.
Then, I without a doubt claim that “nominal”, “nominalist” practices and principles are not required criterion for competent, successful, productive workforce. Henceforth, prejudicial judgements and decisions on grounds of “names and nominals” are harmful to principles of justice and ‘economic rationalism’, similar to racism, ethnocentrism, sexism, which impose exclusionary measures leading to similar problems caused by racism, sexism, ethno-religious exclusions…etc.
This paper is divided into four sections. Section one provides discussion, explanation, analysis of “dynamic nominalism” (Hacking, 2002), which is a very important, most competent, well-known “valid theory of nominalism”, that makes sense of the system of knowledge production, knowledge articulation, knowledge organization. It makes sense of the world around us, puts the human societies in knowledgeable intelligible perspective, a dynamic living system which we constitute and reconstitute constantly. Are we all “nominalists”? Section two focuses on “nominalism”, in particular “nominalism” in everyday life, as it constitutes and reconstitutes practices, the uses and application of practical reason, a sphere in which prejudicial practices are more likely to occur. Section three provides an analysis and discussion of social, political and economic consequences of “invalid nominalist” fallacies.
The last section provides a brief Charter legal remedy, and “economic rationalist” solution, which do make a valid case for inclusion of prohibition against unfair, unreasonable discriminatory judgements on grounds of a person’s and an entity’s name in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and Canadian Bill of Rights. The “economic rationalist” remedy relies on the logical cost-benefit analysis and technical expertise which derives its validity from cost and demand in the market workforce that operates on principles of skillful, experienced, capable expert workers who have advanced knowledge, whose main task are action on principles of maximizing surplus and profit on grounds of valid legal and fair economic activities.
Only, when reasonably, demonstrably justified and prescribed in the limitations set out in law, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, precedent, judicial interpretations, certain names may be excluded in legal admissibility. For example, we all agree that no person or entity would be allowed to carry a name, or label him or her self “terror” and “terrorism” legally. Any person or entity that carries the title, name of “terror” and “terrorism” do have legal bearing, and legally-criminally liable, their liabilities are defined and judged in the courts of law by judicial application and interpretation of statutory law and precedent. Other than limitations on such words, names and expressions which invoke and provoke violence, any limitations that are out-casting, stigmatizing of names and labels must be illegal and prohibited in the interests of ‘principles of justice’ and ‘economic rationalism’.
2. Nominalism: Its Scope and Scale of Validity
In this section, a discussion and an analysis of two main approaches of “nominalism” (Hacking, 2002) will be provided. Systemic practical “nominalism” contains valid and invalid components. Analyzing the scope and scale of “nominalism”, and their validity are practices that require definitional frameworks that do explain functional capacity of “nominalism” which allow us preparing provisions of conclusive test about validity of “nominalism” as a method and an approach for organizing, categorizing, classifying the world of things and human societies.
What is “nominalism”? Hacking (2002) does characterize his own work as “dynamic nominalism”, the most sophisticated form of nominalism, which reproduces, reconstitutes and develops theoretical and practical methods for understanding the objects in the universe and the world of human activities in a dynamic manner that practices dialects of reason and renewal. “Nominalism” is a branch of philosophical investigation that has emerged in the medieval period, in the work of Ockham (1957), which was a particular critical interpretation of Aristotle’s deterministic, essentialist philosophy and harmonious ordered world (Gosselin, 1990: 1). The challenge for Ockham was to question the order and the nature of things, taking epistemological approach based on “the principle of primacy of the individual; [and claiming that] reality consists of individual substances that can be directly known by intuition and without mediation of nature or essences” (Gosselin, 1990: 2).
This particular model of epistemology opens a different possibility for making “things” and “objects” knowable. On the one hand, “dynamic nominalism” is in sharp contrast and disagreement with essentialism and determinism which are characteristics of Aristotelian teleologies; it opposes realism for two reasons. First, it questions the universal concepts and names; second, it argues that generalized concepts and names cannot be made intelligible. In neither example, in fixed general principles, premise of meanings of names and nominals do not reflect the reality, characteristics, property and quality of their meanings.
Name and naming are organization, recognition and identification method – practice, the meaning which we have attached to certain names are simply of our own making. They do not express and do not make reference to the actual, to the real properties, and characteristics of names in practice. For example, we, the human society, the English nation, do not know, how and why, have decided to name “stone, stone”. Similarly the equivalent of “stone” in all other languages and cultures has been named at some point in time for which no logical, no rational explanation is available about why and how they have decided to name “stone”, for example, in Kurdish, “bard”.
Has there ever been a decision making process of naming a natural object like “stone”? No. Language is a dynamic and living symbolic means of communication. The objects, activities, living and non-living beings, which have emerged and have become known to us in more recent times, have been named, classified, categorized either among the world of non-living or living beings, in living system of human active social, political and economic processes which constitute societies as they emerge and re-emerge. Although, we have living memory and written knowledge of the recent objects, things, human activities which we have named, generally we have better explanations for which why and how we arrived at certain conclusion of naming them certain names; however, not all processes were rational and fair, not all names may be explained, in abstract terms those names in the former are as meaningless as those in the latter categories.
It is the cultural, historical, experiential, memory texts and contexts which provide meaning of “good”, “bad” “likeable”, or “unlikable names”. Hence, we must be careful with prejudicial practices, exclusionary measures which particular cultures, histories, experiences and memories do impose; they must be assessed against principles of justice and fairness. Thus, evaluating assessing names, nominals and practices of “nominalism” are more complicated than many people assume to be, as Gosselin argues “it is a very common simplification to identify nominalism with a theory that rejects universals…What is forgotten is the premise from which this follows, namely the principle of the epistemological primacy of the particular”.
Hacking acknowledges that Kuhn did advance nominalism whose work focused on scientific revolution in relations to the ways in which, we make up the natural world. He argues that “In natural science, our investigation of categories does not ‘really’ change the way the world works…But in social phenomena we may generate kinds of people and kinds of actions as we devise new classifications and categories (Hacking, 2002:40). By this point, he claims that we make people in a clearer sense than we make the natural world. The space of possibilities of making up people lies in the question of ‘nominalism’ and history of “the object of social sciences – people and groups – are constituted by historical process, while the objects of that natural sciences, particular experimental apparatus, are created in time, but in some sense, they are not constituted historically” (Hacking, 2002: 40).
In the construction of “dynamic nominalism”, Hacking uses Bachelard’s epistemology thresholds, which have been deployed by Foucault in archaeological and genealogical works. Bachelard’s epistemological thresholds suspend the continuous accumulation of knowledge, cut the unconditional structure of truths, and interrupt the transcendental developments of knowledge. According to Kusch, “Bachelard’s epistemology emphasized revolutions, breaks and discontinues in the history of natural sciences (Kusch, 1991: 27). Foucault applied Bachelard’s epistemological thresholds to social sciences, so does Hacking who points out that “I would say that my own position is strikingly similar to Gaston Bachelard (1953) ‘applied rationalism and technical materialism’ “ (Hacking, 2002: 44).
Hacking’s “dynamic nominalism” is inspired by Foucault’s genealogical method of inquiry and Bachelard’s approach to rationalist materialism. In principle and in practice, it rejects a static and dogmatic approach to knowledge on the one hand, and it relies on the power of discourse and language as the essential component of knowledge production, making up people and the natural world. Hackings’ theory of “dynamic nominalism” is most valid – credible approach of nominalism.
For understanding “dynamic nominalism”, which operates on the three principle axes of “historical ontology of ourselves” (Foucault, 2004: 110), “First, a historical ontology of ourselves in relation to truth through which we constitute ourselves as subjects of knowledge; second, as historical ontology of ourselves in relation to a field of power through which we constitute ourselves as subject acting on others; third, a historical ontology in relation to ethnics through which we constitute ourselves as moral agents”. Historical ontology is basic foundation of “dynamic nominalism”, it is fully developed social-scientific theory.
2.1. Nominalism in Formal Knowledge System
Theories and practices of “naming” and “nominalization” are ingrained in the systems of knowledge, epistemology and ontology practices of making sense of the world of things and human societies, which are valid purposive, educational organizing, categorizing and classifying methods – approach. Its particularity and context dependency to the language, culture, society, time, space and place are constituent parts which need to be understood and studied for making sense of the society they make reference to, the body of knowledge for which they are constructed to express, the ‘world of things’ which they define, describe analysis, and explain.
