Wikia

Psychology Wiki

Nationalism

Talk0
34,142pages on
this wiki
Revision as of 15:36, February 3, 2010 by AWeidman (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |

Social psychology: Altruism · Attribution · Attitudes · Conformity · Discrimination · Groups · Interpersonal relations · Obedience · Prejudice · Norms · Perception · Index · Outline


Eugène Delacroix - La liberté guidant le peuple

Liberty Leading the People by Eugène Delacroix

Nationalism is an ideology [1] that holds that a nation is the fundamental unit for human social life, and takes precedence over any other social and political principles. Nationalism makes certain political claims based upon this belief: above all, the claim that the nation is the only legitimate basis for the state, that each nation is entitled to its own state, and that the borders of the state should be congruent with the borders of the nation.[2] Nationalism refers to both a political doctrine[3] and any collective action[4] by political and social movements on behalf of specific nations. Nationalism has had an enormous influence upon world history, since the nation-state has become the dominant form of state organization. Most of the world's population now lives in states which are, at least nominally, nation-states. Historians also use the term 'nationalism' to refer to this historical transition, and to the emergence of nationalist ideology and movements.

Principles of NationalismEdit

This section sets out the components of nationalist ideology as seen by nationalists themselves. (Academic theories of nationalism are sceptical of some of these beliefs and principles, see below).

Nationalism is a form of universalism when it makes universal claims about how the world should be organised, but it is particularistic with regard to individual nations. The combination of both is characteristic for the ideology, for instance in these assertions:

  • "in a nation-state, the language of the nation should be the official language, and all citizens should speak it, and not a foreign language."
  • "the official language of Denmark should be Danish, and all Danish citizens should speak it."

The universalistic principles bring nationalism into conflict with competing forms of universalism, the particularistic principles bring specific nationalist movements into conflict with rival nationalisms - for instance, the Danish-German tensions over their reciprocal linguistic minorities.

The starting point of nationalism is the existence of nations, which it takes as a given. Nations are typically seen as entities with a long history: most nationalists do not believe a nation can be created artificially. Nationalist movements see themselves as the representative of an existing, centuries-old nation. However, some theories of nationalism imply the reverse order - that the nationalist movements created the sense of national identity, and then a political unit corresponding to it, or that an existing state promoted a 'national' identity for itself.

Nationalists see nations as an inclusive categorisation of human beings - assigning every individual to one specific nation. In fact, nationalism sees most human activity as national in character. Nations have national symbols, a national culture, a national music and national literature; national folklore, a national mythology and - in some cases - even a national religion. Individuals share national values and a national identity, admire the national hero, eat the national dish and play the national sport.

Nationalists define individual nations on the basis of certain criteria, which distinguish one nation from another; and determine who is a member of each nation. These criteria typically include a shared language, culture, and/or shared values which are predominantly represented within a specific ethnic group. National identity refers both to these defining criteria, and to the shared heritage of each group. Membership in a nation is usually involuntary and determined by birth. Individual nationalisms vary in their degree of internal uniformity: some are monolithic, and tolerate little variance from the national norms. Academic nationalism theory emphasises that national identity is contested, reflecting differences in region, class, gender, and language or dialect. A recent development is the idea of a national core culture, in Germany the Leitkultur, which emphasises a minimal set of non-negotiable values: this is primarily a strategy of cultural assimilation in response to immigration.

Nationalism has a strong territorial component, with an inclusive categorisation of territory corresponding to the categorisation of individuals. For each nation, there is a territory which is uniquely associated with it, the national homeland, and together they account for most habitable land. This is reflected in the geopolitical claims of nationalism, which seeks to order the world as a series of nation-states, each based on the national homeland of its respective nation. Territorial claims characterise the politics of nationalist movements. Established nation-states also make an implicit territorial claim, to secure their own continued existence: sometimes it is specified in the national constitution. In the nationalist view, each nation has a moral entitlement to a sovereign state: this is usually taken as a given.

The nation-state is intended to guarantee the existence of a nation, to preserve its distinct identity, and to provide a territory where the national culture and ethos are dominant - nationalism is also a philosophy of the state. It sees a nation-state as a necessity for each nation: secessionist national movements often complain about their second-class status as a minority within another nation. This specific view of the duties of the state influenced the introduction of national education systems, often teaching a standard curriculum, national cultural policy, and national language policy. In turn, nation-states appeal to a national cultural-historical mythos to justify their existence, and to confer political legitimacy - acquiescence of the population in the authority of the government.

Nationalists recognise that 'non-national' states exist and existed, but do not see them as a legitimate form of state. The struggles of early nationalist movements were often directed against such non-national states, specifically multi-ethnic empires such as Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire. Most multi-ethnic empires have disappeared, but some secessionist movements see Russia and China as comparable non-national, imperial states. At least one modern state is clearly not a nation-state: the Vatican City exists solely to provide a sovereign territorial unit for the Catholic Church.

