International PoliticsNationalism and Ethnicity – Summary and Q&A

Michaelmas term 2020

Dr Vahid Nick Pay

Ongoing Ethnic conflicts• Israel-Palestine conflict

• Turkey and Kurds

• China, Uighur

• Mianmar and Rohungiya

• Yemen

• Afghanistan

• Nigeria

• South Sudan

• Syria

• Somalia

• DRC

• Mali

• Algeria

• Iraq

• Ethiopia

Primordialism – Pierre Van den Berghe

• Theorist of ethnicity, even prehistoric populations had a sense of ethnicity

• Define ethnic groups as possible with as few as several hundred people

• In-breeding and endogamy rules mean that most neighbours are kinsmen

• Principle of ethnocentrism is 'extended' from several hundred to tens of thousands as tribes unite to form ethnies

• As with animals, people who cooperated survived to pass on their genes

• Evolved a disposition for 'collective nepotism' to favour our own

• This instinct survives in phenomena like ethnicity and nationalism

Other Primordialists

• Geertz – Cross-cultural anthropology shows primordialism to be psychologically

universal and cannot be suppressed by the state

• Grosby – cultural beliefs can shape the form that primordial impulses take ('traditions of

belief and action towards primordial objects’)

• Fishman – emphasises psychological power of biological and kinship metaphors, and of

appeals to blood, Language, dialect, religion, dress, markers

Criticisms of Primordialism

• Reynolds: Van den Berghe has only provided a plausible theory based on generalisation from animals

• Animals lack culture and institutions so studies of animals cannot disprove the argument that culture overpowers biology

• Biology provides impulses which can be fooled, redirected, manipulated (i.e. we can behave in a primordial way in defence of trans-ethnic identities like class or team)

• Even sociobiologists like Van den Berghe do not claim that their theory drives all – or even most - of the social interactions that fall under the rubric of ethnicity

Summary of Primordialism• Primordialists suggest that ethnic sentiment goes back into human

prehistory

• That ethnic sentiment is an extension of kinship instincts

• Collective nepotism which drives animal and human family behaviour is what explains the ease with which ethnic sentiments are mobilised and the passions they arouse

• Socially constructed ties of ideology and material interest are weaker

Ethno-Symbolism – Anthony Smith

• Social facts, moving through history

• 'Essentials' of culture and lifestyle do

shape self-understandings and

constrain invention

• Culture as a motivating force

Other Ethno-symbolistsJohn Hutchinson:

• Idea of layering of symbolic resources

• Different ideological, class and regional fragments of society highlight different aspects of the mytho-symbolic inheritance

Perennialism – Adrian Hastings:

• Nations have a much longer history than even Smith allows

• England in the time of Bede was already a nation

• Religion and vernacular languages helped create national identity

• Other perennialists: Grosby, Armstrong, Shils, Fishman

most medievalist historians

Pre-modern Social Space

• Premodern social space more dynamic than in the Gellner-Giddens model of modernism

• Ethnie States, some ‘ethnic states’ like Israel and Armenia which approximate nations

• Nations use the proper name, sense of territory, ‘myths, symbols and memories’ of the antecedent ethnie (even France)

• Why the need to appeal to an ethnic past if unimportant – why not that of an empire or class?

• Romantic Intellectuals, not the ‘Ruling Class’ were key

Modernism - Ernest Gellner• Nations created in modern period, post-1789

• Prior to 1789- local ids, local genealogy, religious/imperial conception, no territorial self-conception

• Culture played a stratifying role for elites, no vertical integration

• Kingdom, principality, empire means of keeping a small elite living off producers

• Elite literacy level

Anthony Giddens:

• Nation is a ‘Power-container’ created by the state

• Nations were created in the modern period through state systems

Instrumentalism - Eric Hobsbawm

•State and national political elites create

ethnic groups to divide working class or

otherwise advance their own claims for

wealth, power, status

•Motives are not biological or cultural,

but political and economic

•Nations were created after 1780s

Perennialism vs. ModernismModernists:

▪ There is a lack of record of popular sentiment

▪ There is a record of discord within ethnies: China, North America, Italy, Georgia