Pure rational practices of “nominalism” are organizational, categorizing value-laden approach. It is purely for the purpose of understanding; howver, the worldview which constructs the names and their interpretations are subject of question and scrutiny. It is located within the system, which (Habermas, 1996) has been critical for being rigid, highly rational, highly formal that leaves no-space for informal everyday sphere of life to intervene in decision making process. Hacking, “historical ontology” (2002) provides an “objective”, valid meaningful, justifiable remedy to the gap between the formal and informal sphere of decision making process in “valid nominalism”.
The valid approach is concerned with making sense of the world of things and human societies, as a rational method of categorizing, classifying, making the world knowable and understandable in which “names”, and “naming” are for the purpose of recognition and ordering things and human societies (Foucault, 1970), value laden knowledge, system which is an organizational method. While societies are hierarchically organized into class, religions…etc. such hierarchies are questionable and constantly get assessed and tested for efficiently, justice, quality, progress, development…etc.
Thus, while formal systemic rational theories and practices of nominalism are necessary purposive methods of organizing our knowledge of human societies and world of things. Their validity depends on the knowledge system, language, culture, universality and particularity of the relevant epistemology and ontology. They are principle knowledge base that have contributed to the construction of system of knowledge constructed for making sense of particular society and societies, and world of things, for which they are designed to express, to write, to analyze, to define, to explain…etc (Hacking 2002, 1999).
If the first validity test, which is basic epistemological ontology (Hacking 2002) test of rationality and validity successfully has been passed, a theory and a practice of nominalism must be ‘tested for possible violations of principles of justice’. Most theories and practices of nominalism fail the test of principle of justice, meaning-reality accuracy, which may lead to systemic malfunctions, injustice, corruption, ethno-religious discrimination, racism, Constitution Act, Schedule B. Charter (1982).
Second, while practical reason in everyday life is a rich source of knowledge production and knowledge constitution. It is mainly in the practical reason and its associated spheres of everyday life, which practices and approaches of nominalism generate logical fallacies caused by cultural prejudices of short-term personal non-rational interests. The possible incompetent method is trial and error methods that allow prejudicial unjust practices enter the formal rational system, which do lead to corrupting the system and hurting-harming principles and practices of justice, reducing production of economic activity, generating further segregation and polarizations, damaging boarder-macro solidarity and cohesion in social, political and economic life.
2.2. Nominalism in Practice / Practical Reason and Nominalism
As pointed out, the second approach in nominalism is located within the “practical reason” (Habermas, 1972), which is subjective value burdened, part of a system of practices of everyday life (Habermas, 1972), it is cultural, relative, related to time, space, ethnicity, religion…etc. Within this approach of “naming” and “nominalism”(Hacking, 2002), there is a valid workable approach, which is based and derives its validity from logical reasoning system of “pure objective reason” with consideration for practical matters of law, justice, inclusion, rights, freedoms…etc.
It does not suppress the human component and the possibilities of “ought and ought not based on principles of justice”, it distinguishes “good” from “bad”, “constructive” from “destructive”, “positive” from “negative”, the subjective unprejudiced cultural practices of choice makings in everyday life.
Within the “practical reason”, an invalid prejudicial subjective practice of “naming” and “nominalism” (Hacking, 2002), which makes exclusionary choices on the bases of personal preference, group, ethnic, and religious preference…etc. introduces harmful practices to the system of pure objective reason and practical substantive reason of everyday life which are fundamental to the sustaining of continued social, political, legal and economic system built on principles of “reason and justice” that have provided for “minimal cohesion” and relations between states, nations, cultures, ethno-religious groups in different part of this world, in different relevant times and at various spaces of action and interaction where dialogue and negotiations for the management and governance of the societies and natural world take place.
At the macro level, that “minimal cohesion” has held the system of nations, the international system, working together in continued negotiation and dialogue mainly in close cooperation with the valid system of pure reason and valid practical reason that have made sense of relations of working, relations of shared understandings, and shared interest possible. The valid systems of pure and practical reason in formal and everyday life are the superior technical competencies which human beings possess, they are the human capacity to master, to govern and to mange their own affairs justifiably, ethically, universally, in order to regulate and to end invalid prejudicial, unreasonable, unjust exclusionary cultural approaches within the system and within practical reason of everyday life.
The superiority and admissibility of the universal epistemological ontology system of production, governance, practices of knowledge in the formal-systemic and in informal-practical spheres are fundamental for sustaining and increasing understanding and practicing justice in systems of “naming” and “nominalism” which make the micro component of the system intelligible, just, fair inclusive, democratic, pluralistic. While, practical complications in trial and error methods, have been useful for the advancement of the system of justice; as pointed out in practical sphere unsolvable, nonnegotiable complications that are not supported in the system, have been the main reasons for emergence of conflict, war, social, political and economic divisions within certain societies and internationally between nation-states.
The invalid component has been influenced – has been dominated by prejudices of non-rational cultural, non-standard choices of preference which accepts “certain names” and devalues “rejects certain names” without any correlation between the names and properties of the names, without evidence and reference to the meaning of the names in abstract and their characteristics in practice. Thus, choice makings on grounds of names and nominalism do violate universal principles of justice, if we apply “principles of justice” and “economic rationalism”, they do not have any logical correlations to social, to political, to economic well-being and for advancement of the person who has made the choice, nor for the person who has been chosen for his or her name, neither do contribute to the society. In fact, in certain cases, prejudicial choice makings about “accepting certain names” or “rejecting certain names” do harm the person who made the choice and the society for which the choice has been made.
Thus, the development and accumulation of valid knowledge about just practicable universal and particulars in “nominal world of things and human societies” must be built on principles of justice and fairness. Prejudicial judgements and decision on grounds of “names and nominal” are similar to racism, ethnocentrism, sexism…etc.., which must be regulated and governed by conscious legal enforcements and prohibitions, prescribed in Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
3. Social, Political and Economic Consequences of Invalid Nominalist Fallacies
The social, political and economic consequences of invalid nominalist fallacies do create systemic inefficacies and malfunctions, which lead to the reduction of economic production, unhealthy social system in the formal and informal spheres, leads to undemocratic, irresponsible, unrepresentative political system of governance and management. Social, political and economic consequences of invalid nominalist fallacies are similar to the consequences of racism, ethnocentrism, sexism…etc.
It is very important to ask and to answer two main categories of relevant questions in most accurate manner. The first category is questioning and analyzing “names” and nominalism. Where, why, how, when, what is a name? The second category is what, where, when, how, why is “work” and “occupation” necessary? While we recognize the world around us through naming and names, certain names do make reference to certain ethnicities, religions, regions, qualities, characteristics and attributes; nonetheless, names do not make reference and do not respond to their meanings in practice in all cases. Thus, names do make false reference in certain instances.
The second categories of questions are the queries which aid us to understand the ways in which ‘work’ is fundamental the successful fulfillment of human life for purpose of monetary and financial gains, for the purpose of creativity. It is through ‘work’ and our professions individual and human societies define, communicate, express themselves and earn means their livelihood. Without the right and ability to work, human species lose their definition as intelligent, creative, rational beings.
Hence, since we – human beings – define ourselves through our work and profession, depriving human beings of practicing their profession, discriminating against them and excluding them from the right to work on ground of their name, is a decision, which is in violation of basic principles which us defines human beings, in violation of the legal rights and freedoms which are guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and in violation of other relevant laws and legal codes which prohibit unjust, irrational discrimination of individuals and groups to live freely in accordance with the principles of rights and, responsibilities set out in the Constitution, the Charter, Bill of Rights and ethics of code conduct.
3.1. Social Consequences
Social consequences of invalid nominalism create unjust segregation, false labeling, social out-casting stigmatization, illegal discrimination, racism, damage to social cohesion and distortion to social solidarity at macro level and micro levels which constitute patriotism, sense of belonging, sense of community and cultural cohesion. Social agoninzation of certain names, which belong to certain ethno-religious cultures are practices of out-casting and exclusion that ultimately lead to withdrawal of the person(s) and their isolation from public life. In this subsection, I provide my own personal experience with the ways in which prejudices, unfair discriminatory and unjust practices against my name have contributed to my exclusion from social, political and economic life in Canada – as a Canadian citizen, I have lived in Canada for almost 22 years.
The question which asks “what is your name?” is expressed in a number of tones with a number of indented meanings, in a number of contexts. I am sure it rings in the ear of everyone who may recall a number of occasions and contexts in the past in which he or she has been asked “what is your name?” If the question is asked from a person or an entity of position of power, whether an employer, a government officer, a transportation agency, a new neighbour, a new co-worker, asked you in your own home city, your region, your own country of citizenship, from a person or an entity of the same ethno-religious culture, from an interviewer who you think will hire you to work…etc., do make a difference, each situation and condition which gives rise to the question is context dependent and situation specific.
