Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Anthony D. Smith's
contribution to the study of
Nationalism
Student: Nejra Hodi
Instructor: Matilde Fruncillo
Course: Nation and Nationalism
Contents
1. Background......................................................2
2. Ethnic vs. Civic Nationalism.............................3
3. Ethno-symbolism..............................................5
4. The Diffusion of Nationalism............................7
5. Conclusion........................................................9
REFERENCES..............................................10
1. Background
Anthony D. Smith has often been referred to as the most
authoritative European researcher on nationalism.
He is Professor
and equal before the law. The common bondage comes from mutual
characteristics not of the genealogical type but of shared language,
experiences, rules, law, food and education. As pointed out, civil
nationalism does not require common paternity but a closeness created
out of exposure to same elements that make up one society. The ideas of
the nation and nationalism in a civic sense arose within already existing
state structures that included relatively homogenous population. Such was
the case with the struggle of Western nations against dynastic rule that
were previously formed but only demanded equality and liberty in the
citizenship outlook (Schulman, 2002). On the other hand, nations in the
East consolidated around the common heritage of a people and the
abstract idea of the volk, instead of around the notion of citizenship (ibid).
This idea of ethnic nations emphasizes the elements of shared blood,
historical experiences, culture, language and religion that are not central
for common understanding of civic nation.
Smith poses an interesting question regarding the commonly-held
distinction
between
these
two
forms
of
nations/nationalisms.
He
3. Ethno-symbolism
The ethno-symbolist theory provides an insight into pre-modernist
forms of collective identity rooted in the culture or what Smith refers to as
ethnies (Guibernau, 2004). This theory lies between the modernist approach
of constructed nations and traditional perennial stance. Smith defines
ethnies as named human populations with shared ancestry myths,
histories and cultures, having an association with a specific territory, and a
sense of solidarity (1986). He claims that they are pre-modern origins of
national identities. Collective cultural identity circles around continuity of
ethnies and not their uniformity. This implies that the shared notions of
groups history, culture and ancestry do not necessarily coincide over the
generations to a full extent but they are adapted to each new generation
as to fit their demands (Smith, 1991). Nevertheless, their continued
existence is an obligatory element of a nation. Accordingly: there is a felt
filiation, as well as a cultural affinity, with a remote past in which a
community was formed, a community that despite all the changes it has
undergone, is still in some sense recognized as the same community
(Smith, 1991). Smiths work on the importance of the ethnic origins is
crucial for his percipience of why were particular nations created and why
are nationalisms varying in type although they are formally the same
ideology (Smith, 1998). He therefore explored the role of myths,
memories, beliefs, traditions and symbols, as powerful distinctions of one
communitys uniqueness and national identity. There are a number of
reasons for this. First, Smith asserts that these elements, individually and
in combination, play a crucial part in forming societal beliefs and
structures defining and legitimating the relationship between various
actors and institutions in community (2009). This further reflects on the
cohesion of society in times of instability and norms adaptation. Second,
these elements endue the community with specific symbolic support for
language, religion and customs that continue to separate that community
from other even similar groups. For example, Bosnians, Serbs, Croats and
any
case,
ethno-symbolic
approaches
are
always
that they often overlook the ethnic element. He continues to separate two
levels of diffusion present in these studies: diffusion of ideas and
ideologies (more historical) and impact of one set of social and political
institutions on the others. Nevertheless, the first one is according to him
tautological and inadequate because it does not answer the question
why the particular idea would be strong enough to overthrow existing
norms. What we require to explainand what invocation of a universal
'need to belong' cannot explainis why men have chosen to transfer their
allegiances, activities and identity definitions from these other, often
competing, units to that of the nation-state; and why they have done so
only recently (Smith, 1978). The second one is rejected on a similar basis
asserting that nationalism cannot be picked up abroad by elites and
disseminated at home as well as an extensive reliance on the statements
of nationalists themselves when explaining the diffusion.
The alternative model of diffusion is offered by him and in order to be
successful it needs to encompass several elements. From the beginning,
the process of diffusing nationalism must be placed in both global and
local context and the role of externalities needs to be examined. Then, one
needs to look for the novelty in this occurrence that does not completely
defy the universal difussionist model but carries some originality of its
own. Smith further identifies modernization, capitalism and bureaucracy as
explanatory processes of such occurrences. Modernization suggests
transformation brought about through Western impact. For example, the
rise of African nationalism has inevitably been influenced by political,
cultural and economic factors coming from externity. Capitalism, on the
contrary, is not a very good alternative because as the example of early
twentieth-century Kazakhs or Arabs demonstrate, their economies were
not based upon the commodity market nor were they employing a large
force of wage-earning labourers, at a time when their nationalism emerged
(ibid). In contrast, bureaucracy seems to be a very plausible explanation
since the 'rational-legal' type of bureaucracy enhances the incorporation
of, and reliance upon, scientific methods and impersonal techniques of
organization through which the rising intelligentsia of societies importing
Smith
5. Conclusion
Overall, this paper introduced the main assumptions and grasps of
Anthony D. Smiths theories and contributions to the study of nationalism.
First, the differentiation between ethnic and civic nationalisms was
established to ascertain Smiths position that lies between both of these.
Second, his theory of ethno-symbolism that claims each nation uses
symbols that stem from historical myths and values to create cohesive
sense of national identity. Last, the paper outlined major premises of
Smiths attitude upon diffusion of nationalism across the fields of sociology
and history as well as analysed his argument that only certain external
events may influence nation-formation, but that ethnicity is a crucial
element that must be created if it is non-existed. In the end, Smith is a
much respected author among the scholars of nationalism and his work is
extremely important for understanding the meaning of this concept or
doctrine as he refers to it in the modern world that is still torn by the
conflicts between different national identities.
REFERENCES
Guibernau, M., 2004. Anthony D. Smith on nations and national identity: a
critical
assessment.
Available
at:
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/herbert.preiss/files/Guibernau_Smith_on_
nations_and_national_identity.pdf. Accessed: 30 May 2015.