▪ We see the rise and fall of groups, the change of peoples' names over time in one area

▪ There is elite competition within groups

Perennialists:

▪ reference to others (natio, ethnos, gens) since antiquity

▪ elite writings mention ethnie, nation, from classical, biblical times

▪ language vernaculars spread early in Europe

▪ regna, myths focused on common customs and myths of descent

▪ military clashes could involve whole communities: zulu, mongol, norman, isrealites, swiss

▪ regional variants of class strata cultures (orthodox, latin, muslim) existed

National Identity – State (civic) Nationalism

• Ethnic or Civic national identity

• State Nationalism: 'top-down', emphasises state symbols

• Inclusive, based around political institutions

• Leans toward modern 'invented traditions' like mass commemoration, flag, anthem, constitution

• Mass society, abstract ties link individual citizen to the state

• Current and future projects rather than the ethnic past

National Identity – Ethnic Nationalism

• 'Bottom-Up': emphasises vernacular culture rather than official culture

• Arise from cultural institutions like churches or literary patriotic societies, not state structures

• Favours exclusive ethnic boundary markers and narratives, not all-encompassing state ones

• Society as an organism, not a set of abstract individual citizens

• Premodern myths and epics count for more than state projects

East & West: Two Separate traditions?

• State-national experience in the West (England, France, Switzerland, USA, Spain, Holland, Portugal, Scotland)

• Ethnic experience in the East where nationalism was anti-imperial (Germany, Poland, Czechs, Serbia, Greece, etc)

• Idea that separate trajectories give birth to two distinct varieties of national identity

• Meinecke, Cosmopolitanism (1909): staatsnation v. kulturnation

• Kohn (1944), Cobban (1945) and others develop typology

• Most recently Smith (1991) and Brubaker (1992)

• These divisions influence national identities, citizenship today (Brubaker 1992)

‘Western’ Model• Emphasis on State and Territory

• Emerge through revolution or reform of early modern kingdoms or proto-democracies

• Forward-Looking. Propounded by established intelligentsia, bourgeoisie or state functionaries

• Territorial and political

• Assimilationist

• Rational. Ties to state-nation, not 'super-family'

• Voluntarist

• Ultimately inclusive and trans-ethnic, trans-religious

• Links of modern rights and duties, as well as mass integration through education, military, economics, bureaucracy

‘Eastern’ Model• Emphasis on culture and ancestry

• Emerge from insecure or excluded intellectuals and their associations

• Looks back to heroes, spiritual roots, not forward

• Interested more in cultural preservation and purification than achievement or future projects

• Mystical and organic, not rational and individualistic

• Metaphors of kinship, family and blood ties

• Exclusive of ethnic minorities due to intrinsically ethno-particularist nature of the national identity

• Modern 'civic' elements grow in on top, but are always seen as secondary to the ethnic elements, and the ethnic often shapes the content of 'civic' symbols

Alternative Interpretations of Nationalism

• We must unpack the Ethnic/Civic into its component elements: 'East' vs 'West', Liberal vs Illiberal, Industrial vs Preindustrial, Cultural vs Political, Ethnic vs Territorial, Democracy vs Autocracy, etc.

• National identities can deploy any combination of the above, there is no intrinsic reason why all elements should align together

Ethnic v Civic

Nationalism

Geography

(East v West)

Liberalism

(Illiberal v

Liberal)

Democracy

(Autocratic v

Democratic)

Politics (State

v Non-State)

Economics

(Industrial v

Preindustrial)

Culture

(Emphasis on

Culture vs

Politics)

Ethnicity (Ethnic

Symbols v

Non-Ethnic)

Other research on ethnic/civic nationalismZimmer Approach:

• Must separate symbolic resources from those who use them

• Users of symbols can be inclusive or deterministic

• Main symbol types: political values/institutions, culture, history and geography

• Many types of symbol (language, geography, politics) can be spun in an 'organic' [read: ethnic] or 'voluntarist' [read: 'civic']direction

• Ex. language could be used as a basis for exclusion (interwar E Europe, Estonia) or inclusion (Quebec, Catalonia)