A response to the question “what is your name?” may trigger the following reaction. My name is “Abdulkarim” . Response to the answer, oh, you have longest name which does not fit in our company form or University form. Where are you from? Are you an Arab? No, I am not an Arab; I am Kurdish. After explanations, the questioner: May I call you Abdul? No, because Abdulkarim is composed of a suffix and the actual name, the suffix is “Abdul” and the actual name is “Karim”, you may not call me by the suffix of my name, you may call me by the name, which is “Karim”.
What about your last name? My last name is a two name, last name? Questioner: in Canada the last name is only one name, you may have one of the two as middle name. On my landed documents, my full first and last names have been recorded as follows, which I have pointed out to you. Questioner: you can change and write your name any way you want. No, I want to keep my name as it is. Thereafter problems begun, not only in everyday life, in formal system of administration, and record keeping, the system has been biased and prejudicial.
As the result that I wanted to keep my name the way as it is, and I did, my name was twisted around, interchangeably, my first name used as middle name, a portion of my last name as my first name, middle name as last name, commonly known name as my formal name…etc. The same arduous journey continued, when I rented a shared accommodation in August 1990, one bedroom in a two bedroom apartment. An elderly senior citizen man, who was willingly decidedly that he, could not call me by my full first name; instead he choice to he called me by my father’s name “Hasan”, at times he called me “Karim”, or the last part of my last name, “Abdullah”. On my high school diploma from Toronto, Ontario, my name has been changed around; last part of my last name as first name of my “two name last name”…etc.
On a number of occasions when immigration officials called to check on my progress, he at his own discretion replaced and misplaced my first with my last names, and interpreted my respectful attitude and behavior that I did not want to learn and hear from him the slung English words, like “f. words”, or using I expression like “crazy”, “through you off the balcony up side down”…etc., he told me often, which did not have positive impact on my integration in Canadian culture. After 2.5 year exploiting me enough as new immigrants do often get exploited, he thought that I was not “respecting his furniture enough”, he asked me to vacate his bedroom apartment in spring 1993.
I am not sure what happened, I am not sure what he did, ever since I left his one bedroom apt., in spring 1993, I have not been able to rest in Canada. While I was making solid quality progressive in learning English, Canadian culture, getting through education at high school and college level: 1990 – 1994. The burden of my name and cultural prejudices certain people and offices associated with it in Canada, has been burdening, distorting, delaying proper assessment of my skills, expertise, characteristics for proper placement, which has been continuously disturbing me, my education, and my career. For certain, many others do have similar difficult experiences, which have been imposed on them due their name…etc., legal remedies must be provided.
Ultimately, I ended up with having commonly known name “Karim Hasan”, “Karim” as first name, and “Hasan” as last name, which people in university and workplace knew me by, my formal legal first and last names which the majority of my peers did not know, even a number of administrative government offices kept mistaken records of my legal name. Social Insurance kept “Abdullah”, after a couple of weeks of my arrival in August 1990; immigration officials did make that mistake, as my last name. Toronto Citizenship office did the same. Both of the mistakes by Ministry of Public Works and Human Resources and Immigration and Citizenship do warrant action for damages. Passport office, OHIP and Ministry of Transportation kept “Hasan Abdullah” as my last name, which is my original real last name.
In similar way, those companies, universities…etc. who were fine and accepting my full first name “Abdulkarim”, they kept “Abdulkarim” on record, those who thought for whatever reason they could not accept “Abdulkarim”, they either wrote my first name as “Karim”, or “Abdul”, recently the Ontario works write my first name as “Abdul (space) Karim”. I have asked many people whom I know that they arrived in Canada legally around the same time I did, they have experienced the same problems with name distortions and record distortion, which have been having unbearable negative consequences for their social-networking, for the purpose of settlement, finding employment, socialization, contribution to the society and communities in which they reside.
Name distortion, giving technical reasons, i.e. “not enough space is available” for distorting names, is prejudicial decisions on ground of names are techniques and means of distortion. As a scholar termed it, it is a technique to kill a person socially, political and economically, not physically ending the life of the person, but distorting his or her identity, cutting him or her to pieces of certain parts, regulating him or her, limiting him or her, localizing him or her…etc. a process which slowly and gradually end the social, political and economic present of a person in life and in the world.
As the consequence of false nominalist prejudices, certain people were not prepared to accept my full legal name “Abdulkarim”, an Arabic, which has a good meaning, “Abdul” means “servant”, “Karim” means “generous”, which is one of the names of God of Islam, combined, “Abdulkarim” means “servant of God”, but they accepted “Karim”, which is the first name in which my Master of Arts Legal Studies/Political Science Thesis has been written. No proper guidance, no sincere help were available. People may assume that “Abdulkarim” is a name of a religious person; in fact, I do not practice any religion. I am a secular person, with respect for religion, and have been “secular” since my adolescence age. It is inconceivable for an educated rational person or entity to prejudge a person’s level of education, whether he or she is secular or religious on the basis of the person’s name…etc., a practice which is common among the prejudicial, common lay people and untrained nominalist officials.
3.2. Political Consequence
Political consequences of invalid nominalism leads to lack of democracy, lack of accountability, lack of the rule of law, exclusion from participation in governance and management in political office, exclusion from equal full participation and political rights as citizens. False nominalism in politics opens the way for corrupt favoritism and power of the few who are related in culture with known familiar favoring certain names as politicians, political party names, and political platform names whereas those names do not reflect quality and the meaning of names of choice in practice. Approximately, 2500 years ago, the Greek philosopher argued that “man is a political animal” (Aristotle, 1992). Depriving citizens from participation and contribution to politics on grounds of their name does undermine the very essence that makes us human, undermines democratic principles which our society is founded, undermines equality rights…etc.
The consequence of false nominalism on politics is enormous. Political democratic public sphere is the space where citizens and community members take an active participation in the will-formation of the community, the regions in which they live, and the nation. Now, in the period in which, globalization has become an inevitable process of bringing nations together, successful democratic, responsible representative politics depends on cohesively formulated international public space where politics and political action do take place, where political actors decide on the current affairs and future of the locals, regions, and states they represent.
Who are those political actors? What are the criteria – qualifications to participate in politics as ordinary citizens, as administrators, as representatives, as presidents, as prime ministers? Do the rights and responsibilities of being a political actor and having the qualification to participate in politics include “nominal practices” and “having certain names” or his or her name is being of certain genealogical nominal decent as prerequisite?
While the practical materiality of false cultural prejudices have required certain non-rational, non-objective, certain limitations, certain false discriminatory and exclusionary practices against “certain names and nominals”, which are considered “false practices in nominalism”; prejudicial and unjust discriminatory exclusions on grounds of a person’s and entities’ name may face legal prohibition and consequences for the decisions makers future, interest…etc. Rational, responsible, accountable political actors do act on principles of just methods of governance as prescribed and defined the Charter of Rights and Freedom and relevant laws, legal ethics.
Will a Martin, a Glen, a Darryl, a Don, a Peter, a Rose, Hunt…etc. do a better job in politics, representation, administration, and executive responsibility, than Middle Eastern, East European, Asian, Chinese names or vise versa? In a very plain and simple language, a person’s and an entity’s name is not criterion of success. Thus, those who make their decision on the basis of a person’s name, they make decisions on the grounds of false method and false approach in nominalism.
The consequences of practices of “false nominalism” are devastating, which do lead to false categorization, false classification, of certain names and individuals, initially it will receive objections and criticisms, which may be confronted with in formal way. If “false nominalism” is accepted and systematized, which to a degree has been, the real problem of false categorizations do begin to materialize and lent to the emergence of corrupt, inefficient, irresponsible, wasteful the social, political and economic life in the formal and everyday spheres of life.
Thus, if “false nominalism” becomes predominant method, the society in formal and informal sphere, the system of governance and management will operate on false standards, false premises; thereby, unfairness, injustice, draconian measures against certain names emerge, rights and freedoms will vanish. For those who have read Nineteen Eighty Four novel by George Orwell, and for those who have lived under undemocratic regimes – dictatorial regimes do really understand the consequences of false nominalization, false stigmatizations, false prohibitions, false categorizations, false classifications…etc.
3.4. Economic Consequences
Economic consequences of invalid nominalism leads to appointing incapable, less experienced, less educated, less skilled expertise and work force, whom will reduce production, negatively influence quality of production, consume more than they produce…etc. For example, if a preferred name receives acceptance and gets hired for a position because of his or her name, or because he is she has a familiar a name, which is of certain ethno-religious cultural background acceptable to the hiring company, institution, organization, but the person is not skilled enough for, experienced enough for, educated enough for the position, needs more training for the position; the hiring practice will waste companies’ resources and it will be unfair for those jobseekers who are well skilled and experienced.
