National Identity

1. National Identity Ethnic or Civic?

2. Recap: State Nationalism • 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

3. 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 • So 'state' vs. 'ethnic' nationalisms

4. East & West: Two Separate Entities? • 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)

5. Ethnic and 'Civic' Nationalism • 'Eastern' v. 'Western' nationalism (Kohn 1944) • 'Ethnic' v. 'Civic' nationalism • Many hold that these divisions influence national identities, citizenship today (Brubaker 1992)

6. 'Western' Model • Emphasis on State and Territory • Secure, emerge through revolution or reform of early modern kingdoms or proto-democracies • Forward-Looking. Propounded by established intelligentisia, 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

7. '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

8. Ethnic and Civic • Seems to have been coined by Smith (1991) • 'Ethnic' refers to the fact that the national identity sees itself as defined by shared ancestry, demarcated by culture. Implicit here is the idea that you get ethnic nationalism when you lack democratic or liberal institutions • 'Civic' refers to the idea of ties of citizenship between individuals and the state (i.e. legal rights and duties to each other and the state) within a voluntarist, democratic framework. Founded on idea of pride in liberty and democracy. Also linked to notions of civil society, i.e. of trans-ethnic associations • Are people reading their hopes into the theory? (ie Ethnic is Bad, Civic is Good)

9. Unpacking Terms • Can 'ethnic' and 'civic' phenomena really be grouped together under the same rubric of 'nation' • Does the ethnic/civic dichotomy stand up to scrutiny? • Is there a difference between ethnic and civic as ideal types versus descriptions of reality? • Are civic nationalisms 'good' and ethnic nationalisms 'bad'?

10. Do Exceptions Prove or Disprove the Rule? • Ireland: western, democratic, non-state, but ethnic • Japan after 1945: liberal democracy but ethnic • Czechs: eastern, non-state, but led by industrial bourgeoisie • Postcolonial nationalisms like India and Tanzania: 'eastern', non-state, but non-ethnic • France, c. 1899; USA c. 1920: western democracies, secure states, but ethnic nationalisms • Quebec and Wales post-1960: western but non-state; emphasise language but seek to be ethnically inclusive • Germany post-1999: shift from 'ethnic' to 'civic'

11. Exceptions Disprove Rule ? • Early theorists like Kohn may have been reading their hopes into history • 'Western' nationalism is a Utopia • We must unpack the ethnic/civic into its component elements: 'East' v 'West', liberal v illiberal, democracy v autocracy, industrial v preindustrial, cultural v political, ethnic v territorial, etc • National identities can deploy any combination of the above, there is no intrinsic reason why all elements should align together

12. Switzerland: Paradigm Case? • Switzerland a 'civic' nation • But what of romantic narrative of Tell's resistance to the Habsburgs & the Oath on the Rütli Meadow (at left) • These premodern myths emphasise timelessness of Swiss Alpine geography and primitive democracy

13. Ideal v Real Types • Ideal Type: Weberian conceptual technique which exaggerates clustering characteristics to create useful tool for interpreting reality. Does not exist in reality • Real Type: An actual description of the way reality is subdivided, like mammal or amphibian. Does exist in reality • Critiques of ethnic-civic dichotomy on both counts

14. Theoretical Critiques • Criticise ethnic-civic as ideal type • 'Cultural' as a third form (Kymlicka 1999, Nieguth 1999, Nielsen 1999) – cultural nationalism can be inclusive, as in Quebec nationalism • 'Multicultural' as another third form (Brown 2000) • Ethnic to Civic Shifts: Kaufmann (2000), Yack (2001), Kuzio (2002) • Zimmer (2003) on resources vs mechanisms

15. Zimmer's 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 • I.e. 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 (ie voluntarist), or in a mystical 'organic' way, as in Switzerland • Same with political values: i.e. abstract liberalism or 'ancient English liberties'

17. Empirical critiques • Criticise ethnic-civic as real type, • Use factor analysis of survey questions to see whether 'ethnic' and 'civic' items cluster • Jones & Smith: ascriptive plays a bigger role than voluntary in most countries, regardless of ethnic-civic tradition • Hjerm 2003: no major east-west European differences except regarding pride in political achievements which is greater in West

18. Shulman (2002) – 8 eastern and 8 western European countries. As many indicators contesting as supporting east v 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 tradeoff between ethnic and civic dimensions as some countries strong on several

