Page 129 - MIGRATION

Basic HTML Version

127
MIGRATION, MEMORY, HERITAGE: SOCIO-CULTURAL
APPROACHES TO THE BULGARIAN-TURKISH BORDER
scholarly, political, media and everyday discourses; in other words, to establish a monopoly over
legitimate symbolic violence and by virtue of this to also establish amonopoly over the official and/
or everyday interpretations of the common places of memory. The effect from such monopolizing
of the past is ‘encapsulation’ of heritage and memory.
Unlike the meta-narratives of Lyotard which gain legitimacy from “the future” and as such
project
”, these ideological discourses (of Thracians and of Bulgarian out-migrants to Turkey)
gain their legitimacy from “the past”. Therefore, they carry a certain “
re-activity
” in which their
legitimizing symbolic efficacy is concentrated. This is where we find the contradiction of their
inheritance, insofar as they use as a key resource for identification and self-identification of the
group on whose behalf they speak
the past
–“there and then”vests with significance and meaning
“here and now”.
These ideological discourses, however, carry their own “ideological effect” – precisely
because, and insofar as it is an effect in
the meta-field of symbolic power
in which their speakers
struggle for the monopoly over legitimate symbolic violence in the field of inheritance. In the case
of Thracians, to struggle for the monopoly in the meta-field of symbolic powers means, according
to the newest official line of the Union, to struggle for political representation. I will quote here an
excerpt from the interview with the president of the UTSB, Mr. Krassimir Premyanov, given after
the last elections for mayor and published on the website of the Union: “I am convinced that as
Thracians we must be aware that if WE DO NOT HAVE SPEAKERS AND OUR OWN REPRESENTATIVES
IN THE INSTITUTIONS, THERE IS NOBODY TO PROTECT OUR INTERESTS”. This can mean only one
thing –
the resource of the “past” and “memory” is increasingly less likely to give legitimacy
to the official discourse of the association and it will be increasingly drawing upon political
representation to ensure that legitimacy, i.e. it will be a function of the transformation of
social capitals into symbolic such in the form of political dividends.
In the discourse of the official spokesman of the Federation of BulgarianOut-migrants on the
other side of the border the symbolic struggle for monopolizing the meta-field of symbolic power
is phrased like this: “That history should be forgotten – history should not be forgotten, but we
should be looking ahead”(Interviewwith H., 2012, archive IEFEM). “
Looking ahead
”, however, turns
out to be linked to“
looking back
”again: the struggle for monopolizing symbolic representation in
this case means to follow that which is legitimate, true and valid “
here
”, while that which is untrue
“always comes from
over there
”. Therefore,
the symbolic efficacy of this ideological discourse
derives from the social and political practices shaped by the official Turkish power
.
All will fall through. The Euroregion will fall through. And everything came from Yambol,
I am telling you. I worked on this project, worked with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, everything
fell through. I was left between the frying pan and the fire. I did not sleep out of worries. I did not
sleep at home for a whole week. Nothingmuch depends onme, but I ama Bulgarian citizen and
forme Bulgariawill always be sacredand I want topass it on tomy children, but it
always comes
from over there
. It came from over there, from Burgas, from Yambol…
The municipalities
decided there was genocide, politics interfered, you see, and… People want to get