Ottoman reforms manufactured a new citizen-subject perceiving through state eyes.

Evidence

The other break, the other disruptive principle—which is, I think, more important—is the introduction of a new subject of history, both in the sense that the historical narrative acquires a new domain of objects, and in the sense that a new subject begins to speak in history. History is no longer the State talking about itself; it is something else talking about itself, and the something else that speaks in history and takes itself as the object of its own historical narrative is a sort of new entity known as the nation. “Nation” is, of course, to be understood in the broad sense of the term. I will try to come back to this point, as it is this notion of a nation that generates or gives rise to notions like nationality, race, and class. — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 158 (#complicates, via linked claim)

It is not surprising, therefore, that with the European encroachment into the Ottoman territories during the nineteenth century, and the prominence and perceived power of the European model of the nation-state, many of the ethnoreligious communities/ minorities moved towards a “national” identity model of social organization. The case of the Jewish millet presented the least difficulty, as ethnicity, religion, and community alreadv coincided. — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 3472 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Mass consumption promised immigrants a visible transformation into citizens. — Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham, Righteous Discontent: The Women’s…, 1634; European nation-state influence pushed Ottoman minorities toward national identity models — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 3472; Ottoman legal reform replaced oral testimony and remade the Muslim subject — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism: A Critique of…, 232 (+4 more)

Broader Connections