A person – a candidate with more higher qualification, more skills, more experience, more education than the candidate for hiring receives a rejection response because of his or her ethno-religious name related to a specific cultural genealogy regardless of the fact that the person’s charter, work skills, world view, practices have any correlations with the historical, cultural and ethno-religious identity in which his or her name has emerged and identity belonging to, and the meaning of the name does not always make reference to the character and quality of the person.
For example, if we were to list following names, John, Smith, Michael, Chris, Merry, Jerry, Ann…etc., in the list of candidates with names Karim, Abdulkarim, Dung, Brandski…etc., applying for lectureship position, for management position, for political public office…etc. who is most likely to receive first consideration and ultimately get hired, although Abdulkarim, Dung, Brandski do have more education skilled for the jobs they have applied? Second, who among those candidates are more likely to receive maximum wage and benefits offered for the job? While none of the candidates in the second group do practice and associate with the ethno-religious culture which their name is related to, they get assessed, prejudged and ultimately screened in or out on the grounds of their name.
With certain possible exceptions, in Canadian case and context, name discrimination is unjust practices, according to University of British Columbia field research, (2009, Oreopoulos), the most
advanced category of names, “English named applicants with Canadian Education and experience were more than three times high compared to resumes with Chinese, Indian…etc. names with foreign educations experience (5 percent versus 16 percent), but were no different compared to foreign applicants from Britain…etc. Canadian applicants that differed only by name had substantially different callback rates. Those with English sounding names received interview requests 40 percent more often than applicants with Chinese, Indian…etc. names (16 percent versus 11 percent). Overall, the results suggest considerable employer discrimination against applicant with ethnic names or with experience from foreign firms” (2009, Oreopoulos).
Rather than letting rational market economy analysis and worker skills competency decided on the success or failure of candidate, nominal and nominalism have been a decisive factor in the success or failure of the applicants. It is true that while recent trends in management have focused on cultural cohesion components and similarity of interest as important criterion to make the workers in specific companies happier more socialized culturally for the purpose of higher production, more cohesive workforce and healthier workforce; it is in informal everyday sphere of life where prejudices, discrimination, uncalculated groupings and categorization emerge, care is required in introducing extra-circular activities to company activities.
Market is rational which operates on principles (work force + means of production + product + demand = profit and surplus). Introducing locality and specific culture of ethno-religious groups to company’s code of conduct and cultural association do negatively effect the universality, international scope and scale of the target market, which particular companies intend to achieve, thereby reduces companies’ power and their products to locality, singularity, isolation, which may further draw them to specific unwritten and non-rational code of conduct very modern rational terms.
While we are all in need of socio-cultural associations, which are practices that may lead to cohesion and sense of belonging, the rational component – base may not be subjected to prejudicial decisions on grounds of a person or an entity’s name. In the interest of the companies and justice, competency, capacity, skill, experience, contribution, and character must be considered as the main criterion in decisions making about the person’s and entities’ success or failure. In the interest of justice and “rational economy” prejudices and discriminations on grounds of a person, an entities’ name and nominalist decisions must be regulated and prohibited by providing legal remedies to invalid nominalism. The Charter of Rights and Freedom, Constitution Act of Canada, and Bill of Rights do have provisions which may admit such prohibition.
4. Legal Remedies to Invalid Nominalist Fallacies
A constitutional prohibition of discrimination on grounds of a person’s name must included in Charter of Rights and Freedoms, SS. 7, 15, 11, prohibiting restriction and discrimination of an a person’s (citizen) social, political, economic, legal rights and freedoms on grounds of a person’s – individual’s name, whether the name is English, French, of European, Asian, ethno, or religious decent, or of any ethnic connotations; discrimination on grounds of name must be illegal.
Thus, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has to be amended for inclusion of a new prohibition, and of equality rights, in section 7, and 11,legal rights, section 15, must to prohibit discrimination on grounds of a person’s, entities’ “name”, and to guarantee equal rights and equality of rights to all Canadian, that no-Canadian would be discriminated on grounds of having ethnic names, or names which have religious connotation in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice prescribed and guaranteed in the charter.
Second, economic rationalist, remedy relies on specific expertise, skills, capacity and competencies of the individual and the entity to perform certain duties successfully in job market. Names and nominals are categories of cultural, historical…etc., they are not decisive factors of competency and skill, names and nominals are not indicators of success or failure of employees, workers in their profession. Decisive measurements and indicators are skills, expertise, competencies of the workers in their profession to maximize surplus and profit in legal, justifiable manner.
In abstract principle, the “good names” and “bad names” are all meaningless neither can be intelligible in accordance with their properties and characteristics. It is their cultural, historical, experiential, memory texts and contexts that create meanings of “good”, “bad” “likeable” or “unlikable” “familiar names”, or “unfamiliar names”, “legal” or “illegal names”. Thus, culture, history, experience and memory must be tested for validity. Hence, we must be careful with prejudicial practices, exclusionary measures which particular cultures, histories, experiences and memories do impose; they must be assessed and screened in accordance with principles of justice and fairness prescribed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian Bill of Rights, work ethics, and boarder moral principles.
Let us make promise and practice that we do not prejudge on the grounds of a person’s and an entity’s name. Let us practice principles of justice as prescribes in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Canadian Bill of Rights in the formal and informal spheres of life. Let us work to correct the injustices which certain offices, officials, individuals, entities practice. Research results as shown in the University of British Columbia (2009, Oreopoulos) and other sources, I have quoted and my own experience which I recounted and wrote in this paper, have provided sufficient evidence about discrimination, unjust exclusionary measures against certain names and nominals. We must work to realize just society in practice and application.
In paragraph three and onwards, I have described and explained my own experience when I first landed in Canada legally. In immigration reception house when immigration officials were preparing my social insurance card, OHIP, and other residency documentations in 1990, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Aristotle (1994) The Politics, Penguin Books, New York.
Foucault Michel (1970) The Order of Things: An Archaeology of Human Sciences, Pantheon Books, New York.
Foucault, Michel (1983) “On the Genealogy of Ethnics, An Interview of Works in Progress” in Hubert
Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow, Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics; with an Afterword by and Interview with Michel Foucault, pp. 229 – 253, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Foucault, Michel (1994) “What is Enlightenment” Paul Rabinow (eds.), Ethics, Subjectivity and Truth: Essential Works of Foucault, 1954 – 1984 volume 1, The New Press: New York.
Government of Canada, “Canadian Bill of Rights” Department of Justice Canada, (accessed, 23, 02, 2012: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-12.3/page-1.html)
Government of Canada, “The Constitution Act 1982, Schedule B. Charter of Rights and Freedoms”, pp. 128-144, Patrick Fitzgerald, Looking as Law: Canada’s Legal System, Fourth Edition, Bybooks, Ottawa.
(i) Canadian Legal Information Institute: “The Constitution Act 1982,…etc” (accessed, 23, 02, 2012: http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/const/const1982.html),
(ii) Department of Justice Canada: “Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: Part I of the
Constitution Act, 1982” (accessed, 23, 02, 2012: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/)
Grosselin, Mia (1990) Nominalism and Contemporary Nominalism: Ontological and Epistemological Implications of the Work of W.V.O. Quine and of N. Goodman, Kuwler Academic Publishers, Dordrecht
Hacking, Ian (1997) “Making up People” Thomas C. Heller et al. (eds.), Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy, Individuality, and the Self in Western Thought, pp. 222-236, Stanford University Press, California.
Hacking, Ian (1999) The Social Construction of What? Harvard University Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.
Hacking, Ian (2002) Historical Ontology, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.
Habermas, Jurgen (1972) Knowledge and Human Interest, trans. Jeremy J. Shapiro, Heinemann, London.
Habermas, Jurgen (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contribution to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. William Rehg, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Habermas, Jurgen (1999) Exclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, Ciaran Cronin and Palbo De Greiff (ed.) MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.
H.A.Hasan, Karim .A. (2005) “Hacking, Foucault: Making up People and Nominalism”?, Doctoral Research Essay, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario. ( I wrote this research essay in 2005).
Kant, Immanuel (1956) Critique of Practical Reason, trans. Lewiz White Beck, Hobbs Merrill Press, Indianapolis.
Kant, Immanuel (1987), Critiques of Judgement, trans. Werner S. Pluhar, Hobbs Merril Press, Indianapolis.
Oreopoulos, Philip (2009), “Why Do Skilled Immigrants Struggle in the Labor Market? A Field Experiment with Thousand Resumes”, University of British Columbia, National Bureau of Economic Research, Canadian Instituted for Advanced Studies.
