Rethinking Kazakh and Central Asian nationhood : a challenge to prevailing western views

RVW1: This work immediately captures one's attention, displaying its importance and scholarly sharpness. Weller says that two of the primary imperatives of democracy in our day – the separation of religion and state and the separation of ethnicity and state – trace their roots to Western democracy (including Western Protestant Christianity) and I agree with this view. He notes that Western democracy, which is founded upon the doctrine of a territorial political nation, is not entirely suitable to Eastern democracy, which is founded upon the doctrine of ethnic nationhood. Indeed, as Weller himself points out, the contributions to democracy which the "Alash" party had in view (in the early 20th century) are not the same as the Western ones. The very processes which are underway today in our society seem to demonstrate this view. ...When Weller emphasizes that the Kazakh people, who (historically) came to possess the wide-spacious steppe, still to this day have a historical, legal right to this land, you are left with the impression that one of the Kazakh's own genuine sons has written these things. This is not blind partiality, I know it to be his objectivity as a scholar, and even his cultural cordiality. ...I know him as a person helping to connect and forge the process of establishing dialogue and genuine mutual respect for one another between two nations, two cultures, two continents.– Aktolkin T. Kulsarieva, PhDand associate professor of philosophy and culture RVW2: Charles Weller's work focuses upon one of the most vital issues that Kazakhstan is currently facing as a nation. Together with the sunny side of a nation which, after achieving independence, is pressing ahead on the road of democracy, it lays bare the shadowy aspects as well. The author comes to tell us that (scholars) are not simply looking on with impartiality at the situation of our nation which has soaked into its stature both the necessary as well as the harmful aspects of Western democracy. Then he focuses his attention on the (two) imperatives of (Western) democracy, the separation of religion and state and the separation of ethnicity and state, giving primary attention to the latter.The issues raised by the author are crucial. It is the fruit of one who is a sympathetic, spiritual brother who wishes to come to the aid of defending the Kazakh (people's) ethnic-national identity through these kinds of his own works which critique those, including albeit a few citizens encountered on occasion in our own midst, who today look indifferently and apathetically upon the indigenous culture of the (Kazakh) ethnos. The author's own word testifies to this: "it is (historically) self-evident that the Kazakh people hold a special place in the nation of Kazakhstan."– Ainur D. Kormanalieva, PhDand associate professor, eastern and Islamic studies RVW3: When I first learned from Charles Weller about the views of Western modernists, i.e. the idea that the Kazakh ethnos has no (real) history of independent nationhood and no (genuine) cultural heritage or language, but these are rather attributed to the Russians as a colonial creation, I went about for a long time unable to get a hold of myself. When he showed me a number of books espousing that view and lent me a few of them to look at, I not only heard from him, but experienced the sense of reading with my own eyes works which cast doubt upon not only the past, but the future of the Kazakhs. I said, "This concerns the destiny of an entire nation." ...If someone wishes to say something about the Kazakhs, then the wisest thing to do would be to write as they work on learning their language, read their publications in the original language, understand their outlook and mentality and become familiar with their nature. The best scholars do not study particular ethnonational groups via the material written about them in other languages. From this vantage, this work, Rethinking Kazakh and Central Asian Nationhood, is an exceedingly profitable study written by someone who has learned the Kazakh language, understood their heart and soul and who is (thus) able to give a sound, relevant answer to those in view. I have full confidence that the gratitude of the Kazakh people, whose quality is that of a peaceful people, and that of the other peoples who share their lot, will be apportioned to him. I am of the opinion that all scholars will do well to consult this work. – Nursaule Rsalieva, PhD candidateand instructor of linguistics and translation theory