Measuring Russian Nationalism In Complex Times Prepared for the

Many social scientists in the early 1990s predicted that Russian nationalism would cause ethnic conflicts throughout Eurasia. Typical studies of Russian nationalism focused on elite politicians articulation of nationalist political platforms. In the mid-1990s, these parties appeared to have significant political support and academia anticipated significant ethnic conflict within Russia. In 1994, Michael Urban argued that Russian political actors emphasized identity and difference. He also claimed that politicians tended to polarize the political community over the question of national identity which destabilized politics at the root level of communication, and which spun off ancillary conflicts, particularly in the field of federal (ethnic) relations (734). Recently, the academic consensus is that ethnic Russian nationalism is unpopular. However, there are many types of nationalism: statist, ethnic, core and empire models. This paper examines a blend of these different nationalisms through a multi-component index and attempts to measure levels of nationalism in mass attitudes. The dependent variable in this analysis is Russian nationalism; the independent variables are ethno-linguistic identity and personal economic security. Examining nationalism across ethno-linguistic subpopulations is useful to the study of the developing Russian identity. Ethno-linguistic analyses often appear in the literature about Diaspora Russians, but are seldom in nationalism studies within Russia. David Laitin writes on Russians cultural resistance and assimilation in the Near Abroad