Nationalism as ideology includes ethical principles: that the moral duties of individuals to fellow members of the nation override those to non-members. Nationalism claims that national loyalty, in case of conflict, overrides local loyalties, and all other loyalties to family, friends, profession, religion, or class.

Theory of nationalismEdit

Background and problemsEdit

Specific examples of nationalism are extremely diverse, the issues are emotional, and the conflicts often bloody. The theory of nationalism has always been complicated by this background, and by the intrusion of nationalist ideology into the theory. There are also national differences in the theory of nationalism, since people define nationalism on the basis of their local experience. Theory (and media coverage) may overemphasise conflicting nationalist movements, ethnic tension, and war - diverting attention from general theoretical issues; for instance, the characteristics of nation-states.

Nationalist movements are surrounded by other nationalist movements and nations, and this may colour their version of nationalism. It may focus purely on self-determination, and ignore other nations. When conflicts arise, however, ideological attacks upon the identity and legitimacy of the 'enemy' nationalism may become the focus. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, for instance, both sides have claimed that the other is not a 'real' nation, and therefore has no right to a state. Jingoism and chauvinism make exaggerated claims about the superiority of one nation over another. National stereotypes are also common, and are usually insulting. This kind of negative nationalism, directed at other nations, is certainly a nationalist phenomenon, but not a sufficient basis for a general theory of nationalism.

Issues in nationalism theoryEdit

The first studies of nationalism were generally historical accounts of nationalist movements. At the end of the 19th century, Marxists and other socialists produced political analyses that were critical of the nationalist movements then active in central and eastern Europe. Most sociological theories of nationalism date from after the Second World War. Some nationalism theory is about issues which concern nationalists themselves, such as who belongs to the nation and who does not, as well as the precise meaning of 'belonging'.

Origin of nations and nationalismEdit

Recent general theory has looked at underlying issues, and above all the question of which came first, nations or nationalism. Nationalist activists see themselves as representing a pre-existing nation, and the primordialist theory of nationalism agrees. It sees nations, or at least ethnic groups, as a social reality dating back twenty thousand years.

The modernist theories imply that until around 1800, almost no-one had more than local loyalties. National identity and unity were originally imposed from above, by European states, because they were necessary to modernise of economy and society. In this theory, nationalist conflicts are an unintended side-effect. For example, Ernest Gellner argued that nations are a by-product of industrialization, which required a large literate and culturally homogeneous population.[5] According to Charles Tilly, states promoted nationalism in order to assure the popular consent with conscription into large modern armies and taxation, which was necessary to maintain such armies.[6] According to the modernist view, the first true nation state was created by the French Revolution, though the tendencies have existed since the beginning of the Modern Era. In addition to the top-down nationalism, there were also cases of the bottom-up nationalism, such as the German Romantic nationalism, materialized in the resistance against Napoleon.

More recent theorists of nationalism emphasise that nations are a socially constructed phenomenon. Benedict Anderson, for example, described nations as "imagined communities". Gellner comments: "Nationalism is not the awakening of nations to self-consciousness: it invents nations where they do not exist." (Anderson and Gellner deploy terms such as 'imagined' and 'invent' in a neutral, descriptive manner. The use of these terms in this context is not intended to imply that nations are fictional or fantastic.) Modernisation theorists see such things as the printing press and capitalism as necessary conditions for nationalism.

Anthony D. Smith proposed a synthesis of primordialist and modernist views. According to Smith, the preconditions for the formation of a nation are as follows:

  • A fixed homeland (current or historical)
  • High autonomy
  • Hostile surroundings
  • Memories of battles
  • Sacred centres
  • Languages and scripts
  • Special customs
  • Historical records and thinking

Those preconditions may create powerful common mythology. Therefore, the mythic homeland is in reality more important for the national identity than the actual territory occupied by the nation. Smith also posits that nations are formed through the inclusion of the whole populace (not just elites), constitution of legal and political institutions, nationalist ideology, international recognition and drawing up of borders.

Theoretical literature on nationalismEdit

There is a large amount of theoretical and empirical literature on nationalism. The following is a minimal selection, and a series of capsule summaries that do not do justice to the range of views expressed.

