Antigypsyism in Yugoslavia 1918-1945

So Paula, let me start with a terminological question.

The word anti-gypsyism, which turns up a lot in your research, contains the term gypsy, which many Roma people consider discriminatory.

So how do critical Romani studies deal with this term? In what contexts do you use it?

Yeah, thank you for this introductory question.

I'm really happy to expand a bit on it because it's not just a choice of terminology, as you will see, but also a question of actually theoretical outlets and frameworks that guide my research.

And in the past, as you have already mentioned, there has been a debate over whether the subject of this kind of research should be conceptualized as anti-gypsyism or as anti-Roma racism or racism against Sinti and Romani people.

And as you have already also mentioned, in anti-gypsyism we have the use of the racist external designation gypsy within the term.

And this has been criticized, especially from a critical Romani perspective.

And when we look at the historiography of the recent decades, we can see that, yeah, as I have said, it's not just a choice of terminology, but also shapes the theoretical frameworks that guide our research.

On the one hand, we have this research that is analog with antisemitism studies where the attention is focused primarily on prejudices and hostility emanating from the majority society, as well as on practices of discrimination and violence, which then culminate or extend, for example, to the Nazi genocide against Sinti and Roma.

And on the other hand, And this has been also practiced particularly under the influence of interventions by Romani scholars of critical Romani studies.

The focus has been more on the lived experiences of stigmatization and systematic disadvantage among Sinti and Roma, which are generally conceptualized in this case in relation or analog to other forms of racism in Europe.

And recent publications have sought, and I think that's a really great development, to productively actually bring these two things together.

Because I think that it can both enrich anti-gypsyism research and racism studies and also anti-Semitism studies.

Because yeah, as always, comparison is really helpful in understanding differences and also similarities.

And I think for me, I also use the two terms sometimes interchangeably and also depending on audience.

Because for example, in the Serbian context, now I see a lot of younger researchers also talking a lot about anti-Roma racism, and this obviously ties into bigger struggles, anti-racist struggles.

So it's also a political question.

And I feel for me, they can be used interchangeably.

So I will probably also be doing so throughout this episode.

And one last note on terminology, when we are already speaking about language, I will use the term gypsy in this episode only when talking about the construct or the image of gypsies and not when I talk about the actual members of the minority, because then I will be talking about Roma or Romani people.

So Paula, let me start with a terminological question.

The word anti-gypsyism, which turns up a lot in your research, contains the term gypsy, which many Roma people consider discriminatory.

So how do critical Romani studies deal with this term? In what contexts do you use it?

Yeah, thank you for this introductory question.

I'm really happy to expand a bit on it because it's not just a choice of terminology, as you will see, but also a question of actually theoretical outlets and frameworks that guide my research.

And in the past, as you have already mentioned, there has been a debate over whether the subject of this kind of research should be conceptualized as anti-gypsyism or as anti-Roma racism or racism against Sinti and Romani people.

And as you have already also mentioned, in anti-gypsyism we have the use of the racist external designation gypsy within the term.

And this has been criticized, especially from a critical Romani perspective.

And when we look at the historiography of the recent decades, we can see that, yeah, as I have said, it's not just a choice of terminology, but also shapes the theoretical frameworks that guide our research.

On the one hand, we have this research that is analog with antisemitism studies where the attention is focused primarily on prejudices and hostility emanating from the majority society, as well as on practices of discrimination and violence, which then culminate or extend, for example, to the Nazi genocide against Sinti and Roma.

And on the other hand, And this has been also practiced particularly under the influence of interventions by Romani scholars of critical Romani studies.

The focus has been more on the lived experiences of stigmatization and systematic disadvantage among Sinti and Roma, which are generally conceptualized in this case in relation or analog to other forms of racism in Europe.

And recent publications have sought, and I think that's a really great development, to productively actually bring these two things together.

Because I think that it can both enrich anti-gypsyism research and racism studies and also anti-Semitism studies.

Because yeah, as always, comparison is really helpful in understanding differences and also similarities.

And I think for me, I also use the two terms sometimes interchangeably and also depending on audience.

Because for example, in the Serbian context, now I see a lot of younger researchers also talking a lot about anti-Roma racism, and this obviously ties into bigger struggles, anti-racist struggles.

So it's also a political question.

And I feel for me, they can be used interchangeably.

So I will probably also be doing so throughout this episode.

And one last note on terminology, when we are already speaking about language, I will use the term gypsy in this episode only when talking about the construct or the image of gypsies and not when I talk about the actual members of the minority, because then I will be talking about Roma or Romani people.