• Geography could be interpreted in a functional way (i.e. voluntarist), or in a mystical 'organic' way, as in Switzerland

• Same with political values: i.e. abstract liberalism or 'ancient English liberties’

Shulman (2002):

• 8 eastern and 8 western European countries. As many indicators contesting as supporting East vs West distinction

Janmaat (2005) – Not 2 but 5 dimensions: patriotic, political, cultural, ethnic, military

• However, 'ethnic' dimension stronger in East than West, albeit not hugely so

• Ethnic dimension important also in the West

• No clear trade-off between ethnic and civic dimensions as some countries strong on several

Nations as a Blend of Ethnic and Civic• Many aspects of civic and ethnic are complementary, not exclusive

• Smith 1991: Nations entwine civic and ethnic elements

• All nationalisms have both civic and ethnic elements, so must deal with nationalism as a whole

• State nations seek premodern legitimacy and romantic narrative (ex. French Gallicism and English medievalism of late 19th C. Mexican 'cosmic race’ of 1920s)

• Ethnic nations seek civic symbols and progress (ex. wealth, territory, industry, state pride)

• At different times in history, the ethnic aspect of nationhood can wax or wane, but it is always there

• If we accept that nationalism is a formidable force and even desirable to some degree then we need to accept the ethnic characteristics that will always undergird nationalism

Civic – Ethnic divide, recent studies: liberalism

• Centrality of other factors, particularly liberal views

• Studies show strong positive correlation between ethnic nationalism and questions of security, certainty, discipline, predictability and the approval of sever punishment for criminals

• On the other hand a strong positive correlation has been identified between liberal views of inclusivity, forgiveness, granting nationalism to immigrants and civic nationalism

• Hence we see a strong cleavage of ethnic versus civic nationalism within the same countries rather than between countries

• Countries with higher immigration tend to have stronger polarization. i.e. part of the society strongly ethnic and the other part strongly civic nationalist

• Hence one could consider that individual upbringing matters a lot to being ethnic or civic nationalist. The more intolerant individuals are also more ethnic

• Also sometimes there is shift from civic to ethnic nationalism such as trends towards populism in some contexts

Instrumentalist Ethno-Symbolist Primordialist

Key segment of group Elites, ruling class Romantic Intellectuals, Masses Entire Community or Social Organism

Motives Behind Ethnic

Groups

Elite Wealth, Power, Status Meaning, Security, Belonging +

instrumental motives

Instinctive Kinship, Maximization of

Group Fitness

Source of

Ethnogenesis

Elites in competition with each

other

Intellectual-driven historicism and

consciousness-raising, Warfare, culture

contact

Evolutionary struggle in prehistory

Ethnic Groups Origin Modern period (post-1789) In History (after 6000 BC) Pre-History

Process of

Ethnogenesis

Invention of the modern state

or competing sub-state elites,

who determine people's

identities from above

Created by intellectuals (religious or

secular-romantic), but informed by

traditional culture and mediated by

popular sentiment

Emerged organically as peoples met

through migration and war

Summary - Why Did the Ethnic Group Arise?

Modernist Perennialist Primordialist

Ethnic Groups Origin Modern period (post-

1789)

In History (after 6000 BC) Pre-History

Pre-Modern Social

Structure

Cosmopolitan Elite

strata,

localized masses (i.e. no

imagined &/or

integrated communities

of territory and

genealogy)

Great difference: some

vertically-integrated ethnic

groups, some more loosely

integrated units, some un-

integrated, Groups rise and fall

Ethnic groups ever-present throughout history, in all

times and places

Process of

Ethnogenesis

Invention of the

modern state or

competing sub-state

elites

Created by intellectuals

(religious or secular-romantic),

but informed by traditional

culture and mediated by

popular sentiment

Emerged organically as peoples met through

migration and war

Major Theorists Ernest Gellner, Benedict

Anderson, Eric

Hobsbawm, Anthony

Giddens

Anthony Smith, John

Armstrong, Walker Connor,

Adrian Hastings

Pierre van den Berghe,

Joshua Fishman,

Stephen Grosby

Summary - When Did the Ethnic Group Arise?