  • Anderson, Benedict. 1991. Imagined Communities. 2nd ed. London: Verso. Anderson argues that nations are imagined political communities, and are imagined to be limited and sovereign. Their development is due to the decline of other types of imagined community, especially in the face of capitalist production of print media.
  • Armstrong, John. 1982. Nations Before Nationalism. Armstrong traces the development of national identities from origins in antiquity and the medieval world.
  • Breuilly, John. 1992. Nationalism and the State. 2nd ed. Manchester: Manchester University Press. This approach focuses on the politics of nationalism, in particular on nationalism as a response to the imperatives of the modern state. It employs the mode of comparative history to study a large number of different cases of nationalism.
  • Gellner, Ernest. 1983. Nations and Nationalism. Oxford: Blackwell. This work links nationalism to the homogenising imperatives of industrial society and the reactions of minority cultures to those imperatives.
  • Greenfeld, Liah. 1992. Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Greenfeld argues that nationalism existed at an earlier age than previously thought: as early as the sixteenth century in the case of England.
  • Hechter, Michael. 1975. Internal Colonialism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Hechter attributes nationalism in the "Celtic fringe" of Britain and Ireland to the reinforcing divisions of culture and the division of labour.
  • Hobsbawm, Eric, and Ranger, Terence, eds. 1983. The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. This collection of essays, especially Hobsbawm's introduction and chapter on turn-of-the-century Europe, argues that the nation is a prominent type of invented tradition.
  • Kedourie, Elie. 1960. Nationalism. London: Hutchinson. Kedourie focuses on the role of disaffected German intellectuals in developing the doctrine of nationalism at the beginning of the nineteenth century from Kant's idea of the autonomy of the will and Herder's belief in the primacy of linguistic communities in establishing modes of thought.
  • Kedourie, Elie, ed. 1971. Nationalism in Asia and Africa. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Kedourie's introduction to this volume of nationalist texts extends his analysis in his earlier work to the efforts of intellectuals in colonial states.
  • Nairn, Tom. 1977. The Break-up of Britain. London: New Left Books. Marxist historian Nairn traces nationalism to the confrontation of colonialism, which leaves indigenous elites without recourse to any resources but their own population.
  • Smith, Anthony D. 1986. The Ethnic Origins of Nations. Oxford: Blackwell. Smith traces modern nations and nationalism to pre-modern ethnic sources, arguing for the existence of an "ethnic core" in modern nations.

Historical evolution of nationalismEdit

Prior to 1900Edit

Unification of Italy 1815-1870

Gradual unification of independent principalities into an Italian nation state in 1815-1870

Most theories of nationalism assume a European origin of the nation-state. The modern state is often seen as emerging with the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, though this view is disputed. This treaty created the 'Westphalian system' of states, which recognised each other's sovereignty and territory. Some of the signatories, such as the Dutch Republic, qualify as a nation-state, but in 1648 most states in Europe were still non-national.

Many, but not all, see the major transition to nation-states as originating in the late 18th and 19th centuries. Beginning with romantic nationalism, nationalist movements arose throughout Europe, a process accelerated by the French Revolution and the conquests of Napoleon Bonaparte. Some of these movements were separatist, directed against large empires: an early example is the Greek Revolution (1821-1829). Others sought to unify a divided or fragmented territory, as in the Italian unification under the rule of Piedmont-Sardinia. These movements promoted a national identity and culture: in the 1848 Revolutions in Europe they were often associated with liberal demands. By the end of the 19th century most people accepted that Europe was divided into nations, and personally identified with one of these nations. The collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman Empire after the First World War accelerated the formation of nation-states.

According to the standard view, before the 19th century people had local, regional, or religious loyalties, but no idea of nationhood. The typical state in Europe was a dynastic state, ruled by a royal house: if there were any loyalties above regional level, they were owed to the king and the ruling house. Dynastic states could acquire territory by royal marriage, and lose it by division of inheritance - which is now seen as absurd. Nationalism introduced the idea that each nation has a specific territory, and that beyond this point the claims of other nations apply. Nation-states, in principle, do not seek to conquer territory. However, nationalist movements rarely agreed on where the border should be. As the nationalist movements grew, they introduced new territorial disputes in Europe.

Nationalism also determined the political life of 19th century Europe. Where the nation was part of an empire, the national liberation struggle was also a struggle against older autocratic regimes, and nationalism was allied with liberal anti-monarchical movements. Where the nation-state was a consolidation of an older monarchy, as in Spain, nationalism was itself conservative and monarchical. Most nationalist movements began in opposition to the existing order, but by the 20th century, there were regimes which primarily identified themselves as nationalist.

The standard theory of the 19th-century origin of nation-states is disputed. One problem with it is that the South American independence struggles and the American Revolution (American War of Independence) predate most European nationalist movements. Some countries, such as the Netherlands and England, seem to have had a clear national identity well before the 19th century.

20th Century nationalismEdit

By the end of the 19th century, nationalist ideas had begun to spread to Asia. In India, nationalism began to encourage calls for the end of British rule. The 20th century nationalist movement in India is generally associated with Mahatma Gandhi, although many other leaders were involved as well. In China, nationalism influenced the 1911 Revolution. In Japan, nationalism and Japanese "exceptionalism" influenced Japanese imperialism.

World War I led to to the creation of new nation-states in Europe. This was encouraged by the United States, which rejected the legitimacy of the former multi-ethnic empires, see Wilsonianism. France, which sought to to isolate Germany and Austria, also encouraged the creation of potential client states. The Ottoman Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Empire disintegrated. The Versailles Treaty, based upon US President Wilson's Fourteen Points, partially conformed the division into new nation-states. In the Middle East, the Arab Revolt did not lead to new independent states: the victorious western powers secured a League of Nations mandate for Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine including Transjordan, and Syria. The Turkish War of Independence (1919-1923) created a new nation state from the core of the Ottoman Empire. In the east of Europe, the Russian Empire had collapsed, as a result of the Russian Revolution of 1917. The Anglo-Irish War led to the partition of Ireland into the Irish Free State and Northern Ireland.

