The Scars of the Erasure_web

Erasure_4a 10.1.11 20:29 Page 214214 THE SCARS OF THE ERASUREas an important component of the establishment of the Slovenian nation-state, Iwas able to focus on the often overlooked nationalizing practices involving thenationalist construction of “Slovenianness” as the idea and essence that at thesame time irreversibly determined Slovenian statehood. The ethnic principle underliesthe definition of Slovenian national identity, in which one is presumably“born into Slovenianness.” These implicit ties link the state of Slovenia to theSlovenian national identity, thus determining the notion of belonging to theSlovenian nation and the rights that stem from this membership, reflected in statepolicies, political discourse and public opinion. While all of this makes Slovenia agood example of a “nationalizing” state, I also wanted to show that it is no exceptionin this respect. It simply reflects the reality of a world that, despite trans-nationalconnections, globalization processes and the ideal of transcending nationalidentities, remains embedded in the binary logic of belonging for members andOtherness for non-members who are excluded in one way or another.One problem revealed by the erasure is that the Slovenians, despite beingthe majority nation within Slovenia, behave as a threatened minority, reflectingin this way the classical nationalist myth of historical victimhood. The history ofSlovenian national movements since the 19 th century serves as an excuse forthe “returning” of all presumed rights and “redressing” of all the presumed injusticeand suffering endured by generations of “Slovenian predecessors” inorder that today “we” can “finally” live in “our” state. Only when this logic is problematizedcan the erasure be understood as the responsibility of everyoneamong us, because we accepted as “natural” exclusion on the grounds of ethnicity.If this assertion appears too bold, let us remember the astonishment ofthe Slovenians when they learnt that “even Slovenians” could be found amongthe erased. It is precisely this astonishment that reveals that the erased peopleare perceived as the Other, who is not qualified for membership in the communityof the Slovenians (i.e. ethnic Slovenians), while Slovenia – although definedas a country of all of its citizens – is seen as self-evidently being the country ofthe Slovenians, who are given priority. After all, this was confirmed by the institutionalizationof Slovenian citizenship based on the ius sanguinis principle.The erased people are by no means a homogeneous group, and as withany other group, they are not immune to nationalist and other prejudices. Thisonly confirms how deeply rooted nationalist logic is, one which teaches us fromour early childhood through the processes of socialization that we belong to certaincommunities and that we are different from others. This chapter has attemptedto show that the erasure was an expression of nationalism, and that itwas not a one-off event that occurred in February 1992, but part of a complexwider problem of nationalizing practices which stigmatize and exclude all groupsseen as Other, not only the erased people. It was precisely nationalism and thefunctioning of the nation-state that enabled the erasure, both in the preparationsbefore 1992 as well as in disparagement of the erased people and the refusalto recognize the consequences of the erasure.