the new russian nationalismEthnic identity is one of the strongest shortcuts of this kind, being
‘an especially useful uncertainty- reducing device’ in the context
of group politics (Hale 2008: 40–7). The present analysis has
further shown how ethnic group identification decisively shapes
preferences when individual group members consider, project
or prospectively evaluate their status or group position within
the context of changing or uncertain – that is, dynamic – state
identity.
These prospective group status valuations under dynamic state
identity are modelled in Figures 6.4 and 6.5. The first figure maps
out the feasible state identity choices available in the contempo-
rary Russian context and links them with a distinct pattern of
state identity preferences among ethnic sub- samples of NEORUSS
survey respondents. The status quo (Russia within the borders
at the time of the survey) was the preference indicated by more
respondents than any other option across all ethnic groups (see
Figure 6.3). Preferences for other state identity options diverged.
Figure 6.4 Dominant preferences for Russia’s state identity across ethnic
groups in the 2013 NEORUSS survey.
Note: Groups listed in the right- hand column are based on percentages of responses,
within ethnic groups, to the question on preferred Russian borders and tests of statistical
significance