However, multi-nation and multi-ethnic states survived in Europe; and two new ones emerged, Czechoslovakia (where the more prosperous Czech half dominated), and the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, (dominated by Serbia). In the interwar period, the extreme nationalist movements of fascism and Nazism came to power in Italy and Germany respectively, and similar groups took over several other European countries during the late 1930s. This new wave of nationalism had powerful racist undertones, and it culminated in World War II and the Holocaust.

File:Identified Victims.jpg

The horrors of World War II discredited militant nationalism as an ideology, but scarcely altered the division of Europe into nation-states. Outside Europe, the war initiated a new wave of nation-state formation, through the independence of African and Asian nations from European colonial empires. The most dramatic decolonisation began in the late 1950's in Africa, which was transformed from a collection of European colonies into a continent of nation-states. Few of them corresponded to the ideal nation-state (one nation, one language, one culture), but most still exist. Ironically, the one that best met those criteria, Somalia, disintegrated. The Algerian War of Independence was the most bloody of the decolonisation wars in Africa: some decolonisations were peaceful. Rhodesia and the Portuguese colonies of Mozambique and Angola delayed decolonisation for a time.

The collapse of the Soviet Union led to an unexpected revival of national movements in Europe around 1990. Its constituent states became independent, for the second time (in modern history) in the case of the Baltic states - Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania. The second Yugoslavia broke up into nation states, some with predecessor states such as the Nazi-oriented Independent State of Croatia, some as new sovereign states. Within established nation-states, there are many secessionist movements, some of them seeking the creation of a new sovereign state, for instance in Quebec. The unresolved status of in Northern Ireland led to protracted violence known as The Troubles, but without changes in the border.

In the second half of the 20th century, some trends emerged which might indicate a weakening of the nation-state and nationalism. The European Union is widely seen transferring power from the national level, to both sub-national and supra-national levels. Critics of globalization often appeal to feelings of national identity, culture, and sovereignty. Free trade agreements, such as NAFTA and the GATT, and the increasing internationalisation of trade markets, are seen as damaging to the national economy, and have led to a revival of economic nationalism. Protest movements vehemently oppose these negative aspects of globalization, (see Anti-globalisation).

Not all anti-globalists are nationalists, but nationalism continues to assert itself in response to those trends. Nationalist parties continue to do well in elections, and most people continue to have a strong sense of attachment to their nationality. Moreover, globalism and European federalism are not always opposed to nationalism. For example, theorists of Chinese nationalism within the People's Republic of China have articulated the idea that China's national power is substantially enhanced, rather than being reduced, by engaging in international trade and multinational organizations. For a time sub-national groups such as Catalan autonomists and Welsh nationalists supported a stronger European Union in the hope that a Europe of the regions would limit the power of the present nation-states. However, with Euroscepticism now widespread in the EU, this transformation is no longer on its political agenda.

Language and NationalismEdit

A common language has been a defining characteristic of the nation, and an ideal for nationalists. For example, in France before the French Revolution, regional languages such as Breton and Occitan were spoken, which were mutually incomprehensible. Standard French was also spoken in large parts of the country and had also been the language of administration, but after the Revolution it was imposed as the national language in non-French-speaking regions. For instance, in Brittany, Celtic names were forbidden. The formation of nation-states, and their consolidation after independence, is generally accompanied by policies to restrict, replace, or abandon minority languages. This accelerates the tendency noted in sociolinguistic research that high-status languages displace low-status languages. See also: Language policy in France.

Some theorists believe that nationalism became pronounced in the 19th century simply because language became a more important unifier due to increased literacy. With more people reading newspapers, books, pamphlets and so on, which were increasingly widely available to read since the spread of the printing press, it became possible for the first time to develop a broader cultural attachment beyond the local community. At the same time, differences in language solidified, breaking down old dialects, and excluding those from completely different language groups.

Nationalist movements from Ireland to India promote the teaching, revival preservation, and use of traditional languages, such as Celtic languages, Hebrew, and Hindi. (See also: Language revival.)

The United States, a country which historically welcomed immigrants of varying nationality, has what can be seen as a pattern of discrimination against languages other than English. Prominent examples are the German language, which was nearly eradicated during World War I, and French and Italian, which have nearly disappeared from everyday life. Today Spanish is a second language across large portion of the country. Some politicians, such as Pat Buchanan have consciously opposed the rise of Spanish as a second American language, for fear that it would undermine unity in the American national character.