19. Hjerm and Janmaat find no relationship between ethnic vs civic national identity and xenophobia Others – ie Schildkraut (2011) – do. But most find ethnic & civic reinforce each other Resulting data may stem from the experience of communism and underdeveloped civic/political pride in the Eastern bloc McCrone 2005 on England and Scotland. 3 types: civic, ethnic, 'insular/proud'. Shows ambiguity of ethnic-civic category, backs Smith's contention of blending of the two Conclusions: Little support for ethnic and civic real types. A lot of internal complexity and intra-regional variation Ethnic and civic nationalism can both be strong

20. But is it still useful as shorthand? • Smith (1991), Ignatieff (1994), Roshwald (2006) • Smith argues that despite the variations, the concept of nation hangs together and encompasses all • Ethnic/civic remains useful as an ideal type, and starting point • But ultimately all nations display ethnic and civic elements

21. Nations as a Blend of Ethnic and Civic (I) • Smith 1991: Nations entwine civic and ethnic elements • State nations seek premodern legitimacy and romantic narrative (ie French gothicism and English medievalism of late 19th c, Mexican 'cosmic race' idea of 1917) • Ethnic nations seek civic symbols and progress (ie wealth, territory, industry, state pride) • Many aspects of civic and ethnic are complementary, not exclusive • At different times in history, the ethnic aspect of nationhood can wax or wane • But it is always there as a resource as nations formed on the basis of ethnic cores • Continuum, not two boxes

22. Nations as Competing Ethnic and Civic layers • Ethnic resources and Civic resources • Different actors can appeal to different ones to bolster their cause (Hutchinson 2005) • 19th c: Liberals look to Anglo-Saxons or Gauls; Conservatives to Normans or Franks • Today, Liberals stress 'mongrel' past of Britain and France and the importance of civic values like toleration; Conservatives downplay idea of mongrelisation, stress historical continuity of culture. Unspoken sympathy with idea of more homogeneous ethnic English core • Both sides are playing with ethnic resources. Can do same with geography ('green and pleasant land' or just the pride in seeing Britain on a map)

23. Complexity and Differences Within Mass Publics • I have argued (Kaufmann 2016) for national identity as ‘bottom-up’, complex system • Competing ethnic and civic conceptions within a single nation • Bottom-up differences within mass public, shows up in survey data • Ethnic Nationalism linked to appeal to populism

25. More Difference Within than Between Nations • “Qualification for immigration: be white”. Scale from 0 (extremely important) to 10 (extremely unimportant). Std deviation within nations = 2.75; between nations = 1.12 (2014 ESS 15 countries) • “be Christian” = 3.00 vs 1.06 • “Requirement for having citizenship: ancestors from my country”. Scale from 1 (very important) to 3 (not important). Std deviation within nations = .85; between nations = .39(2005-7 WVS 34 countries) • “adopting the customs of my country” = .70 vs .17 • 2-4x more difference on ethnic-civic question within than between nations • Competing ethnic and civic nations within countries (beyond Zimmer-Hutchinson-Kaufmann…..)

26. Liberalism Matters, Historic Origins Don’t

27. Liberalism Matters, Historic Origins Don’t

28. Intolerance only related to Ethnic Nationalism

29. Why do civic nationalists turn ethnic? • State elites more often civic in outlook, masses tend to be ethnic • Populists can outflank by appealing to ethnic nationalism • Shifts state elites from civic to ethnic (Ireland, Sri Lanka, India, Mexico…) • Ethnic-civic shifts often elite-led, caused by rising education or spread of liberal values down social scale (i.e. West post 1960s)

30. Good and Bad Nationalisms? • Brown 2000: nasty side of civic nationalism in Latin America. What about socialist nationalisms (ie USSR, Cambodia, Eritrea), or republican ones like post-1792 France or 19th c. USA. Can be non-democratic, illiberal. Minorities excoriated for being irrational and not assimilating to civic projects • Positive ethnic nationalisms?: Wales, Brittany – focus on culture can lead away from political violence • Finally, if we don't allow ethnic nationalism, how can ethnicity survive – if only in diaspora, this means it is very tenuous • One argument is that all nationalisms have both civic and ethnic elements, so must deal with nationalism as a whole • If we accept that nationalism is possible or desirable to some degree then we need to accept the ethnic characteristics that will always undergird nationalism