Orwell, George, (1987) Nineteen Eighty Four: 1984, Penguin Books, London.
Bernard, G.W., The Kings Reformation: Henry VIII and the Remaking of the English Church, Yale University Press, 2007.
Flesher, Paul; Frerichs, Ernest; Neusner, Jacob (eds.) Religion, Science, and Magic: In Concert and in Conflict, Oxford University Press, USA, 1992.
Habeeb, William M., The Middle East in Turmoil: Conflict, Revolution, and Change, Greenwood Publisher, 2001.
Habermas, Jϋrgen, Between Facts and Norms: Contribution to a Discourse theory of Law and Democracy, trans. Willaim Rehg, MIT Press, Cambridge Mass., 1996.
Habermas, Jϋrgen, Religion, Rationality: Essays on Reason, God and Modernity, MIT Press, Boston, Mass., 2002.
Hodgson, G.S. Marshal, The Venture of Islam, Conscience and History in World Civilization: The Expansion of Islam in the Middle Periods, University of Chicago Press, 2011.
Huntington, Samuel P., “The Clash of Civilizations”, Foreign Affairs, 72, 3, 1993.
Kant, Immanuel, “What is Enlightenment” in What is Enlighten? Eighteenth-Century Answers and Twentieth-Century Questions, James Schmidt (eds. and trans.), University of California Press, Las Angeles, 1996.
Malimoski, Bronislaw, Magic, Science, Religion and Other Essays 1948, edited by Robert Redfield, Kissinger Publishing, LLC, 2004.
Newcombe, G. David, Henry VIII and the English Reformation, Routledge, 1995.
Reynold, E. Ernest, The Trial of St. Thomas More, Anthony Clarke Books, 1985.
Spencer, Herbert, Essays: Scientific, Political and Speculative, Vols. 1, 2 & 3, FQ Books, 2010.
James Schmidt (eds. and trans.), What is Enlighten? Eighteenth-Century Answers and Twentieth-Century Questions, University of California Press, Las Angeles, 1996.
Weber, Max, The Sociology of Religion, Beacon Press, 1964, 1993.
My response to an evaluation of my proposal:
1) I find the committee’s decision unfair and unjust in terms of who
the committee chooses to allocate funds and decides to provide means
for advancement in academics scholarship and research. It is clear
that certain people / applicants receive funding, not because their
research and findings contribute to peace, order, good governance,
justice in the broad and narrow sense, rather they receive for certain
programmatic means, which are not clarified to the public nor to the
applicants. Such decisions constitute violation of universal
principles of justice.
2) The committee’s decision to exclude my proposal which addresses
central problems in religion and its dominating capacity to wage war
of civilization / culture and , or, it could provide the means for
co-existence, sharing, and peace between different religious
denominations is indication of the committee’s unpreparedness to find and practice
remedies for problems of religious domination of everyday life.
3) My proposal addresses problem capacity of religious domination, the
method is clear, the problem statement is clear, the material used
are most important sources which provide readings about the ways in
which this world of human communities have arrived in a relative
balanced life to regulate religious domination over ordinary everyday
life and the secular life. Rather than focusing on focusing on a specific
text and a author, my proposal genuinely has addressed current serious
problems which human societies face, problems which are provoked by
cultural and religious tensions and wars.
4) Henceforth, my proposal seeks to find further remedies, solutions for
persisting problems, as I pointed out, such problems have led human
communities in recent years to verge of a world war in its ugliest
sense, which have been the violation of all fair universal principles
of justice and fairness. My proposal is not declamatory, it has a
clear research problem, and research framework, clear method with
evidence, my proposal provides historical evidence about they ways in
which religious domination was regulated in favor of more justifiable
forms of ordinary everyday life in the past, a method which has been
proven successful, it calls on the academic community to address
problems of religious and cultural domination of everyday life, and
5) We have to come back to our senses, we must focus on life,
coexistence, peace, order, justice, sharing…etc. principle practice
which are obtainable not through finding the ‘hypothetical god and
hypothetical truth’ but finding and practicing those principles of
justice on this earth, today, now.
Once again, I call on the committee to change their decision, and
provide funding for my project.
Karim .A.H.A. Hasan
5) Nominalism, Politics and Legality of Naming: Discrimination and Exclusion
Research field “Sociology of culture, work, profession, epistemology, occupation and the politics of naming: discrimination and exclusions…etc”. 21 years of ongoing work in the field is underway in progress, it will be published in the near future!
6) Racism, ethnicity, injustice, law, politics of inclusion and exclusion...
“We, the People”: Towards a Just Society
People of different continents and color may be considered different races according to the categorizations of race. Acknowledging the existence of race helps us to inquire and pose this question: What is race? Race is a concept of recognition referring to ancestry, blood, descent or lineage of certain groups of people, i.e., all races and ethnicities…etc.
Acknowledging to the existence of race based on different skin color is different than the description of race in racist discourses, because discourses of racism with reference to character have been built on the assumption of value built in blood and lineage but not skin, eye or hair color . A mere agreement to the fact that humans around the world have different races does not create the danger of racism. Racism emerges when race is politicized to carry a kind of value that refers to character good, bad, positive, negative, civilized or savage. The range of attributes I provided here are not exhaustive.
Racism in its initial stage is derived from the recognition of a positive self—image, negative recognition of “difference” and “otherness” based on descent and lineage. Separation between the “self” and the “other” in its initial stage is the product of cognitive activity, which is triggered by self-realization of group identity.
The initial remark of recognizing difference does not create a racist discourse against the “other”, but a racist discourse emerges once a human subject has conversely or actively acted upon and linked difference to generalization of values, specifically negative or positive values. As well, racism can be institutionalized when those negative attitudes toward the other are mobilized for political purposes.
A study of race and racism needs to trace the roots of “us and them” discourses and reflect upon how the “other” historically has been constructed by the “us” discourses starting with the Greek civilization.
Defining and diagnostics of how “us” and “them” discourses in the medieval period shows us gave birth to the initial appropriations of studies of race. In the modern and Enlightenment projects “blatant and clear” discourses of racism under two forms of knowledge: pragmatic practical knowledge and theoretical formations emerged. While Law, morality and ethics have been the governance and judgement in limiting, controlling, sanctioning, criminalizing racism; discrimination and exclusion on grounds of racism is inherent in social, political and economic system at the formal and informal spheres life.
A genealogical account that shows how the rise and expansion of diverse usages of the discourses of “us vs. them,” “otherness,” “difference” have given birth to the categorization of race and the provision of a mature workable discourse of racism. While most of my paper will rely on genealogical methodology to trace, explore and rethink the whole concept and mobilization of racism under specific conditions and for specific interests. Attempting to make remarks on a reconstructive project by which we may dismantle racism and illegal negative labeling in the discourse and practices within the system and everyday life is necessary in Canada and in across the globe.
We have to draw a link between the ways in which racial discourses are produced through false truth claims about certain individuals and races and ethnicities as methods to measure institutional practices of racism; I indicate how these racist discourses backed up by power/knowledge relations which have produced theories and practices of racism. Racism as a ‘self-interest’ measure against the “other” gets triggered, reproduced, reorganized and practiced through power/knowledge.
7. Lean Production, Lean Policy
Summer 2008, In reference to “eating people”
In addition to the classic cases like Dudley and Stephen about actually eating human flesh to satisfy hunger and support survival of the stronger humans is a crime, a different type of crime of ‘eating people’ is taking place currently in our society, which needs research and serious attention, clear cases of intimation, silencing legitimate people, phone and internet hacking, speaking in name of other people, posing and pretending to be other people…etc. without acknowledgement and credit are examples of ‘eating people’, which leads to instances of crime of theft, character kidnapping, social killing…etc.
The non-physical is divided in 2:
1) There are thousands professionals, intellectuals, highly skilled workers who have been eaten by the authority, companies, higher class, they do not receive credit for their skills, expertise…etc. While their work, skills and expertise are stolen, their character are distorted and disrespected, no consideration for intellectual copy right…etc. they are exploited for years without knowing about it, without receiving any credit.
2) Protective measure with risks…etc.
Ahmad, Mohammed, M.A. and Gunter Michael M. The Kurdish Question and the 2003 Iraq War Oakton: Virginia, 2005.
Assad, Talal Genealogies of Religion: Discipline and Reasons of Power in Christianity and Islam Johns Happkins University Press: Baltimore, 1993.
Augustine, S., Bishop of Hippo The City of God Modern Library: New York, 1950.
Anderson, Liam and Gareth Stansfield (eds.) The Future of Iraq: Dictatorship, Democracy, or Division Palgrave Macmillan: New York, 2004.
