The goal of this paper is a presentation of images of relationships between an anthropologist and the Other based on the three main paradigms (realistic, interpretative, processual) defining epistemology and methodology of anthropological fieldwork. In the first, the Other is understood as an informant – a person with whom the anthropologist has a privileged cognitive and moral position. In the second, the Other is presented as an interlocutor who gains an equal moral position, though not epistemological. In the third one, both are presented as entities with exactly the same epistemological and moral status, which metaphorically reflects the figure of the Other as an accomplice. In the end, I describe situation from my fieldworks among the E’ñepá Indians from Venezuelan Amazonia, as an example of processual changes in my image of the relationship between Anthropologist and Other.

In the last decade, significant social movements have emerged in Southeast Europe. Citizens, mostly in the capital cities, objected to the corrupt political class and their criminal entanglements, privatization of public space, environmental degradation or NATO military pacts. As a result, we witnessed violent clashes between law enforcement and protesters, resignations of politicians and revolts. However, not everyone was protesting and – as shown in the case of Macedonia – not all citizens supported new pro-European transformation. This paper is about those who decided not to engage in protests and passively observe protest during so called the  Colorful Revolution” in Macedonia. The starting points for my analysis are the following questions: in which terms can we describe human existence when their agency is invisible or does not take affective from? Why instead of political engagement does political indifference arise? Drawing on the terms such as hope and disenchantment, I argue that passiveness and political apathy, which I observed among my research participants, was caused by the disenchantment with unfulfilled promises carried out by independence of Macedonia in 1991.

In the times of emphasized fluidification mobility becomes self-evident and naturalized, though socially desirable and anticipated. By following research participant strategies and practices, this paper analyzes the meaning of terms such as privileged and naturalized mobility, cosmopolitanism and transnationalism, and shows its multi-dimensional character. Based on the author’s ethnographic fieldwork conducted in 2016–2018 among young, educated and highly mobile Poles and foreigners who live in transnational long-distance relationships and an auto-ethnographic perspective, this article examines the notions of motility, cosmopolitanism and transnationalism and shows how mobility is rooted in their everyday lives. In this specific ethnographic context, transnational longdistance relationship is a verification tool of interlocutor practices and cultural competence that are needed to maintain the relation in the times of individualizing modernity.