In the Arab World during the colonial period, the Turkish language, French language, Spanish language and English language were often imposed, although the intensity of imposition varied widely. When the colonial period ended (mostly after World War Two), a process of "Arabisation" began; reviving Arabic to unify their states and to facilitate a broader Arab identity, motivated by Pan-Arabism. Countries such as Algeria and Western Sahara underwent large scale Arabisations, changing from French and Spanish to Arabic respectively.

However within the Arab World, some nationalistic attempts were made to emancipate a domestic vernacular and treat classical Arabic as a formal foreign language, which was often incomprehensible to the non-literate population of nominally Arab countries, which were politically - but not necessarily linguistically, culturally or ethnically, Arabized. These policies were first promoted in Egypt in the early 20th century by the Egyptian scholar and nationalist Ahmad Lutfi al-Sayyid, who called for the formalization of the Egyptian Vernacular as the native language of the Egyptian people.

Similar attempts to emphasise minority languages completely independent of Arabic were made by the Nubians, speakers of Nobiinm who are split between Egypt and Sudan, and relatively more successfully by the Imazighen (commonly known as Berber) in Morocco.

Types of nationalismEdit

Nationalism may manifest itself as part of official state ideology or as a popular (non-state) movement and may be expressed along civic, ethnic, cultural, religious or ideological lines. These self-definitions of the nation are used to classify types of nationalism. However such categories are not mutually exclusive and many nationalist movements combine some or all of these elements to varying degrees. Nationalist movements can also be classified by other criteria, such as scale and location.

Some political theorists make the case that any distinction between forms of nationalism is false. In all forms of nationalism, the populations believe that they share some kind of common culture, and culture can never be wholly separated from ethnicity. The United States, for example, has "God" on its coinage and in its Pledge of Allegiance, and designates official holidays which are seen by some to promote cultural biases. The United States has an ethnic theory of being American (nativism), and, for a short period in the 20th Century, had a committee to investigate Un-American Activities.

Civic nationalismEdit

Civic nationalism (or civil nationalism) is the form of nationalism in which the state derives political legitimacy from the active participation of its citizenry, from the degree to which it represents the "will of the people". It is often seen as originating with Jean-Jacques Rousseau and especially the social contract theories which take their name from his 1762 book The Social Contract. Civic nationalism lies within the traditions of rationalism and liberalism, but as a form of nationalism it is contrasted with ethnic nationalism. Membership of the civic nation is considered voluntary. Civic-national ideals influenced the development of representative democracy in countries such as the United States and France.

Ethnic nationalismEdit

Ethnic nationalism, or ethnonationalism, defines the nation in terms of ethnicity, which always includes some element of descent from previous generations. It also includes ideas of a culture shared between members of the group and with their ancestors, and usually a shared language. Membership in the nation is hereditary. The state derives political legitimacy from its status as homeland of the ethnic group, and from its function to protect the national group and facilitate its cultural and social life, as a group. Ideas of ethnicity are very old, but modern ethnic nationalism was heavily influenced by Johann Gottfried von Herder, who promoted the concept of the Volk, and Johann Gottlieb Fichte. Ethnic nationalism is now the dominant form, and is often simply referred to as "nationalism". Note that the theorist Anthony Smith uses the term 'ethnic nationalism' for non-Western concepts of nationalism, as opposed to Western views of a nation defined by its geographical territory. (The term "ethnonationalism" is generally used only in reference to nationalists who espouse an explicit ideology along these lines; "ethnic nationalism" is the more generic term, and used for nationalists who hold these beliefs in an informal, instinctive, or unsystematic way. The pejorative form of both is "ethnocentric nationalism" or "tribal nationalism," though "tribal nationalism" can have a non-pejorative meaning when discussing African, Native American, or other nationalisms that openly assert a tribal identity.)

Romantic nationalismEdit

Romantic nationalism (also organic nationalism, identity nationalism) is the form of ethnic nationalism in which the state derives political legitimacy as a natural ("organic") consequence and expression of the nation, or race. It reflected the ideals of Romanticism and was opposed to Enlightenment rationalism. Romantic nationalism emphasised a historical ethnic culture which meets the Romantic Ideal; folklore developed as a Romantic nationalist concept. The Brothers Grimm were inspired by Herder's writings to create an idealised collection of tales which they labeled as ethnically German. Historian Jules Michelet exemplifies French romantic-nationalist history.

Cultural nationalismEdit

Cultural nationalism defines the nation by shared culture. Membership in the nation is neither entirely voluntary (you cannot instantly acquire a culture), nor hereditary (children of members may be considered foreigners if they grew up in another culture). Chinese nationalism is one example of cultural nationalism, partly because of the many national minorities in China. (The 'Chinese nationalists' include those on Taiwan who reject the mainland Chinese government but claim the mainland Chinese state).