Baram, Amatzia “Neo-Tribalism in Iraq: Saddam Hussein’s Tribal Policies 1991-96”
In International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 29 (1): 1-31, 1997.
Bartelson, Jens A Genealogy of Sovereignty Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1995.
Bartelson, Jens “Three Concepts of Globalization” in International Sociology 15 (2): 180-196.
Bateson, Marry Catharine “Beyond Sovereignty: An Emerging Global Civilization: in Walker, R.B. J. and Saul, H. Hendlovits (eds.) Contending Sovereignties: Reframing Political Community Lynne Rienner Publishers: London, 1990.
Beck, Ulrich Individualization: Institutionalized Individualism and its Social Consequences London: Sage 2002.
Bodin, Jean On Sovereignty: Four Chapters from the Six Books on Common Wealth Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1975.
Boemeke, Mafred F, Gerald D. Feldman and Elizabeth Glaser (eds.) The Treaty of Versailles: A Reassessment After 75 Years Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1998.
Bourdieu, Pierre and Jean-Claude Passeron Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture Sage Publication: London, 1990.
Bourdieu, Pierre The Algerians Beacon Press: Boston, 1962.
Bourdieu, Pierre “What Makes a Social Class? On Theoretical and Practical Existence of Groups” Berkeley Journal of Sociology (32): 1-18.
Bourdieu, Pierre The Social Structure of Economy Policy Press: Cambridge, 2005.
Bourdieu, Pierre The Logic of Practice Stanford University Press: Stanford, 1990.
Bourdieu, Pierre, Chamboredon, Jean-Claude and Jean-Claude Passeron The Craft of Sociology: Epistemological Preliminaries Beate Krais (eds.) Walter de Gruter: Berlin, 1991a.
Bourdieu, Pierre Language and Symbolic Power John B. Thompson (eds.) Cambridge: Massachusetts, 1991b.
Buckley, Richard (eds.) “The Kurds: Caught Between Nations” Understanding Global Issues (94): 3, European Schoolbooks Publishing Limited: Cheltenham, 1994.
Chandler, James, Arnold I. Davidson and Harry Harootunian (eds.) Question of Evidence: Proof, Practice, and Persuasion Across the Disciplines The University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1994.
Ciment, James The Kurds: State and Minority Rights in Turkey, Iraq and Iran Facts on File: New York, 1996.
Committee on Foreign Relations Kurdistan in the Time of Saddam Hussein: A Staff Report to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States Senate U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, 1991.
Dadrian, N. Vahakin The History of the Armenian Genocide: Ethnic Conflict from the Balkans to Anatolia to the Caucasus Berghhn Books: Oxford, 1995.
Dancy, Jonathan and Ernest Sosa (eds.) Blackwell Companion to Philosophy: A Companion to Epistemology Blackwell: Massachusetts, 1998.
Dacyl, Janina W. “Sovereignty Versus Human Rights: From Past Discourse to Contemporary Dilemmas” in Journal of Refugee Studies 2 (9): 136-165, 1996.
Davidson, Arnold I. “Structures and Strategies of Discourse: Remarks Towards a History of Foucault’s Philosophy of Language” in Arnold I. Davidson (eds.) Foucault and His Interlocutors Chicago University Press: Chicago, 1997.
Davidson, Arnold I. “Introduction” in Michel Foucault’s Society Must be Defended: Lecture at the Collége de France Picador: New York, 2003.
Foucault, Michel “On the Genealogy of Ethnics: An Interview of Work in Progress” in Hubert Dyrefus and Paul Rabinow Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics; With and Afterward by and an Interview with Michel Foucault, pp. 229-253, University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1983.
Foucault, Michel “Truth and Power” in Paul Rabinow (eds.) Michel Foucault: Power Volume 3 pp. 111-133, The New Press: New York, 2000.
Foucault, Michel “The Subject and Power” in Paul Rabinow (eds.) Michel Foucault: Power Volume 3 pp. 326-348, The New Press: New York, 2000.
Foucault, Michel “Governmentality” in Paul Rabinow (eds.) Michel Foucault: Power Volume 3 pp. 201-221, The New Press: New York, 2000.
Foucault, Michel Society Must be Defended: Lecture at the Collége de France Picador: New York, 2003.
Foucault, Michel The Hermeneutics of the Subject: Lecture at the Collége de France1981-1982 Picador: New York, 2005.
Gellner, Ernest Nationalism New York University Press: New York, 1997.
Ghareeb, Edmund The Kurdish Question in Iraq Syracuse University Press: Syracuse, 1981.
Grenfell, Micheal and Micheal Kelly (eds.) Pierre Bourdieu: Language, Culture and Education, Theory into Culture Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2004.
Gros, Jean-Germain “Towards a Taxonomy of Faild States in the New World Order: Decaying Somalia, Liberia, Rwanda and Haiti” Third World Quarterly 17 (3): 445-471, 1996.
Grotius, Hugo The Laws of War and Peace: De’ iure belli ac pacis, libri tres, books I, II, III, Albrico Gentili (eds.) Merril: Indianapolis, 1925.
Guibernau, Montserrat and John Rex The Ethnicity Reader: Nationalism, Multiculturalism and Migration Policy Press: Cambridge, 1997.
Gunter, Michael and Hakan Yavus (eds.) Papers presented by Gunter, Natali, Olsen, Ozcan, Salih, Yavuz under “The Kurds in Iraq” at the Annual Meeting of the Middle East Studies Association in Anchorage, Alaska, November 8, 2003. These papers are published in Middle East Policy xi (1): 106- 131, Spring 2004.
Gunter, Michael M. and M. Hakan Yavuz “The Continuing Crisis in Iraqi Kurdistan” in Middle East Policy xii (1): 122-133, Spring 2005.
Koohi-Kamali, Farideh The Political Development of the Kurds in Iran: Pastoral Nationalism Palgrave Macmillan: New York, 2003.
Hardt, Michael and Antonio Negri Empire Harvard University Press: Princeton, 2000.
Hassanpour, Amir Language and Nationalism in Kurdistan Mellen Research University Press: San Francisco, 1992.
Hassanpour, Amir “The Making of Kurdish Identity: Pre-20th Century Historical and Literary Discourses” in Essays on the Origins of Kurdish Nationalism, pp. 106-162, Mazda Publishers: Costa Mesa, 2003.
Hassanpour, Amir “The Pen and the Sword: Literacy, Education, Revolution in Kurdistan in Peter Freebody and Anthony R Welch (eds.) Knowledge, Culture and Power: International Perspectives on Literacy as Policy and Practice University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, 1993.
Hassanpour, Amir, Tove Skutnab-Kangas and Michael Chyet “Non Education of Kurds: A Kurdish Perspective” International Review of Education 42 (4): 367-379, 1996.
Hindess, Barry Discourses of Power: From Hobbes to Foucault Blackwell: Massachusetts, 1996.
Hobbes, Thomas Leviathan Penguin Books: London, 1985.
Hunt, Alan and Gray Wickham “Governance and its Principles” in Alan Hunt and Gray Wickham’s Foucault and the Law: Towards a Sociology of Law as Governance Pluto Press: London, 1994.
Hunt, Alan “The Role of Law in the Civilizing Process and the Reform of Popular Culture” in Canadian Journal of Legal Studies 10 (2): 5-29, 1995.
Izady, Mehrdad The Kurds: A Concise Handbook Carne Russak: Washington, 1992
Jwaideh, Wadie The Kurdish National Movement: Its Origins and Development Syracuse University Press: New York, 2006.
Kirisci, Kamal and Gareth M Winrow The Kurdish Question and Turkey: An Example of a Transnational Ethnic Conflict, Frank Press; London: 1997.
Kushner, Tony Refugees in the Age of Genocide: Global, National and Local Perspectives During the Twentieth Century Frank Cass: London, 1999.
Makiya, Kanan Republic of Fear: Politics of Modern Iraq University of California Press: Berkeley, 1998. (Note: Kanan Makia first published this book under a designated name Samir al-Kalil in 1989. He feared that Iraqi government might retaliate if he had published this book in his own name).
Machiavelli, Niccolò The Prince Penguin Books: Middlesex, 1995.
McDowall, David Kurds: A Nation Denied Minority Rights Publication: London, 1992.
McDowall, David A Modern History of the Kurds St. Martin Press: New York, 20043.
McKiernan, Kevin The Kurds: A People in Search of Their Homeland St. Martine’s Press: New York, 2006.
Natali, Denise “Manufacturing Identity and Managing Kurds in Iraq” in O’Leary, B. Sustick, I. S. and Callaghy, T. Right-Sizing the State: The Politics of Moving Borders, pp. 253-288, Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2001.
