Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Anthropological Theory
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cushman, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Anthropology and Genocide in the Balkans

An Analysis of Conceptual Practices of Power

Thomas Cushman

Wellesley College, USA tcushman{at}wellesley.edu

This article examines scholarly discourse on the wars in the former Yugoslavia. It focuses on relativistic arguments put forward by anthropologists and shows how such accounts mask and elide central historical realities of the conflict. Relativistic accounts of serious modern conflicts often mirror and offer legitimation to the accounts put forth by perpetrators. In this case, several leading accounts of the wars in the former Yugoslavia display a strong affinity to those asserted by Serbian nationalists. The article addresses the issue of ethics and intellectual responsibility in anthropological fieldwork in situations of conflict and the problem of the political uses of anthropological research.

Key Words: Bosnia-Hercegovina • Croatia • ethics • former Yugoslavia • genocide • nationalism • propaganda • relativism • war

Anthropological Theory, Vol. 4, No. 1, 5-28 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1463499604040845
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anthropological TheoryHome page
R. M. Hayden
Inaccurate data, spurious issues and editorial failure in Cushman's 'Anthropology and Genocide in the Balkans'
Anthropological Theory, December 1, 2005; 5(4): 545 - 554.
[PDF]

Home page
 Anthropological TheoryHome page
B. Denich
Debate or defamation? Comment on the publication of Cushman's 'Anthropology and Genocide in the Balkans'
Anthropological Theory, December 1, 2005; 5(4): 555 - 558.
[PDF]

Home page
 Anthropological TheoryHome page
D. A. Kideckel
The 'Tar Baby' revisited: War in Former Yugoslavia and anthropological discourses and responsibilities
Anthropological Theory, December 1, 2005; 5(4): 571 - 575.
[PDF]

Home page
 Anthropological TheoryHome page
B. Kapferer
In positions to do great damage: A comment on the Cushman, Denich, Hayden and Wilson debate
Anthropological Theory, December 1, 2005; 5(4): 577 - 581.
[PDF]