Liberal nationalismEdit

Liberal nationalism is a kind of nationalism defended recently by political philosophers who believe that there can be a non-xenophobic form of nationalism compatible with liberal values of freedom, tolerance, equality, and individual rights (Tamir 1993; Kymlicka 1995; Miller 1995). Ernest Renan (1882) and John Stuart Mill (1861) are often thought to be early liberal nationalists. Liberal nationalists often defend the value of national identity by saying that individuals need a national identity in order to lead meaningful, autonomous lives (Kymlicka 1995; for criticism see Patten 1999) and that liberal democratic polities need national identity in order to function properly (Miller 1995; for criticism see Abizadeh 2002, 2004).

State nationalismEdit

State nationalism is a variant on civic nationalism, very often combined with ethnic nationalism. It implies that the nation is a community of those who contribute to the maintenance and strength of the state, and that the individual exists to contribute to this goal. Italian fascism is the best example, epitomised in this slogan of Mussolini: "Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato." ("Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State"). It is no surprise that this conflicts with liberal ideals of individual liberty, and with liberal-democratic principles. The revolutionary (liberal) Jacobin creation of a unitary and centralist French state is often seen as the original version of state nationalism. Franquist Spain, and contemporary Turkish nationalism are later examples of state nationalism.

However, the term "state nationalism" is often used in conflicts between nationalisms, and especially where a secessionist movement confronts an established nation state. The secessionists speak of state nationalism to discredit the legitimacy of the larger state, since state nationalism is perceived as less authentic and less democratic. Flemish separatists speak of Belgian nationalism as a state nationalism. Basque separatists and Corsican separatists refer to Spain and France, respectively, in this way. There are no undisputed external criteria to assess which side is right, and the result is usually that the population is divided by conflicting appeals to its loyalty and patriotism.

Religious nationalismEdit

Religious nationalism (also) defines the nation in terms of shared religion. If the state derives political legitimacy from adherence to religious doctrines, then it is more of a theocracy than a nation-state. In practice, many ethnic and cultural nationalisms are in some ways religious in character. The religion is a marker of group identity, rather than the motivation for nationalist claims. Irish nationalism is associated with Roman Catholicism, and most Irish nationalist leaders of the last 100 years were Catholic, but many of the early (18th century) nationalists were Protestant. Irish nationalism never centred on theological distinctions like transubstantiation, the status of the Virgin Mary, or the primacy of the Pope, but for some Protestants in Northern Ireland, these pre-Reformation doctrines are indeed part of Irish culture. Similarly, although Religious Zionism exists and influences many, the mainstream of Zionism is more secular in nature, and based on culture and Jewish ethnicity. Since the partition of British India, Indian nationalism is associated with Hinduism. In modern India, a contemporary form of Hindu nationalism, or Hindutva has been prominent among many followers of the Bharatiya Janata Party and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Religious nationalism characterized by communal adherence to Eastern Orthodoxy and national Orthodox Churches is still prevalent in many states of Eastern Europe, Russia.

Pan-nationalismEdit

Pan-nationalism is usually an ethnic and cultural nationalism, but the 'nation' is itself a cluster of related ethnic groups and cultures, such as Turkic peoples. Occasionally pan-nationalism is applied to mono-ethnic nationalism, when the national group is dispersed over a wide area and several states - as in Pan-Germanism.

Diaspora nationalismEdit

Diaspora nationalism (or, as Benedict Anderson terms it, "long-distance nationalism") generally refers to nationalist feeling among a diaspora such as the Irish in the United States, or the Lebanese in the Americas and Africa, and the Armenians in Europe and the United States. [2] Anderson states that this sort of nationalism acts as a "phantom bedrock" for people who want to experience a national connection, but who do not actually want to leave their diaspora community. The essential difference between pan-nationalism and diaspora nationalism is that members of a diaspora, by definition, are no longer resident in their national or ethnic homeland. In the specific case of Zionism, the national movement advocates migration to the claimed national homeland, which would - if 100% effected - end the diaspora.

Nationalism within a nationEdit

With the establishment of a nation-state, the primary goal of any nationalist movement has been achieved. However, nationalism does not disappear but remains a political force within the nation, and inspires political parties and movements. The terms nationalist and 'nationalist politician’ are often used to describe these movements; nationalistic would be more accurate. Nationalists in this sense typically campaign for:

Nationalist parties and nationalist politicians, in this sense, usually place great emphasis on national symbols, such as the national flag.

The term 'nationalism' is also used by extension, or as a metaphor, to describe movements which promote a group identity of some kind. This use is especially common in the United States, and includes black nationalism and white nationalism in a cultural sense. They may overlap with nationalism in the classic sense, including black secessionist movements and pan-Africanism.

Nationalists obviously have a positive attitude toward their own nation, although this is not a definition of nationalism. The emotional appeal of nationalism is visible even in established and stable nation-states. The social psychology of nations includes national identity (the individual’s sense of belonging to a group), and national pride (self-association with the success of the group). National pride is related to the cultural influence of the nation, and its economic and political strength - although they may be exaggerated. However the most important factor is that the emotions are shared: nationalism in sport includes the shared disappointment if the national team loses.