Natali, Denise The Kurds and the State: Evolving National Identity in Iraq, Turkey, and Iran Syracuse University Press: New York, 2005.
Nuscheler, F. “Global Governance, Development and Peace” in Kennedy, P. Messner D. and Nuscheler (eds.) Global Trends and Global Governance Pluto Press: London, 2002.
O’Ballance, Edgar The Kurdish Struggle, 1920-94 MacMillan Press: New York, 1996.
O’Leary, Brendan, John McGarry and Khaled Salih (eds.) The Future of Kurdistan in Iraq University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia, 2005.
O’Leary, Carole A. “Are the Kurds a Source of Instability in the Middle East?” in Ahmad, Mohammed, M.A. and Michael Gunter M The Kurdish Question and the 2003 Iraq War, pp. 17-29, Oakton: Virginia, 2005.
Olson, Robert W. The Kurdish Question and Turkish Iranian Relations: From World War I to 1998 Mazda Publishers: Costa Mesa, 1998.
Olson, Robert W. The Goat and the Butcher: Nationalism and State Formation in Kurdistan-Iraq Since the Iraqi War Mazda Publishers: Costa Mesa, 2005.
O’Shea, Maria T. Trapped Between the Map and Reality: Geography and Perceptions of Kurdistan Routledge: New York, 2004.
Pelletiere, Stephen C. The Kurds: An Unstable Element in the Gulf Boulder: Westview, 1984.
Rex, John “Empire, Race and Ethnicity” in International Journal of Comparative Sociology 45 (3-4): 161-177, 2004.
Ricoeur, Paul Time and Narrative: Volumes 1, 2 and 3, Chicago University Press: Chicago,
Ricoeur, Paul Memory, History, Forgetting Chicago University Press: Chicago, 2005.
Rosenau, James N. “Governance Order, and Change in World Politics” in Ersto_Otto, CZempeil and James N Rosenau (eds.) Governance Without Government: Order and Change in World Politics pp. 1-30, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1994.
Rosenau, James N. and Ersel Aydinli (eds.) Globalization, Security, and the Nation-State: Paradigms in Transition State University of New York Press: New York, 2005.
Rousseau, J-J The Basic Political Writings Hackett Publishing: Indianapolis, 1987.
Sassen, Saskia. Losing Control?: Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization Columbia University Press: New York, 1996.
Spruyt, Hendrik. Ending Empire: Contested Sovereignty and Territorial Partition Cornell University Press: London, 2005.
Stienmetz, George State/Culture: State Formation after Cultural Turn Cornell University Press: Cornell, 1999.
Strohomeier, Martin Crucial Images in Presentation of a Kurdish National Identity: Heroes and Patriots, Traitors and Foes Brill: Boston, 2003.
Sykes, Mark The Caliphs’ Last Heritage: A Short History of the Ottoman Empire Macmillan: London, 1915.
Sykes, Mark “The Kurdish Tribes of the Ottoman Empire” in Mark Sykes’ The Caliphs’ Last Heritage: A Short History of the Ottoman Empire pp. 553-588, pp. 589-592, Macmillan: London, 1915.
Urla, Jacqueline “Cultural Politics in an Age of Statistic: Numbers, Nations, and Making of Basque Identity” in American Ethnologist 20 (4): 818-843, 1993.
Vali, Abbas “Kurds and Their “Other”: Fragmented Identity and Fragmented Politics” in Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East xviii (2): 82-94, 1998.
Vali, Abbas, “Genealogies of the Kurds: Constructions of Nation and National Idenity in Kurdish Historical Writing” in Essays on the Origins of Kurdish Nationalism, pp. 58-107, Mazda Publishers: Costa Mesa, 2003.
van Bruinessen, Martin Agha, Shaikh and State: The Social and Political Structure of Kurdistan Zed Books: London, 1992.
van Bruinessen, Martin “Kurdish Nationalism and Competing Ethnic Loyalties” original English version of: “Nationalisme kurde et ethnicités intra-kurdes”, in Peuples Méditerranéens, (68-69): 11-37, 1994. http://www.let.uu.nl/~martin.vanbruinessen/personal/publications
/Competing_Ethnic_Loyalties.htm (accessed, 23, 05, 2006).
van Bruinessen “Kurdish Ulama and their Indonesian Disciples” [revised version of “The Impact of Kurdish Ulama on Indonesian Islam” Les annals de l’autre islam (5): 83-106, 1998.
van Bruinessen, Martin “The Kurds in Movement: Migrations, Mobilizations, Communications and the Globalization of the Kurdish Question” Working paper, no 14, Islamic area study project, Tokyo: Japan, 1999.
/Kurds_in_movement.htm (accessed, 26, 06, 2006).
van Bruinessen, Martin Kurdish Ethno-Nationalism Versus Nation-Building States Isis Press: Istanbul, 2000A.
van Bruinessen, Martin Mullas, Sufis and Heretics: The Role of Religion in Kurdish Society Isis Press: Istanbul, 2000B.
van Bruinessen, Martin “The Kurdish Question: Whose Questions, Whose Answers? The Kurdish Movements Seen by Kurds and by Their Neighbours” Wadie Jwaideh Memorial Lecture in Arabic and Islamic Studies, Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures and Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies Program, Indiana University: Bloomington, 19 November 2004. http://www.let.uu.nl/~martin.vanbruinessen/personal/publications
/Jwaideh_memorial_lecture.htm (accessed, 26, 06, 2006).
Whitman, Lois Destroying Ethnic Identity: The Kurds of Turkey, an Update Human Rights Watch: New York, 1990.
Ashenden, Samantha and David Owen (ed.) 1999. Foucault Contra Habermas: Recasting
the Dialogue between Genealogy and Critical Theory, Saga Publications,
Ashenden, Samantha and David Owen. 1999. “Foucault, Habermas and the Politics of
Critique”. In Foucault Contra Habermas: Recasting the Dialogue between
Genealogy and Critical Theory. Ashenden, Samantha and David Owen (ed.). 2-
19. Saga Publications, London.
Ardent, Hannah. 1965. The Human Condition. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Aron, Harry. 1978. “Wittgenstein’s Impact on Foucault”. In Wittgenstein’s Impact on
Contemporary Thought. Leinfekkner et. al (ed.) Holder-Pichiler-Tempsky,
Beilharz, Peter. 1995. “Critical Theory—Jürgen Habermas”. In Reconstructing Theory:
Gadamer, Habermas, Lumann. David Roberts (ed.). 39-62. Melbourne University
Cronin, Ciaran P. 1993. “Translator’s Introduction”. In Habermas Jürgen, Justification
and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics. trans.: Cairan P. Cronin, xi-xxxi.
MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
d’Erntreves, Maurizio Passerin. 1997. “Introduction”. In Habermas and the Unfinished
Project of Modernity: Critical Essays on the Philosophical Discourse of
Modernity. Maurizio et al. (ed.). 1-37. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Dean, Michell. 1994. Critical and Effective Histories. Routledge, London.
Dreyfus, Huber L. and Rabinow, Paul. 1986. “What Is Maturity? Habermas and Foucault
on ‘What is Enlightenment’”. In Foucault A Critical Reader. David Couzends
Hoy (ed.). 109-123. Blackwell, Oxford.
Donner, Wendy. 1991. The Liberal Self: John Stuart Mill’s Moral and Political
Philosophy. Cornell University Press, New York.
Edward, Graig. (ed). 1998. Routledge Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Routlege, London.
Foucault, Michel. 1965. Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of
Reason. trans.: Richard Howard, Random House, New York.
Foucault, Michel. 1972. Archaeology of Knowledge. Routledge, London.
Michel Foucault. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. trans.: Alan
135 Sheridan, Pantheon Books, New York.
Foucault, Michel, 1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings
Gordon Colin (ed.). Pantheon Books, New York.
Foucault, Michel. 1980. “Power and Strategies”. In Power/Knowledge: Selected
Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977. C. Gordon (ed.). Pantheon Books,
Foucault, Michel. 1986. The History of Sexuality Volume 3: Care of the Self. trans.:
Robert Hurley, Vintage Books, New York.
Foucault, Michel. 1994. “On the Archaeology of the Sciences: Response to the
Epistemology Circle”. In Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology: Essential Works
of Foucault Volume 2. Paul Rabinow (ed.). 297-234. The New Press, New York.
Foucault, Michel. 1994. “Technologies of the Self”. In Paul Rabinow Series, Ethics,
Subjectivity and Truth Volume 1, 222-251. Paul Rabinow (ed.). The New Press,
Foucault, Michel. 1994. “What is Enlightenment?” In Michel Foucault Ethics,
Subjectivity and Truth: Essential Works of Michel Foucault Volume I. Paul
Rabinow (ed.). 303-320. The New Press, New York.
