1
Introduction
Ethnic appeals have been found to be more salient than class appeals in both
developing and developed countries throughout the post-World War II period.
The power of ethnic appeals is said to lie in their ability to offer individuals an
emotional bond lacking in mass society (Rothschild 1981: 27). It has been
argued that processes of globalization, through their dislocation of traditional
values, reinforce ethnic identities and produce parallel movements of localization
(Appadurai 1990; Huntington 1993). Ethnic affinities are thought to lower the
cost of coordination allowing ethnic groups to solve the collective action dilemma
(Hardin 1995: 4-10). Similarly, the movement from class-based mobilization to
ethnic mobilization is considered much easier than the reverse. Class-based
movements and parties are particularly susceptible to liquidation along ethnic
lines (Horowitz 1986: 291-332).
Something fundamentally different appears to be taking place in the
former Soviet Union with the demise of state socialism. Nationalist mobilization
has declined sharply in both Latvia and Ukraine. Dire forecasts of Latvian and
Ukrainian observers who feared the rise of ethnic conflict failed to materialize.
While the closing of a few Russian schools did meet with some resistance in
Riga, other nationalizing policies of the Latvian and Ukrainian states have
provoked surprisingly little counter-mobilization by Russian speakers. The
economic decline, while hitting the average resident of both countries hard, has
not fueled mobilization along ethnic lines. Russian workers in Latvia and the
Russian-speaking miners of the Ukrainian Donbas, when they have mobilized,
Convention