The emotions can be purely negative: a shared sense of threat can unify the nation. However, dramatic events, such as defeat in war, can qualitatively affect national identity and attitudes to non-national groups. The defeat of Germany in World War I, and the perceived humiliation by the Treaty of Versailles, economic crisis and hyperinflation, created a climate for xenophobia, revanchism, and the rise of Nazism. The solid bourgeois patriotism of the pre-1914 years, with the Kaiser as national father-figure, was no longer relevant.

Nationalism and extremismEdit

Although nationalism influences many aspects of life in stable nation-states, its presence is often invisible, since the nation-state is taken for granted. Michael Billig speaks of banal nationalism, the everyday, less visible forms of nationalism, which shape the minds of a nation's inhabitants on a day-to-day basis. Attention concentrates on extreme aspects, and on nationalism in unstable regions. Nationalism may be used as a derogatory label for political parties, or they may use it themselves as a euphemism for xenophobia, even if their policies are no more specifically nationalist, than other political parties in the same country. In Europe, some 'nationalist' anti-immigrant parties have a large electorate, and are represented in parliament. Smaller but highly visible groups, such as far right skinheads, also self-identify as 'nationalist', although it may be a euphemism for neo-Nazis or white supremacists. Activists in other countries are often referred to as ultra-nationalists, with a clearly pejorative meaning. See also chauvinism and jingoism.

File:Kovnopogrom.jpg

Nationalism is a component of other political ideologies, and in its extreme form, fascism. However it is not accurate to simply describe fascism as a more extreme form of nationalism, although non-extreme nationalism can be seen as a lesser form of fascism. Fascism in the general sense, and the Italian original, were marked by a strong combination of ethnic nationalism and state nationalism, often combined with a form of economic and ethical socialism. That was certainly evident in Nazism. However the geopolitical aspirations of Adolf Hitler are probably better described as imperialist, and Nazi Germany ultimately ruled over vast areas where there was no historic German presence. The Nazi state was so different from the typical European nation-state, that it was sui generis (requires a category of its own).

RacismEdit

Nationalism does not necessarily imply a belief in the superiority of one nation over others, but in practice some (but not all) nationalists do think that way about their own nation. Occasionally they believe another nation can serve as an example for their own nation, see Anglophilia. There is a specific racial nationalism which can be considered an ethnic nationalism, but some form of racism can be found within almost all nationalist movements. It is usually directed at neighbouring nations and ethnic groups.

Racism was also a feature of colonialist ideologies, which were especially strong at the end of the 19th century. Strictly speaking, overseas colonies conflict with the principles of the nation-state, since they are not part of the historic homeland of the nation, and their inhabitants clearly do not belong to the same ethnic group, speak its language, or share its culture. In practice, nationalists sometimes combined a belief in self-determination in Europe, with colonisation in Africa or Asia.

Explicit biological race theory was influential from the end of the 19th century. Nationalist and fascist movements in the first half of the 20th century often appealed to these theories. The Nazi ideology was probably the most comprehensively racial ideology in history, and race influenced all aspects of policy in Nazi Germany.

Nevertheless racism continues to be an influence on nationalism. Ethnic cleansing is often seen as both a nationalist and racist phenomenon. It is part of nationalist logic that the state is reserved for one nation, but not all nation-states expel their minorities. The best known recent examples of ethnic cleansing are those during the Yugoslav secession war in the 1990s. Other examples seen as related to racism include the removal of Germans from the Volga Republic during the 1950s, and the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire in 1915.

Opposition and critiqueEdit

Nationalism is an extremely assertive ideology, which makes far-reaching demands, including the disappearance of entire states. It is not surprising that it has attracted vehement opposition. Much of the early opposition to nationalism was related to its geopolitical ideal of a separate state for every nation. The classic nationalist movements of the 19th century rejected the very existence of the multi-ethnic empires in Europe. This resulted in severe repression by the (generally autocratic) governments of those empires. That tradition of secessionism, repression, and violence continues, although by now a large nation typically confronts a smaller nation. Even in that early stage, however, there was an ideological critique of nationalism. That has developed into several forms of anti-nationalism in the western world. The Islamic revival of the 20th century also produced an Islamic critique of the nation-state.

In the liberal political tradition there is widespread criticism of ‘nationalism’ as a dangerous force and a cause of conflict and war between nation-states. Liberals do not generally dispute the existence of the nation-states. The liberal critique also emphasises individual freedom as opposed to national identity, which is by definition collective (see collectivism).

The pacifist critique of nationalism also concentrates on the violence of nationalist movements, the associated militarism, and on conflicts between nations inspired by jingoism or chauvinism. National symbols and patriotic assertiveness are in some countries discredited by their historical link with past wars, especially in Germany.

The anti-racist critique of nationalism concentrates on the attitudes to other nations, and especially on the doctrine that the nation-state exists for one national group, to the exclusion of others. It emphasises the chauvinism and xenophobia of many nationalisms.

