NATIONS & NATIONALISM

Civic Nationalism & Ethno Nationalism
 

"..(the) division of nationalism into ‘good Western civic’ and ‘bad Eastern ethnic’ reflects both an intellectual arrogance and an idealisation of pure civic and ethnic states that do not exist in practice...Contemporary Eastern nationalism looks and feels peculiar to those in the West because of a time gap between the ethnic nationalism that permeated the West in the early stages of its national state formation and the ethnic nationalism found in some parts of the East today. As Canovan says, ‘It is unfortunately the case that a nation that is peaceful, secure and a favourite site for liberal democratic politics now usually has a past that no liberal democracy can comfortably look into’.. To what degree can we historically define Western states as ‘civic’ if they disbarred people from integration into their communities on grounds of gender, race or ethnicity, all of which occurred prior to the twentieth century. Using Kymlicka’s definition Kohn’s five states could not be defined as ‘civic’..."

"...The United States has often been viewed by ethnicity and nationalism scholars as the quintessential civic nation historically defined by its commitment to eighteenth century liberal ideology. This paper takes issue with such a perspective. Instead, the United States, for nearly its entire existence, is shown to be an ethnic nation characterized by non-conformist Protestantism and pre-Norman, Anglo-Saxon genealogy. This self-styled 'American' ethnie sought to reshape the nation in its own image and saw its destiny in Puritan, millennial terms. Faced with large flows of non-British immigrants, the 'Americans' employed techniques of Anglo-conformity in an attempt to transform the newcomers into 'WASP's. When this process was viewed as inadequate, movements of cultural nationalism and immigration restriction developed which resulted in the institution of a set of boundary-defending practices that began in the 1920's and continued into the 1960's. Developments in the 'West' have since ushered in the era of liberal civic nationhood in which the U.S. has participated. In this manner, America's shift from ethnic to civic nationalism is not exceptional, but instead reflects a broader value shift in Western culture..."

"...So-called civic nations like France, Canada, and the United States may have become relatively open societies that offer citizenship rights to all peoples, but they did not start out that way. In each case, they began with restricted core communities -- be they white or Catholic or British or European -- and expanded outward. As a result, when we urge nationalists, say in Bosnia or Kosovo, to follow our example and found nations solely on the basis of shared political principles, we are in fact urging them to do something that we never did ourselves..."

"...Contemporary scholars of nationalism often claim that nationalism is a protean doctrine, as distinct nationalisms define their relevant nations as such by employing different criteria: in some cases the nation is defined as a linguistic group, sometimes as a cultural body, a race, a collective with common history and so forth. However, it seems that the common denominator of all nationalisms, and therefore the nature of nationalism in general, applies to their conception of the nation as a sort of extended family...by ‘nationalism’ I do not refer to theories of nationalism but to actual nationalist movements and thinkers. ... I believe, there is a big gap between ‘real-world’ nationalism and the understanding of nationalism by ‘academics sympathetic to it’.

 
"... When is a nation? Nationalists traditionally argue that (their) nations are timeless phenomena that have existed since time immemorial. Theoretical approaches to the phenomenon of nationalism could be divided into perennialist, modernist and ethno-symbolic. Perennialists argue that nations have existed for a very long time, though they take different shapes at different points in history. The dominant perspective on nationalism in history and the social sciences is, however, the modernist one, which treats nations as modern constructs, the products of the new conditions that have changed the world since the Enlightenment and the French and American revolutions. But modernist views are as theoretically problematic and historically questionable as the perennialist perspective, which they supplanted. An alternative ‘ethno-symbolic’ approach reveals the various forms of the nation in history, and seeks to supplement the rather linear historical question, ‘when is the nation?’ with the more recurrent and sociological problem of ‘when is a nation?’. The latter question invites us to delineate different starting points and patterns of nation-formation in terms of ideal-type constructs, while an emphasis on the role of ethnic myths, memories, symbols and traditions helps us to explore the processes and routes by which nations are formed in different epochs and continents."

"This study is an examination of the exercise of nationalism as the assertion and/or reassertion of the mutual (political) sovereignty of a community in the form of a nation-state. My thesis aims to explore two theoretically different routes and forms of exercise of nationalism focusing specifically on modern Europe. These two routes are civic nationalism and ethnic nationalism. This classical dichotomy, I agree, is a misleading division for though the two are theoretically separate, in practice they are collaborators in the journey towards nationhood and in the pursuit of the establishment of a nation-state.

For nationalism to be successful it must involve an interplay of the principles of both civic nationalism and ethnic nationalism, rather than these components acting as mutually exclusive concepts. The nature of this interplay will be examined throughout the thesis and the collaboration will be explored via the two competing perspectives: that held by the modernists and that proposed by the ethnicists, both operating within the framework of modernity. The key distinction between the two is their focus and the point at which they identify a group imagining themselves as a community and society. Their respective cases will be critically examined with respect to those elements that determine that an interplay occurs....

No exercise of nationalism is the same, but they are all an exercise of the one phenomenon. Nationalism is an interplay of civic nationalism and ethnic nationalism and all their characteristics. The civic and the ethnic demonstrate two broad categories of concentration, but neither is exclusive. They are analytically different, but each nation, or group of people that consider themselves a nation and practise nationalism, carry elements of both. Just as the ethnicist and modernist theories are not complete on their own, so too their correlated ideals of the ethnic and the civic are not complete either. Neither is sufficient on its own to forge a nation. A civic nationalism must crystallise the ethnic components of its members in order to provide vigour and appeal to the nationalism, and thus be able to succeed onwards towards the establishment and perpetuation of nationhood. Likewise, ethnic nationalism must institutionalise to realise its goals. Ethnicity transmitted by culture carries with it the tools and in some cases the foundations of new nations they do not work on their own however and are not the root of the nationalism. Nationalism is a modern phenomenon that should not exclude the persistence of ethnicity as a popular motivation that fuels it..."

"...the first modern states, namely Britain and France, (had) been founded around a dominant ethnie. Thus, because Britain and France were the dominant colonialist powers, they influenced their colonies as well as other communities with their Anglo-French state-nation model. ...historical priority of the Anglo-French state-nation model presented a basic model for the rest of the world how a national society and national state should be formed and sustained..."

Difference without Dichotomy: An Examination of Nationalism in Ireland and Quebec, since 1780 - Catherine Frost, McMaster University 30 May 2003

"A review of nationalist thinking in Ireland and Quebec over the past two hundred years reveals two contrasting formulations of the nationalist argument associated with distinct historical periods. One formulation (prominent from the late eighteenth to the mid-nineteenth century) focused on securing “good government” through knowledgeable governors with a stake in the affairs of a given population. The other (prominent from the mid-nineteenth to the mid-twentieth century) focused on defining and upholding a “national character” that would distinguish and sustain this population. This paper argues that despite their initial similarity to civic/ethnic or political/cultural dichotomies of nationalism, these two formulations are in fact closely related; that they share a common concern with representation; and that the second formulation grew out of the first as the national concept was put into practice. Rather than a dichotomy of nationalism, then, this evolution suggests a thesis/antithesis relationship and raises the possibility of an eventual synthesis in nationalism."

"...Having postulated a conflict between ‘primordial’ and ‘civil’ sentiments it is an easy step for politicians and social scientists to argue for the substitution of one (civil ties) for the other (primordial ties)... But is one form of nationalism traditional and the other modern? .. What are the distinguishing characteristics of the two nationalisms? Why does one nationalism, with its attendant locus of political identity develop and not the other? What is the relevant level of analysis of these two nationalisms? In the process of modernization will territorial nationalism inevitably replace cultural nationalism? If modernity and cultural nationalism are defined as in opposition to each other how do we understand the resurgence of cultural nationalism (and the definition of cultural variables as the relevant determinants of political identity) in many post-industrial societies?.."