Foucault, Michel. 1995. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Vintage Books,
Foucault, Michel. 1997. Essential Works: 1954-1984, Ethics, Subjectivity and Truth.
Paul Rabinow (ed). New York Press, New York.
Foucault, Michel. 1998. “What is an Author?”. In Paul Rabinow Series Aethetics, Method
and Epistemology Volume 2. James D. Faubion (ed.). 205-222. The New Press,
Foucault, Michel. 1998. “Nietzsche, Genealogy, History”. In Paul Rabinow Series
Aethetics, Method and Epistemology Volume 2. James D. Faubion (ed.). 369-
391.The New Press, New York.
Fraser, Nancy. 1989. “Foucault on Modern Power: Empirical insights and
Normative Confusions”. In Unduly Practices: Power, Gender, Discourse in
Contemporary Social Theory. Fraser Nancy (ed.). 17-34. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Fultner, Barbara. 2001. “Translator’s Introduction”. In On The Pragmatics of Social
Action: Primary Studies in the Theory of Communicative Action. vii-xxiv, trans.:
Barbara Fultner, MIT Press, Mass.
Giddens, Anthony. 1977. Studies in Social and Political Theory. Basic Books, New York
Habermas, Jürgen. 1972. Knowledge and Human Interest. trans.: Jeremy J. Shapiro,
Habermas, Jûrgen.1981. The Theory of Communicative Action Volume 1: Reason and the
Rationalization of Society. trans.: Thomas McCarthy, Beacon Press, Boston.
Habermas, Jürgen.1984. The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume I: Reason and the
Rationalization of Society. trans.: Thomas McCarthy, Beacon Press, Boston.
Habermas, Jûrgen.1987. The Theory of Communicative Action Volume 2: Lifeworld and
System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. trans.: Thomas McCarthy, Beacon
Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere : An
Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. trans.: Thomas Burger, MIT Press,
Habermas, Jürgen. 1991. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. trans.:
Christian Lenhardt and Shierry Weber Nicholson, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Habermas, Jûrgen. 1992. “An Alternative Way out of the Philosophy of the Subject:
Communicative versus Subject-Centered Reason”. In Jûrgen Habermas, The
Philosophical Discourse on Modernity: Twelve Lectures. 294-335. MIT Press,
Habermas, Jürgen. 1992. The Philosophical Discourse on Modernity. tans. F. Lawrence,
MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Habermas, Jurgen. 1992. Autonomy and Solidarity: Interviews with Jurgen Habermas.
Peter Dews, (ed.). 43-61, Verso Press, New York.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1993. Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics.
trans.: Ciaran P. Cronin, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms: Contribution to a Discourse Theory
of Law and Democracy. trans.: William Rehg, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. “Popular Sovereignty as Procedure”. In Habermas’s Between
Facts and Norms: Contribution to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy.
463-490. trans.: William Rehg, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1997. “Modernity: An Unfinished Project” In Habermas and the
the Unfinished Project of Modernity: Critical Essays on the Philosophical
Discourse of Modernity. Maurizio et al. (ed.). 38-55. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1999. The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory. Ciaran
Cronin and Palbo De Greiff (ed.). MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Habermas, Jûrgen. 2001. On The Pragmatics of Social Action: Primary Studies in the
Theory of Communicative Action. trans.: Barbara Fultner, MIT Press, Cambridge,
Heidegger, Martin. 1993. “What is Called Thinking”. In Martin Heidegger, Basic
Writings. David Farrell Krell (ed.). 365-392. Harper Collins Publishers, New
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. 1975. Lectures on the Philosophy of World History:
Introduction, Reason in History. trans.: Johannes Hoffmeister, Cambridge
University Press, Mass.
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. 1998. The Phenomenology of Spirit Reader: Critical and Interpretive Essays. Jon Stewart (ed.). State University of New York Press,
Honneth, Alex. 1991. The Critique of Power. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Hunt, Alan and Gary Wickham. 1994. “Governance and its Principles”. In Hunt and
Wickham’s. Foucault and the Law: Towards A sociology of Law as Governance.
Pluto Press, London.
Hunt, Alan. 1996. The Governance of Consuming Passions: A History pf Sumptuary
Law.St. Martin’s Press, New York.
Hunt, Alan. 1999. Governing Morals: A Social History of Moral Regulations. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Kant, Immanuel. 1956. Critique of Practical Reason. trans.: Lewiz White Beck, Hobbs-
Kuper, Adam and Kuper Jessica. 1996. The Social Sciences Encyclopaedia. Second
Edition, Routledge, New York.
Kooiman, J., 1993. “Social Governance: Introduction”. In Modern Governance. J.
Kooiman (ed). 1-9. Sage, London.
Kant, Immanuel. 1996. “What is Enlightenment?” In What is Enlightenment? Eighteenth-
Century Answers and Twentieth-Century Questions. James Schmidt (ed.), trans.:
James Schmidt, University of California Press, LA.
Kusch, Martin. 1991. Foucault’s Strata and Fields: An Investigation into Archaeological
and Genealogical Science Studies. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London.
Jessop, B., 1995. “The Regulations Approach and Governance Theory: Alternative
Perspectives on Economic and Political Change”, Economy and Society, 24:3, 07-
Low, Sidney, Sir. 1914. The Governance of England. Unwin, London.
May, Todd. 1993. Between Genealogy and Epistemology: Psychology, Politics, and
Knowledge in the Thought of Michel Foucault. The Pennsylvania State University
McCarthy, Thomas. 1990. “Critique of Impure Reason: Foucault and the Frankfort
School”. In Political Theory, 18: 437-469.
McCarthy, Thomas. 1991. “Introduction” In Jürgen Habermas Moral Consciousness and
Communicative Action, trans.: Christian Lenhardt and Shiery Weber Nicholsen.
vii-xiii. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
McCarthy, Thomas. 1994. The Critical Theory of Jürgen Habermas. MIT Press,
Mellos, Koula. 1991. “Rationality, Validity and Functionality in Habermas”. In
Communicative Action and Political Philosophy in Habermas. Sous et al. (ed.).
13-39. University of Ottawa Press, Ottawa.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1967. The Will to Power. trans.: Walter Kaufmann and R.J.
Hollingdale, Random House, New York.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1989.“Good and Evil”. In On the Genealogy of Morals. 24-56.
trans.: Walter Kaufmann and RJ Hollingdale, Vintage Books, New York.
Owen, David. 1995. Nietzsche, Politics and Modernity. Saga Publications, London.
Pantton, Paul. 1994. “Foucault’s Subject of Power” in Policialt News Letter, 6 (1): 60-71.
Rhodes, R. A. W. 1996. “The New Governance: Governing Without Government”.
Political Studies. XLIV, 652-667.
Ritzer, George. 1992. Sociological Theory, third Edition. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Roberts, David. 1995.“Introduction”. In Reconstructing Theory: Gadamer, Habermas,
Lumann. David Roberts (ed.) 1-9. Melbourne University Press, Australia.
Rose, Nikolas. 1999. Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge
University Press. London.
Rose, Nikolas. 1996. “Governing ‘Advanced’ Liberal Democracies”. In Foucault and
Political Reason; Liberalism Neo-Liberalism and Rationalities of Government.
University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Rose, Nikolas. 1999. Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge
University Press, London.
Rosenau, J., 1992. “Governance, Order and Change in World Politics”. In Governance
Without Government: Order and Change in World Politics. J. Rosenau and E-O
Czempiel (ed.). 1-30. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Schmidt, James and Waternberg, T. 1994. “Foucault’s Enlightenment: Critique,
Revolution, and the Fashioning of the Self”. In Critique and Power: Recasting
Foucault Habermas Debate. Kelly Micheal (ed.). 283-314, Cambridge, Mass.
Sim, Stuart. (ed.).1999. The Routledge Critical Dictionary of Postmodern Thought.
Routledge, New York.
Stoker, Gerry. 1998. “Governance as a Theory: Five Propositions”. In International
Social Science. March, 17-28.
Talor, E. Victor and Winguist, Charles E. (ed.) 2001. Encyclopedia of Postmodernism.
Routledge, New York.
Tully, James. 1999. “The Agonic Freedom of Citizens”. In Economy and Society volume
Weber, Max.1965. Protestant Ethics and the Sprit of Capitalism, MIT Press, Cambridge,
Weber, Max. 1966. Max Weber on Law and Economy and Society, Harvard University
Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1958. Philosophical Investigations. Blackwell, Oxford.