Political movements of the left have often been suspicious of nationalism, again without necessarily seeking the disappearance of the existing nation-states. Marxism has been ambiguous towards the nation-state, and in the late 19th century some Marxist theorists rejected it completely. For some Marxists the world revolution implied a global state (or global absence of state); for others it meant that each nation-state had its own revolution. A significant event in this context was the failure of the social-democratic and socialist movements in Europe to mobilise a cross-border workers' opposition to World War I. At present most, but certainly not all, left-wing groups accept the nation-state, and see it as the political arena for their activities.

In the Western world the most comprehensive current ideological alternative to nationalism is cosmopolitanism. Ethical cosmopolitanism rejects one of the basic ethical principles of nationalism: that humans owe more duties to a fellow member of the nation, than to a non-member. It rejects such important nationalist values as national identity and national loyalty. However there is also a political cosmopolitanism, which has a geopolitical programme to match that of nationalism: it seeks some form of world state, with a world government. Very few people openly and explicitly support the establishment of a global state, but political cosmopolitanism has influenced the development of international criminal law, and the erosion of the status of national sovereignty. In turn, nationalists are deeply suspicious of cosmopolitan attitudes, which they equate with treason and betrayal.

While internationalism in the cosmopolitanist context by definition implies cooperation among nations, and therefore the existence of nations, proletarian internationalism is different, in that it calls for the international working class to follow its brethren in other countries irrespective of the activities or pressures of the national government of a particular sector of that class. Meanwhile, anarchism rejects nation-states on the basis of self-determination of the majority social class, and thus reject nationalism. Instead of nations, anarchists usually advocate the creation of cooperative societies based on free association and mutual aid without regard to ethnicity or race.

Islamism and NationalismEdit

Some radical Islamists who reject the existence of any state on any basis, other than the Islamic caliphate. For them, the unity of Islam means that there can be only one government on Earth, in the form usually titled caliphate (khilafah). It is not a state in the usual Western sense, but all existing states are incompatible with this ideal, including the Islamic nation-states with Islam as the official religion. Only a minority of Islamists take this view, but insofar as Al-Qaeda has an ideology, it includes the goal of the caliphate. The Ba'ath Party and related groups have historically offered a secular Arab Nationalist opposition to Islamism in Arab countries.

As a universal religion, Islam is nominally opposed to any categorisation of people not based on one's beliefs. Islam promotes a strong feeling of community among all Muslims, who collectively constitute the Ummah. The word "Ummah" is often incorrectly translated into English as "Islamic nation" but it is not a nation in this sense and not a synonym of 'caliphate', although the idea is associated with the historic caliphates. There is no doubt that many Muslims do strongly identify with the religious community, probably more so than Christians. The confusion may arise because in other cases it does translate to the English word "nation", as in the Arabic name of the United Nations,الأمم المتحدة, Al Umam al Mutahidah. Shared observances such as the holy month of Ramadan and the Hajj (the pilgrimage to Mecca), contribute to this common Muslim identification. The Nation of Islam in the United States has been criticised by some Muslims, who find the comparison between Islam and an earthly nation offensive.

See alsoEdit

Look up this page on
Wiktionary: Nationalism

Wikiquote-logo-en
Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:
This entry is related to, but not included in the Political ideologies series or one of its sub-series. Other related articles can be found at the Politics Portal.


CompareEdit

External linksEdit

References Edit

  1. "Nationalism I would define as an ideology claiming that a given human population has a natural solidarity based on shared history and a common destiny. This collective identity as a historically constituted “people” crucially entails the right to constitute an independent or autonomous political community. The idea of nationalism takes form historically in tandem with the doctrine of popular sovereignty: that the ultimate source of authority lies in the people, not the ruler or government. The foregoing definition of nationalism will be found in any classic text with minor variations." M. Crawford Young, 2004. Revisiting nationalism and ethnicity in Africa. UCLA International Institute, James S. Coleman Memorial Lecture Series. Or: Handler, Richard. "Nationalism is an ideology about individuated being. It is an ideology concerned with boundedness, continuity, and homogeneity encompassing diversity. It is an ideology in which social reality, conceived in terms of nationhood, is endowed with the reality of natural things." Nationalism and the Politics of Culture in Quebec. New Directions in Antropological Writing: History, Poetics, Cultural Criticism, ed. George E.; Clifford Marcus, James. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1988. Passage online at [1]. Specifically on the issue: M. Freeden, 1998. Is Nationalism a Distinct Ideology? Political Studies, Volume 46, Number 4, September 1998, pp. 748-765(18).
  2. Gellner, Ernest. 1983. Nations and Nationalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
  3. Gellner, Ernest. 1983. Nations and Nationalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
  4. Hechter, Michael. 2001. Containing Nationalism. ISBN 0-19-924751-X .
  5. Gellner, Ernest. 1983. Nations and Nationalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
  6. Tilly, Charles. 1990. Coercion, Capital and European States AD 990-1992. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.

Further readingEdit

This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia (view authors).

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki