:: wikimiki.org ::
| Nationalism |
Nationalism
Nationalism is an ideology which holds that the nation, ethnicity or national identity is a "fundamental unit" of human social life, and makes certain political claims based upon that belief; above all, the claim that the nation is "the only legitimate basis for the state", and that "each nation is entitled to its own state". In this form, nationalism is a universal ideology; but the term also refers to the specific ideology of nationalist movements, which make political claims on behalf of specific nations. Nationalism is also defined as a "specific conceptual perspective," born in 16th century England and eventually spread to other communities, that forms "the constitutive element of modernity." These movements may dispute each others specific claims; nevertheless, they share the same general nationalist ideology. Two of the standard (and methodologically dissimilar) works in nationalism are Benedict Anderson's "Imagined Communities" and Liah Greenfeld's "Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity."
Nationalists define individual nations on the basis of certain criteria, which distinguish one nation from another; and also determine "who is a member of each nation". These criteria might include a shared language, a shared culture, and/or shared values; but the most important is probably now ethnicity, the belonging to or membership of an ethnic group. National identity refers both to these defining criteria, and to the "sense of belonging" to that group. Nationalists see membership of nation as exclusive and involuntary, meaning that you can not simply "join it", like any other association.
Nationalism sees most human activity as national in character. Nations have national symbols, a national character, 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.
Nationalism has had an enormous influence upon world history and geopolitics, since the nation-state has become the dominant form of state. Most of the world's population now lives in states which are, at least nominally, nation-states. The word 'nation' is often inaccurately used as a synonym for these states. 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. Most nation-states appeal to a cultural and historical mythos to justify their existence, and to give them "legitimacy".
Nationalists recognise that 'non-national' states exist; indeed, the struggles of early nationalist movements were often directed against empires, such as Austria-Hungary. The Vatican City exists to provide a sovereign state for the leadership of the Catholic Church; not for a nation. The global Caliphate sought by some Islamists is another example of a non-national state.
Anyone who identifies with a nation, and sees nation-states as legitimate, can be described as a "nationalist". In this sense, most adults are "passive nationalists". However, the modern vernacular use of nationalism refers to political (and sometimes military) action, in support of nationalist demands. That action may include separatism, irredentism, militarism and in extreme cases "ethnic cleansing". Political scientists (and the media) usually tend to focus on these more extreme forms of nationalism.
Background and problems
Nationalism is a long controversial term, as its most general definition is broad, and has been controversial throughout history; and specific examples of nationalism are extremely diverse. Extreme emotions are aroused, when discussing nationalism, and that makes it difficult to describe and define nationalism. A recurring problem is that people define nationalism on the basis of their local experience. To a Breton nationalist, the central issue is state nationalism versus cultural nationalism; elsewhere that distinction may be irrelevant. Often supporters of nationalism fear that the negative consequences of conflicting nationalisms, ethnic tension, war, and political conflicts within states, are taken for nationalism itself, leading some to view the general concept of nationalism negatively. They argue that viewing nationalism through its most negative consequences distorts the meaning of the term. The emphasis upon specific conflicts has certainly diverted attention from general issues; for instance, the characteristics of nation-states.
Nationalist movements may or may not claim that their nation is better than others. They may simply claim that the population of a given nation is better off when it is permitted to govern themselves; which is the principle of self-determination. However, conflicts often result in ideological attacks upon the identity and legitimacy of the 'enemy'. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, both sides claim 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. These are nationalist phenomena; and are worthy of attention, but they are not a sufficient basis for a general theory of nationalism.
Issues in nationalism theory
The first studies of nationalism were generally historical accounts of nationalist movements. At the end of the 19th century, Marxists and socialists produced political analyses 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, and what belonging to a nation means. Recent general theory has looked at underlying issues, and above all with 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 20 thousand years.
The modernist theories imply that until around 1800, no-one had more than local loyalties. National identity and unity were imposed from above, by European states, because they were necessary to modernise economy and society. In this theory, nationalist conflicts are an unintended side-effect.
The more recent theorists of nationalism are influenced by postmodernism and emphasise that nations are a socially constructed phenomenon. Benedict Anderson, for example, described nations as "imagined communities". Ernest 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 Smith proposes a synthesis of 'post-modernist' and traditional views. According to Smith, the preconditions for the formation of a nation are a fixed homeland (current or historical), high autonomy, hostile surroundings, memories of battles, sacred centres, languages and scripts, special customs, historical records and thinking. Smith considers 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.
Historical evolution of nationalism
Prior to 1900
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. This treaty created the Westphalian system of states, which recognised each others sovereignty and territory. Some of the signatories, such as the Dutch United Provinces, could be seen as a nation state, but there was no German equivalent, notwithstanding that the Holy Roman Empire consisted of almost entirely German-speaking states. In 1648 most states in Europe were still non-national. The theory of the Westphalian origin of the modern state system is disputed.
The major transition to nation-states is often seen as originating in the late 18th and 19th centuries, although this is disputed. Beginning with romantic nationalism, nationalist movements arose throughout Europe. Some of them were separatist, directed against large empires, others sought to unify a divided or fragmented territory, most notably in Germany and Italy. These movements promoted a national identity and culture, and they were successful. 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, then 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. Going further back, the ancient Greeks called everyone who was not Greek a barbarian (because their different language sounded like 'bar-bar' to Greek speaking people), but the Greek city states often fought amongst themselves for dominance. 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. Italy's unification, however, is a good example of a 19th-century nationalist movement based upon ethnicity and/or language.
20th Century nationalism
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 thought to have been led by Mahatma Gandhi, although many other leaders were involved as well. In China, nationalism created a justification for the Chinese state that was at odds with the idea of the universal empire. In Japan, nationalism combined with Japanese "exceptionalism" to form Japanese imperialism, as extreme nationalism often leads to imperialism.
World War I led to new nation-states in Europe being encouraged by the United States, who were opposed to the old Imperial Empires, and by France, who wished to isolate Germany and Austria by a series of client states. The result of this pressure was that several multi-nation empires (Ottoman Empire, Austro-Hungarian Empire) disintegrated. The Russian Empire also lost territory. The Versailles Treaty, based upon US President Wilson's 14 Points, was an attempt to recognize the principle of nationalism, as most of Europe was divided into nation-states in what was euphemistically called an "attempt to keep the peace". However, multi-nation and multi-ethnic states survived; and two new ones emerged, Czechoslovakia (where Czechs took control even though they only made up 43% of the population), and Yugoslavia, (which became dominated by the Serbs).
World War II initiated a new wave of nation-state formation, by the emergence of fascism and Nazism ("national socialism") before the War, and by independence from European colonial Empires, which declined after the War. The most dramatic decolonisation was in Africa, which was transformed from a collection of European colonies into a continent of nation-states. Few of them corresponded to the European ideal of "a single people, with one language" and a clear territory. Ironically, the one that best met those criteria, Somalia, disintegrated.
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.
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 almost always see it as a threat to 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 Catalonian 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 nationalism
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 always 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, was generally accompanied by policies to restrict, replace, or abandon minority languages. That 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, preservation, and use of traditional languages, such as Celtic languages, Hebrew, and Hindi. (See also: Language revival.)
The United States, a country which historically welcomes 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 large 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 traditional institutions.
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. It 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 mid 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. More recently Bayoumi Andil, an Egyptian Linguist and Egyptologist, did research in what he nationalistically defines as the "Modern Egyptian Language", which led him to declare it "irrelevant" to Arabic. He claimed that it was the fourth phase of the ancient Egyptian language descended from Coptic, with which it is intimately related, syntactically, morphological, and phonologicaly.
Similar attempts to emphasise minority languages completely independent of Arabic were made by the Nubians who are split between Egypt and Sudan, and relatively more successfully by the Amazigh (also known as Imazighen or Berber) in Morocco.
Prominent figures
See the List of prominent figures in nationalism.
Types of nationalism
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 had a committee to investigate Un-American Activities.
Civic nationalism (also 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 nationalism defines the nation in terms of ethnicity, which always includes some element of descent from previous generations. It also includes ideas of a shared culture, shared between members of the group and with their ancestors, and usually a shared language. Membership of 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.
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 ethnic German. Historian Jules Michelet exemplifies French romantic-nationalist history.
Cultural nationalism defines the nation by shared culture. Membership of the nation is neither 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 said to be a good 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).
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 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 (ETA) and Corsican separatists refer to Spain, and France in this way. In return, the larger state calls them terrorists. There are no 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 nationalism defines the nation in terms of shared religion. If the state derives political legitimacy from adherence to religious doctrines, then it is may be 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 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, the mainstream of Zionism is more secular in nature, and based on culture and 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.
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[http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2501/is_1_26/ai_n6145318]. Benedict 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.
Nationalism within nations
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 each 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:
- strengthening national unity, including campaigns for national salvation in times of crisis.
- emphasising the national identity and rejecting foreign influences, influenced by cultural conservatism and xenophobia.
- limiting non-national populations on the national territory, especially by limiting immigration and in extreme cases, by ethnic cleansing.
- annexing territory which is considered part of the national homeland. This is called irredentism, from the Italian movement Italia irredenta.
- economic nationalism, which is the promotion of the national interest in economic policy, especially through protectionism and in opposition to free trade policies.
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-Africanists.
Nationalists obviously have a positive attitude to 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.
Post-2001 nationalism in the United States
Kaiser]]
The September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States led to a wave of nationalist expression. While there was a groundswell of international outrage over the attacks and support for the American public after the attacks, the United States nationalism has been difficult for some outside of the United States. Modern Western Europeans, particularly in the United Kingdom and Germany, have tended to view any ostentatious display of flags and national symbols as excessive.
Many believe that the surge in nationalism enabled a number of major changes in national policy. The USA PATRIOT Act, which was signed into law on October 26, 2001, was designed to combat terrorism, but is considered by many to constitute a harmful assault on civil liberties. It is also possible that the nationalist surge created a political climate favorable for the George W. Bush administration in the lead up to wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Like almost all wars, the conflicts themselves appear to have increased nationalist feeling. As casualties have mounted and opposition to the war has increased, a pattern seen earlier in the Vietnam War has reemerged: those in favor of war consider that those who oppose it are unpatriotic, or even outright traitors. Several commentators supportive of the war have indicated they feel that news that paints the US in a negative light is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Since war opponents tend to resent such accusations, the political debate has taken place in an atmosphere of increasing anger.
Patriotism and extremism
Vietnam War
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 groups which may be no more nationalist than the rest of the population. In western democracies, xenophobic and anti-immigrant groups often refer to themselves as nationalist, to avoid the even more pejorative term racist. These parties may have a large electorate, and be represented in parliament. Smaller but highly visible groups, such as nationalist skinheads, also self-identify in this way, although it may be a euphemism for national-socialist or white supremacist. Activists in other countries are often referred to as ultra-nationalists, with a clearly pejorative meaning. In Continental Europe, nationalism refers more to an ethnic group or nation, while patriotism connotes a state or country, and sometimes its government. See also chauvinism and jingoism.
jingoism
Nationalism is a component of other political ideologies, and above all fascism, and the term extremism is often used in this context. However it is not accurate to simply describe fascism as a more extreme form of nationalism. Fascism in the general sense, and the Italian original, were marked by a strong combination of ethnic nationalism and state nationalism. 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).
That could be said of Stalinism as well. Josef Stalin was an expert on nationalism, and his definition of a nation is quoted in all theoretical works. Under his regime, the Soviet Union pursued a policy of defining and encouraging national identities in the Soviet Republics and autonomous regions. Nevertheless, they were denied sovereignty, and in many cases there was a contradictory Russification policy. A similar approach was taken to the countries in Eastern Europe occupied by Soviet troops in 1945. The regime also encouraged an ambiguous 'Soviet' (in reality Russian) identity, with a strong nationalist character, especially during World War II (the Great Patriotic War).
Racism
Nationalism does not necessarily imply a belief in the superiority of one nation over others, but in practice many nationalists 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. The defeat of Nazi Germany, and above all the Holocaust, discredited race theories and racial nationalism after 1945.
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 related to racism include the removal of Germans from the Volga Republic during the 1950s, and the extermination of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire in 1915.
Opposition and critique
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. (No states currently describe themselves as an empire). 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 communitarianism.
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 most nationalisms. Some authors, for example, Klitou in his book "The Friends and Foes of Human Rights," argue that nationalism is greatly responsible for most human rights violations and as a result weakens the human rights movement. For Klitou, nationalism is a major foe of human rights, while its opposite, cosmopolitanism, is an important friend.
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 ideological alternative for nationalism is cosmopolitanism. Cosmopolitanism is often inaccurately labelled internationalism, and vice versa. (Inter-nationalism, by definition, implies cooperation among nations, and therefore the existence of nations). 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. In turn, nationalists are deeply suspicious of cosmopolitan attitudes, which they equate with treason and betrayal.
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.
One of the most far-reaching alternatives to nationalism and the nation-state comes from some radical Islamists, who reject the existence of any state on any basis other than Islam. For them, the unity of Islam means that there can be only one government on earth, in the form which is usually titled caliphate (khilafa). 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 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.
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. There is no doubt that many Muslims do strongly identify with the religious community, probably more so than Christians. Shared observances such as the holy month of Ramadan and the Hajj (the pilgrimage to Mecca), contribute to this identification. The word "Ummah" is often incorrectly translated into English as "Islamic nation" but it is not a nation in this sense. 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. 'Ummah' is not a synonym of 'caliphate', but the idea is associated with the historic caliphates.
Similarly, since anarchism rejects nation-states, anarchists reject nationalism. Instead of nations, anarchists usually advocate for the creation of cooperative societies based on free association and mutual aid without regard to ethnicity or race.
Historical effect of nationalism
Historical events (not just wars) in which nationalism played an essential role included:
- The Indian independence movement of the 20th Century and the rise of Mahatma Gandhi.
- The French Revolution between 1789 and 1799.
- The Rebellions of 1837 in Upper and Lower Canada.
- The 1848 Revolutions in Europe.
- The Italian unification under the rule of Piedmont and Sardinia
- The Anglo-Irish War and the partition of Ireland into the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.
- The Balkan Wars in 1912-1913.
- The Arab Revolt of 1916-1918.
- The rise of Reza Shah in 1921.
- The establishment of the apartheid state in South Africa by the National Party of South Africa, the Afrikaner nationalists.
- The unification of Syria and Egypt under the United Arab Republic and its demise.
- The Indonesian Nationalism Movement 1905-1949.
- Nationalism and resistance in Algeria as a prelude to the Algerian War of Independence.
- The decolonisation of Africa during the 1960s and 1970s.
- The anti-colonial opposition to white rule in Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia during the 1960s and 1970s.
- The conflict between the Canadian nationalism and Quebecois nationalism in Canada, and the violence of the FLQ.
- The Fiji coups of 1987 and 2000.
- The rise in white nationalist or anti-immigrant violence in western countries since the 1970s.
See also
- Indian independence movement
- Arab Nationalism
- Cultural identity
- Filipino Nationalism
- Historiography and nationalism
- Identity politics
- Japanese nationa
Ideology
An ideology is a collection of ideas. The word ideology was coined by Count Destutt de Tracy in the late 18th century to define a "science of ideas." An ideology can be thought of as a comprehensive vision, as a way of looking at things (compare Weltanschauung), as in common sense (see Ideology in everyday society) and several philosophical tendencies (see Political ideologies), or a set of ideas proposed by the dominant class of a society to all members of this society (for the Marxist definition of ideology - see Ideology as an instrument of social reproduction).
Ideology in everyday society
Every society has an ideology that forms the basis of the "public opinion" or common sense, a basis that usually remains invisible to most people within the society. This dominant ideology appears as "neutral", while all others that differ from the norm are often seen as radical, no matter what the actual vision may be. The philosopher Michel Foucault wrote about this concept of apparent ideological neutrality.
Organisations that strive for power influence the ideology of a society to become what they want it to be. Political organisations (governments included) and other groups (e.g. lobbyists) try to influence people by broadcasting their opinions, which is the reason why so often many people in a society seem to "think alike".
When most people in a society think alike about certain matters, or even forget that there are alternatives to the current state of affairs, we arrive at the concept of Hegemony, about which the philosopher Antonio Gramsci wrote. The much smaller scale concept of groupthink also owes something to his work. Modern linguists study the mechanism of conceptual metaphor, by which this 'thinking alike' is thought to be transmitted.
There are many different kinds of ideology: political, social, epistemological, ethical, and so on.
Meta-ideology is the study of the structure, form, and manifestation of ideologies. Meta-ideology posits that ideology is a system of ideas and thoughts bound by an internal logic and a few basic assumptions about reality that have no real factual basis, but are arbitrary choices that serve as the seed around which ideologies grow. According to this train of thought, ideologies are neither right nor wrong, but only a relativistic intellectual strategy for categorizing the world.
Political ideologies
In social studies, a political ideology is a certain ethical, set of ideals, principles, doctrines, myths or symbols of a social movement, institution, class, or large group that explain how society should work, and offer some political and cultural blueprint for a certain social order. A political ideology largely concerns itself with how to allocate power and to what ends it should be used. It can be a construct of political thought, often defining political parties and their policy.
Studies of the concept of ideology itself (rather than specific ideologies) have been carried out under the name of systematic ideology.
Political ideologies regard policies of many different aspects of a society, the most central of which are: economy, education, criminal law, management of criminals, minors, animals, environment, immigration, eugenics, race, use of the military, forced nationalism, forced religion
List of political ideologies
There are many proposed methods for the classification of political ideologies. See the political spectrum article for a more in-depth discussion of these different methods (each of whom generates a specific political spectrum).
The following list attempts to divide ideologies into a number of groups; each group contains ideologies that have a certain theme or idea in common. Note that one ideology can belong to several groups, and there is sometimes considerable overlap between related ideologies.
Ideologies emphasizing ethnicity or nationality
- ethnic supremacy
- fascism, neo-Fascism
- clerical fascism
- Multiculturalism
- Nazism, neo-Nazism
- racism, racialism
- Pan-Arabism
- Pan-Africanism
- Pan-Iranism
- Pan-Slavism
- sultanism
- black nationalism
- white nationalism
Ideologies emphasizing class struggle
- Marxism, Leninism
- 'Marxism-Leninism'
- Stalinism
- Maoism
- Trotskyism
- left communism
- council communism
- eurocommunism
- neo-Marxism
- anarchism
- anarcho-syndicalism
- anarcho-socialism
- anarcho-communism
Ideologies emphasizing the individual
- Christian anarchism
- individualist anarchism
- libertarian socialism
- liberalism
- social liberalism
- ordoliberalism
- classical liberalism
- liberal conservatism
- market liberalism
- economic liberalism
- new liberalism
- neoliberalism
- American liberalism
- libertarianism
- anarcho-capitalism
- neolibertarianism
- minarchism
- paleolibertianism
- geolibertarianism
- georgism
- autonomism
- existentialism
- capitalism
- unregulated capitalism
- regulated capitalism
Ideologies and social-systems emphasizing the collectivity
- communitarianism
- communism, collectivism, egalitarianism
- Marxism
- socialism
- African socialism
- religious socialism
- Christian socialism
- democratic socialism
- infosocialism
- international socialism
- libertarian socialism
- Popular Socialism
- utopian socialism
- Peronism
Ideologies emphasizing territory
- nationalism
- regionalism
- Pan-Africanism
- Pan-Arabism
- Pan-Iranism
- Nazism
Ideologies based on religion
- Christian based ideologies
- Christian anarchism
- Christian communism
- Christian democracy
- Christian socialism
- clerical fascism
- Hindu-based ideologies
- Hindu nationalism
- Islamic-based ideologies
- Islamism, Muslim fundamentalism
- Jewish-based ideologies
- religious Zionism
- theocracy
- neo-theocracy
- communalism (South Asia)
- religious communism
- religious socialism
Conservatism
- conservatism
- liberal conservatism
- paleoconservatism
- neoconservatism
- compassionate conservatism
- social conservatism
Other ideologies
- centrism
- federalism
- feminism
- green politics
- animal welfarism
- internationalism, cosmopolitanism
- pacifism
- republicanism
- syndicalism
- pragmatism
- majoritarianism
- utilitarianism
- law
Epistemological ideologies
Even when the challenging of existing beliefs is encouraged, as in science, the dominant paradigm or mindset can prevent certain challenges, theories or experiments from being advanced. The philosophy of science mostly concerns itself with reducing the impact of these prior ideologies so that science can proceed with its primary task, which is (according to science) to create knowledge.
There are critics who view science as an ideology in itself, or being an effective ideology, called scientism. Some scientists respond that, while the scientific method is itself an ideology, as it is a collection of ideas, there is nothing particularly wrong or bad about it.
Other critics point out that while science itself is not a misleading ideology, there are some fields of study within science that are misleading. Two examples discussed here are in the fields of ecology and economics.
A special case of science adopted as ideology is that of ecology, which studies the relationships between living things on Earth. Perceptual psychologist J. J. Gibson believed that human perception of ecological relationships was the basis of self-awareness and cognition itself. Linguist George Lakoff has proposed a cognitive science of mathematics wherein even the most fundamental ideas of arithmetic would be seen as consequences or products of human perception - which is itself necessarily evolved within an ecology.
Deep ecology and the modern ecology movement (and, to a lesser degree, Green parties) appear to have adopted ecological sciences as a positive ideology.
Some accuse ecological economics of likewise turning scientific theory into political economy, although theses in that science can often be tested. The modern practice of green economics fuses both approaches and seems to be part science, part ideology.
This is far from the only theory of economics to be raised to ideology status - some notable economically-based ideologies include mercantilism, social darwinism, communism, laissez-faire economics, and "free trade". There are also current theories of safe trade and fair trade which can be seen as ideologies.
History of the concept of ideology
Perhaps the most accessible source for the original meaning of "ideology" is Hippolyte Taine's work on the Ancien Regime (first volume of "Origins of Contemporary France"). He describes ideology as rather like teaching philosophy by the Socratic method, but without extending the vocabulary beyond what the general reader already possessed, and without the examples from observation which practical science would require. Taine identifies it not just with Destutt de Tracy, but with his milieu, and includes Condillac as one of its precursors.
The word "ideology" was coined long before the Russians coined "intelligentsia", or before the adjective "intellectual" referred to a sort of person (a substantive). Thus these words were not around when the hard-headed, driven Napoleon Bonaparte took the word "ideologues" to ridicule his intellectual opponents.
Ideology as an instrument of social reproduction
Karl Marx proposed a base/superstructure model of society. The base refers to the means of production of society. The superstructure is formed on top of the base, and comprises that society's ideology, as well as its legal system, political system, and religions. For Marx, the base determines the superstructure. Because the ruling class controls the society's means of production, the superstructure of society, including its ideology, will be determined according to what is in the ruling class's best interests. Critics of the Marxist approach feel that it attributes too much importance to economic factors in influencing society.
The ideologies of the dominant class of a society are proposed to all members of that society in order to make the ruling class' interests appear to be the interests of all. György Lukács describes this as a projection of the class consciousness of the ruling class, while Antonio Gramsci advances the theory of cultural hegemony to explain why people in the working-class can have a false conception of their own interests.
Louis Althusser proposed that ideology makes use of a special type of discourse: the lacunar discourse. A number of propositions, which are never untrue, suggest a number of other propositions, which are. In this way, the essence of the lacunar discourse is what is not told (but is suggested).
For example, the statement 'All are equal before the law', which is a theory behind current legal systems, suggests that all people may be of equal worth or have equal 'opportunities'. This is not true, because the concept of private property over the means of production results in some people being able to own more (much more) than others, and their property brings power and influence (the rich can afford better lawyers, among other things, and this puts in question the principle of equality before the law).
The dominant forms of ideology in capitalism are (in chronological order):
#classical liberalism
#social democracy
#neo-liberalism
and they correspond to the stages of development of capitalism:
#extensive stage
#intensive stage
#contemporary capitalism (or late capitalism, or current crisis)
Other dominant forms of capitalist ideology such as social darwinism cannot be related to a specific phase.
The Marxist view of ideology as an instrument of social reproduction has been an important touchstone for the sociology of knowledge and theorists such as Karl Mannheim, Daniel Bell and Jürgen Habermas amongst many others.
Feminism as critique of ideology
Naturalizing socially constructed patterns of behavior has always been an important mechanism in the production and reproduction of ideologies. Feminist theorists have paid close attention to these mechanisms. Adrienne Rich e.g. has shown how to understand motherhood as a social institution.
ko:이데올로기
External Links
- [http://www.tamilnation.org/ideology/ The Strength of an Idea]
Nation:For publications of this name, see also Nation (disambiguation).
One of the most influential doctrines in history is that all humans are divided into groups called nations. It is an ethical and philosophical doctrine in itself, and is the starting point for the ideology of nationalism. The nationals (the members of the "nation") are distinguished by a common identity, and almost always by a common origin, in the sense of ancestry, parentage or descent. The national identity refers both to the distinguishing features of the group, and to the individual’s sense of belonging to it. A very wide range of criteria is used, with very different application. Small differences in pronunciation may be enough to categorise someone as a member of another nation. On the other hand, two people may be separated by difference in personalities, belief systems, geographical locations, time and even spoken language, yet regard themselves and be seen by others, as members of the same nation. Nationals are considered to share certain traits and norms of behaviour, certain duties toward other members, and certain responsibilities for the actions of the members of the same nation.
Nations extend across generations, and include the dead as full members. More vaguely, they are assumed to include future generations. No-one fixes a timespan, but a nation is typically several centuries old. Past events are evaluated in this context, for instance by referring to "our soldiers" in conflicts which took place hundreds of years ago.
The term nation is often used synonymously with ethnic group (sometimes "ethnos"), but although ethnicity is now one of the most important aspects of cultural or social identity for the members of most nations, people with the same ethnic origin may live in different nation-states and be treated as members of separate nations for that reason. National identity is often disputed, down to the level of the individual.
A state which explicitly identifies as the homeland of a particular nation is a nation-state, and most modern states fall into this category, although there may be violent disputes about their legitimacy. In common usage, terms such as nations, country, land and state often appear as near-synonyms, i.e., for a territory under a single sovereign government, or the inhabitants of such a territory, or the government itself; in other words, a de jure or de facto state.
In a more strict sense, however, terms such as nation, ethnos, and peoples denominate a group of human beings, in contrast to country which denominates a territory, whereas state expresses a legitimised administrative and decision-making institution. Confusingly, the terms national and international are used as technical terms applying to states, see country.
Origins
The origins of nations are disputed, and these disputes form a major issue in the theory of nationalism. There are some biological theories of its origin, which see humans as territorial animals and the nation as a territory in this sense. Most theorists reject this as simplistic, and treat nations as a relatively late human social grouping. The most widely quoted theories place their origin in the late 18th and 19th century, although this dating is very disputed. Certainly the identification with a "nation" was promoted by early romantic nationalism at that time, usually in opposition to multi-ethnic (and autocratic) empires.
The Avishai Margalit in The Ethics of Memory (2002), discusses the defining role of memory in shaping nations: "A nation," he says acerbically, "has famously been defined as a society that nourishes a common delusion about its ancestry and shares a common hatred for its neighbors. Thus, the bond of caring in a nation hinges on false memory (delusion) and hatred of those who do not belong."
Etymology
The first recorded use of the word "nation" was in 968, when Liutprand, bishop of Cremona, while confronting the Byzantine emperor on behalf of his patron Otto I, Holy Roman Emperor, boldly declared in his report, "The Land": I answered, "which you say belongs to your empire belongs, as the nationality and language of the people proves, to the kingdom of Italy." (emphasis added)[http://mediaeval.ucdavis.edu/20A/Luitprand.html]
The term derives from Latin natio and originally described the colleagues in a college or students, above all at the University of Paris, who were all born within a pays, spoke the same language and expected to be ruled by their own familiar law. In 1383 and 1384, while studying theology at Paris, Jean Gerson was twice elected procurator for the French nation (i.e. the French-born Francophone students at the University). The Paris division of students into nations was adopted at the University of Prague, where from its opening in 1349 the studium generale was divided among Bohemian, Bavarian, Saxon and various Polish nations.
Modern understanding
Since the 19th century, it is considered the norm that a nation coincides with a sovereign state, called a nation-state. That norm itself derives from the ideology of nationalism, which asserts that each nation deserves its own state. Before the 19th century, it is difficult to find examples that fit the modern idea of a nation-state.
That does not mean that there is agreement on the number of nations, and their equivalence with a nation-state. Very few nations and nation-states have an undisputed territory and borders. There are many self-government movements, such as those in Belgium, the United Kingdom and Spain. There are nations which describe themselves as stateless nations, such as those of the Kurds and Assyrians. Claimed national territory may be partitioned, as in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. There are also examples of national identity without a corresponding state, or claim to a state. England is a nation in the United Kingdom, but unlike the other four component nations (Northern Ireland, Cornwall, Scotland and Wales) there has, until recently, been little sign of aspiration to self-government (see Campaign for an English Parliament).
The term "state-nation" is sometimes used, for nations where the common identity derives from shared citizenship of a state. It implies that the state was formed first, and that the sense of national identity developed later, or in parallel. The Netherlands and France are often quoted as examples. However, both countries also have a strong ethnic identity and cultural identity, reflected in widespread attitudes to immigrants. If the nation was defined only by citizenship, then naturalised citizens would be accepted as equal members of the nation, and that is not the case. In most countries citizenship is sharply distinguished from nationality.
Nation-states vary in their attitude to naturalisation and citizenship. In the United States, the only legal restriction on naturalised citizens is, that they may not hold the office of President, and the only act required of new citizens is an Oath of Allegiance. Many other countries have language and cultural knowledge tests, but they may be intended primarily as a barrier to immigration.
Almost all nations are associated with a specific territory, the national homeland. Some live in a historical diaspora, that is, mainly outside the national homeland. The term diaspora now refers mainly to dispersed economic migrants and their descendants. The Roma, who are considered in some parts of Europe to be a distinct nation, are a diaspora without a clearly identified homeland. Where territory is disputed between nations, the claims may be based on which nation lived there first - the nation is considered to include past members. That is mainly the case in areas of historical European settlement (1500-1950). The term "First Nations" is used by groups which share an aboriginal culture, and seek official recognition or autonomy.
The term nation is widely used, by extension or metaphor, to describe any group promoting some common interest or common identity, see Red Sox Nation and Queer Nation.
Related concepts
- Nationality
- Nationalism
- Nation-state
- Home Nations
- Country
- Constituent countries
- State
- State (law)
- Ethnicity
- Ethnic group
- Race
- Society
- Identity
- Identity politics
See also
- List of ethnic groups
- List of people by nationality
- List of countries
- Melungeon
- Micronation
- National emblem
Links
- [http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-41 Dictionary of the History of Ideas[:] Medieval and Renaissance ideas of Nation
- [http://www.tamilnation.org/nation.htm What is a Nation?] - Nadesan Satyendra
Category:Ethnicity
Category:Political geography
ja:国民
simple:Nation
National identity:For publications of this name, see also Nation (disambiguation).
One of the most influential doctrines in history is that all humans are divided into groups called nations. It is an ethical and philosophical doctrine in itself, and is the starting point for the ideology of nationalism. The nationals (the members of the "nation") are distinguished by a common identity, and almost always by a common origin, in the sense of ancestry, parentage or descent. The national identity refers both to the distinguishing features of the group, and to the individual’s sense of belonging to it. A very wide range of criteria is used, with very different application. Small differences in pronunciation may be enough to categorise someone as a member of another nation. On the other hand, two people may be separated by difference in personalities, belief systems, geographical locations, time and even spoken language, yet regard themselves and be seen by others, as members of the same nation. Nationals are considered to share certain traits and norms of behaviour, certain duties toward other members, and certain responsibilities for the actions of the members of the same nation.
Nations extend across generations, and include the dead as full members. More vaguely, they are assumed to include future generations. No-one fixes a timespan, but a nation is typically several centuries old. Past events are evaluated in this context, for instance by referring to "our soldiers" in conflicts which took place hundreds of years ago.
The term nation is often used synonymously with ethnic group (sometimes "ethnos"), but although ethnicity is now one of the most important aspects of cultural or social identity for the members of most nations, people with the same ethnic origin may live in different nation-states and be treated as members of separate nations for that reason. National identity is often disputed, down to the level of the individual.
A state which explicitly identifies as the homeland of a particular nation is a nation-state, and most modern states fall into this category, although there may be violent disputes about their legitimacy. In common usage, terms such as nations, country, land and state often appear as near-synonyms, i.e., for a territory under a single sovereign government, or the inhabitants of such a territory, or the government itself; in other words, a de jure or de facto state.
In a more strict sense, however, terms such as nation, ethnos, and peoples denominate a group of human beings, in contrast to country which denominates a territory, whereas state expresses a legitimised administrative and decision-making institution. Confusingly, the terms national and international are used as technical terms applying to states, see country.
Origins
The origins of nations are disputed, and these disputes form a major issue in the theory of nationalism. There are some biological theories of its origin, which see humans as territorial animals and the nation as a territory in this sense. Most theorists reject this as simplistic, and treat nations as a relatively late human social grouping. The most widely quoted theories place their origin in the late 18th and 19th century, although this dating is very disputed. Certainly the identification with a "nation" was promoted by early romantic nationalism at that time, usually in opposition to multi-ethnic (and autocratic) empires.
The Avishai Margalit in The Ethics of Memory (2002), discusses the defining role of memory in shaping nations: "A nation," he says acerbically, "has famously been defined as a society that nourishes a common delusion about its ancestry and shares a common hatred for its neighbors. Thus, the bond of caring in a nation hinges on false memory (delusion) and hatred of those who do not belong."
Etymology
The first recorded use of the word "nation" was in 968, when Liutprand, bishop of Cremona, while confronting the Byzantine emperor on behalf of his patron Otto I, Holy Roman Emperor, boldly declared in his report, "The Land": I answered, "which you say belongs to your empire belongs, as the nationality and language of the people proves, to the kingdom of Italy." (emphasis added)[http://mediaeval.ucdavis.edu/20A/Luitprand.html]
The term derives from Latin natio and originally described the colleagues in a college or students, above all at the University of Paris, who were all born within a pays, spoke the same language and expected to be ruled by their own familiar law. In 1383 and 1384, while studying theology at Paris, Jean Gerson was twice elected procurator for the French nation (i.e. the French-born Francophone students at the University). The Paris division of students into nations was adopted at the University of Prague, where from its opening in 1349 the studium generale was divided among Bohemian, Bavarian, Saxon and various Polish nations.
Modern understanding
Since the 19th century, it is considered the norm that a nation coincides with a sovereign state, called a nation-state. That norm itself derives from the ideology of nationalism, which asserts that each nation deserves its own state. Before the 19th century, it is difficult to find examples that fit the modern idea of a nation-state.
That does not mean that there is agreement on the number of nations, and their equivalence with a nation-state. Very few nations and nation-states have an undisputed territory and borders. There are many self-government movements, such as those in Belgium, the United Kingdom and Spain. There are nations which describe themselves as stateless nations, such as those of the Kurds and Assyrians. Claimed national territory may be partitioned, as in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. There are also examples of national identity without a corresponding state, or claim to a state. England is a nation in the United Kingdom, but unlike the other four component nations (Northern Ireland, Cornwall, Scotland and Wales) there has, until recently, been little sign of aspiration to self-government (see Campaign for an English Parliament).
The term "state-nation" is sometimes used, for nations where the common identity derives from shared citizenship of a state. It implies that the state was formed first, and that the sense of national identity developed later, or in parallel. The Netherlands and France are often quoted as examples. However, both countries also have a strong ethnic identity and cultural identity, reflected in widespread attitudes to immigrants. If the nation was defined only by citizenship, then naturalised citizens would be accepted as equal members of the nation, and that is not the case. In most countries citizenship is sharply distinguished from nationality.
Nation-states vary in their attitude to naturalisation and citizenship. In the United States, the only legal restriction on naturalised citizens is, that they may not hold the office of President, and the only act required of new citizens is an Oath of Allegiance. Many other countries have language and cultural knowledge tests, but they may be intended primarily as a barrier to immigration.
Almost all nations are associated with a specific territory, the national homeland. Some live in a historical diaspora, that is, mainly outside the national homeland. The term diaspora now refers mainly to dispersed economic migrants and their descendants. The Roma, who are considered in some parts of Europe to be a distinct nation, are a diaspora without a clearly identified homeland. Where territory is disputed between nations, the claims may be based on which nation lived there first - the nation is considered to include past members. That is mainly the case in areas of historical European settlement (1500-1950). The term "First Nations" is used by groups which share an aboriginal culture, and seek official recognition or autonomy.
The term nation is widely used, by extension or metaphor, to describe any group promoting some common interest or common identity, see Red Sox Nation and Queer Nation.
Related concepts
- Nationality
- Nationalism
- Nation-state
- Home Nations
- Country
- Constituent countries
- State
- State (law)
- Ethnicity
- Ethnic group
- Race
- Society
- Identity
- Identity politics
See also
- List of ethnic groups
- List of people by nationality
- List of countries
- Melungeon
- Micronation
- National emblem
Links
- [http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-41 Dictionary of the History of Ideas[:] Medieval and Renaissance ideas of Nation
- [http://www.tamilnation.org/nation.htm What is a Nation?] - Nadesan Satyendra
Category:Ethnicity
Category:Political geography
ja:国民
simple:Nation
State:This article discusses states as sovereign political entities; for other meanings, see state (disambiguation).
A state is an organized political community occupying a definite territory, having an organized government, and possessing internal and external sovereignty. Recognition of the state's claim to independence by other states, enabling it to enter into international agreements, is often important to the establishment of its statehood, although some theories do not make this a requirement - for instance, the Montevideo Convention. The "state" can also be defined in terms of domestic conditions, specifically, as conceptualized by Max Weber, "a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory." [http://www.mdx.ac.uk/www/study/xweb.htm] The exact meaning of this definition depends on what is understood by "legitimate". For more information see government.
Introduction
The word "state" in contemporary parlance often means the "Westphalian state", in reference to the Peace of Westphalia of 1648. In this sense, the modern state is an entity that enjoys extensive autonomy in its domestic economic and social policy, largely free from interference from other states and powers. A number of modern commentators have claimed that we are experiencing the decline of the Westphalian state as the principal actor of the international system, pointing to economic, cultural, political, and technological changes in the world, such as globalization and the emergence of regional and supernational groupings such as the European Union.
The term "state" is also used to describe subnational territorial divisions within a federal system, as in the case of the United States of America. See state (law) and state (non-sovereign).
In common speech, the terms country, nation and state are casually used as synonyms, but in a more strict usage they are distinguished:
- country is the geographical area.
- nation designates a people (however, national and international both confusingly refer as well to matters pertaining to what are strictly states, as in "national capital", "international law").
- state refers to the government, and an entity in international law.
Currently, the entire land surface of the Earth is divided among the territories of the roughly two hundred states now existing, with the special case of Antarctica, a variety of disputed territories, and a number of areas where state power exists in theory, but not in practice (the most significant of these being Somalia and Iraq).
Etymology
The word "state" originates from the medieval state or throne upon which the head of state (usually a monarch) would sit. By process of metonymy, the word state became used to refer to both the head of state and the power entity he represented (though the former meaning has fallen out of use). A similar association of terms can today be seen in the practice of referring to government buildings as having authority, for example "The White House today released a press statement..."
Formation of the state
The birth of the state, in the broadest sense of the word, coincides with the rise of civilization. For most of the existence of the human species, people lived as nomadic hunter-gatherers. That lifestyle began to change with the invention of agriculture around the 9th millennium BC. The practice of agriculture made it necessary for human beings to build permanent settlements and spend most of their lives in close proximity to the land they cultivated. Thus, control over land became an issue for the first time. To express that control, various forms of property rights developed, with people claiming different kinds of rights over various areas of land. Disagreements over the nature and extent of such claims of ownership degenerated into violence and the first "wars".
In some parts of the world, notably Mesopotamia and the Nile valley, natural conditions favoured the concentration of land ownership in few hands. Eventually, a small group of people found themselves owning the land on which many other people worked for a living. This control over the land meant control over the people whose livelihoods depended on the land; thus, the first primitive states arose. These states were usually despotic and unstable, with the ruler(s) holding absolute power over their subjects until some other ruler(s) displaced them. Since there were no laws and no infrastructure, and since power was exercised arbitrarily, some political theorists and historians do not consider such early forms of despotic rule to have been states in the proper sense of the word; they are sometimes called proto-states.
One of the earliest known sets of laws, the Code of Hammurabi, has been dated to ca. 1700 BC. It was around this time that the concept of law - one of the foundations of the modern state - began to appear. But the rulers of the Ancient Near East had a long tradition of holding absolute power and claiming the status of god-kings (see hydraulic despotism). Thus, laws limiting the power of monarchs did not develop very far in that region.
The city-states of Ancient Greece were the first to establish states whose powers were clearly defined in laws (even if the laws themselves could usually be changed quite easily). Also, notably, the idea | | |