Din Ilut.

Identitate naional este o expresie care dateaz din anii 1980. Anii 1990 aduc o
serie de lupte ntre etnii i apartenene interstatale. n context, se poate vorbi i de sentiment
naional (concept n uz de la sfritul secolului al XIX-lea, generat de revoluiile anilor 1948, din
state europene) sau de contiin naional (n uz nc din prima jumtate a secolului al XIX-lea,
ce a generat mai multe revoluii n 1848), cnd este n discuie sentimentul de apartenen a unei
persoane la o naionalitate1. Toate aceste expresii redau, n mod nuanat, sentimentul unei persoane
fa de o naiune de care aparine. Nu trebuie confundat identitatea naional, care este un
sentiment, cu naionalitatea, care desemneaz o apartenen, fie politic sau juridic (n sensul de
cetenie), fie etnic.
n a doua jumtate a secolului XIX i n secolul XX, prin intermediul sistemelor lor
educaionale, statele i-au asumat rolul de a forma identitatea naional preciznd i definind
punctele comune.
One of the existing interpretations of national identity is David Rousseaus speculation that
"a shared sense of identity can reduce, or even eliminate, perceptions of threat posed by power
asymmetries" (686). People need to belong somewhere for the fear of danger or harm that can
afflict them while standing alone. Regarding Rousseaus assertion, it is a justifiable reason for the
strong aspiration of people to define their external identity nowadays, at times of new previously
unknown inventions and new threats appearing. Datele prin care se identific membrii unei
comuniti naionale cu naiunea definesc un ansamblu de similariti de interese, credine sau
norme de via, mprtite de toate persoanele care aparin acelui grup. Identitatea poate deveni
stereotip n discursul cotidian, cu toate c identitatea naional prezint dificulti de
conceptualizare2.
Naiunea este aproape confundabil cu naionalismul, adic acesta din urm este
sentimnentul generat de apratenenta la Naiune, apoi la Statul-naiune. Idenitatea naional este o
consecin fireasc a tuturor acestor concepte. Pentru a se dezvolta, identitatea naional a avut
nevoie de instrumente: tiparul/coal/ nchisoare/legi/voin politic/ etc

1
Stoica, Adrian, Curs Identitate European, cap. De la NAIUNE la IDENTITATEA NAIONAL, 2013
2
Simona tefnescu, Anca Velicu, Naional i/sau european? reprezentri sociale ale
identitii n societatea romneasc actual, Bucureti, Editura Expert, 2006, p. 1617.
 Identitatea naional este un subiect cu impact n analizele asupra naiunii, naionalismului,
etnicului i etnicitii, fiindc studiul comunitilor naionale include n mod necondiionat
cunoaterea dimensiunilor de difereniere a unui grup naional de alt grup naional.al
Despre identitate naional ncepe s se vorbeasc n Europa ca urmare a constituirii
statelor naionale n secolul XIX. Ideea nsi de naiune nu e mult mai veche. Europa medieval,
preburghez, era un stat global, fr frontiere precise i care, n orice caz, separau comuniti mai
degrab religioase dect etnice.
Identitatea naional a fost definit prima oar n mod polemic n Frana o dat cu afacerea
Dreyfus i cu crearea ligilor reunite n "Action franaise" a lui Charles Maurras. O definiie care a
fcut o lung carier internaional, bazat pe excluderea a patru "inamici interni": protestanii,
evreii, masonii i metecii. Cel puin aa i sistematizeaz Michel Winock, autor al mai multor studii
pe aceast tem. n fond, neidentitarii se reduc la o singur categorie: strinii. Fie de neam, fie de
religie.
n ceea ce privete identitatea naional, Cillia et al. (1999) susin c ea poate fi privit ca
habitus colectiv (ca i complex de idei comune, concepte i scheme de percepie comune legate de
atitudinile, emoiile mprtite ntr-un grup de persoane, de comportamente similare, toate
internalizate prin socializarea naional (de exemplu se uit la aceleai programe TV, citesc
aceleai ziare etc.).
Elemente comune. Indiferent de perspectiva de analiz, aproape toate definiiile evoc o
serie de elemente comune. Colectiviti naionale Elemente omune: aproape toi evoc un
sentiment de recunoatere. Din Platon, p, 20 Construcia identitii naionale se realizeaz, mai
susin autorii, prin sublinierea unei istorii comune (memoria colectiv); sau dup Halbwachs (apud
Cillia et al., 1999) prin amintirea selectiv a evenimentelor trecute despre care se crede c ar fi
importante pentru membrii unei comuniti. Cultura naional construiete identiti prin crearea
de nelesuri ale naiunii cu care ne putem identifica. Identitatea naional nu e complet
consistent, stabil i imuabil. E fragil, dinamic, vulnerabil i adesea incoerent (este
construit n funcie de context). Cillia et al. mai arat cum construirea discursiv a identitii
naionale e legat de construirea diferenei/distinctivitii i a unicitii; cum s-au realizat analize
ale construirii identitii naionale n discursurile politicienilor (de exemplu la evenimente
comemorative, ziua naional)3.
Rezumnd, putem spune c identitatea naional se definete prin trsturile proprii, am
spune unice, ale unei naiuni, cum ar fi limba, cultura, religia, dar i prin respectarea obiceiurilor,
tradiiilor, cutumelor specifice comunitii naionale. Conceptul de naiune este, la rndu-i, proteic.
Etimologic, termenul provine din latinescul natio (natere), indicnd, n antichitatea roman, un
grup demarcat prin origine. n Evul Mediu timpuriu, prin termenul nationes erau desemnai pgnii
i triburile barbare (n Vulgata, n Originum seu Etymologiarum Libri XX, a lui Isidor din Sevilla,
n Anglorum Ecclesistica Historia, scris de clugrul Beda Venerabilul, la Bernard de Clairvaux)4
Ulterior, prin extindere semantic, termenul de naiune a nglobat, alturi de nelesul mai
vechi, i sensul de comunitate determinat de un anume teritoriu, de patria, adic ara
strmoilor37. Mai trziu, a ajuns s desemneze elita privilegiat a societii feudale, aa cum s-a
ntmplat cu strile din Transilvania. Formarea statelor n apusul Europei, confruntarea cu
alteritatea, rolul limbilor vernaculare, mai ales dup Reforma protestant, apartenena
confesional, toate laolalt au determinat un proces acut de identificare, care a dus la formarea
naiunilor38 (medievale, cum le numete Ioan-Aurel Pop39)
Dup Revoluia francez din 1789 i concepia civic asupra naiunii40, a aprut dihotomia
dintre naiunea politic i naiunea cultural. Semnificaia diferit a conceptelor Kulturnation,
organicist, elaborat n spaiul german i privilegiind valorile tradiionale, limba i cultura, respectiv
Nation, investit civic i politic n spaiul francez41, a contribuit la o mare dezbatere, care persist
nc n literatura de specialitate: naiune cultural sau naiune politic42.

3
Cillia, R., Reisigl, M., Wodak, R., 1999, The Discursive Construction of National Identities, n Discourse & Society,
vol. 10, [online]: http://das.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/10/2/149.
4
Hagen Schulze, Stat i naiune n istoria european, traducere coordonat de Hans Neumann, Iai, Editura Polirom,
2003, p. 101. Aceast carte reprezint o reuit mbinare ntre istoria conceptelor (Begriffsgeschichte) i istoria
politic.
37
Karl Ferdinand Werner, Volk, Nation, Nationalismus, Masse: Mittelalter, n Otto Bruner et al. (eds.), Geschichtliche
Grunbegriffe, vol. VII, Stuttgart, 1992, p. 223, apud H. Schulze, op. cit., p. 102. Vezi i AXIS. L'Univers documentaire.
Hachette. Dossier, vol. 7, 1995, p. 268; Encyclopedia Universalis, corpus 16, 1995, pp. 6-7.
38
H. Schulze, op. cit., pp. 114-136. Istoricul acord rzboiului, adic confruntrii violente cu alteritatea, un rol aparte:
Rzboiul nu este originea unei naiuni, ci catalizatorul ei (Ibidem, p. 114).
39
Vezi Ioan-Aurel Pop, Geneza medieval a naiunilor moderne, p. 17.
40
Victor Neumann, Neam, popor sau naiune? Despre identitile politice europene, Bucureti, Editura Curtea Veche,
2003, p. 45.
 Identitatea naional are n centru naiunea i sentimentul naional. Exist o identitate
naional bazat pe principiul etnicitii specific statelor naionale unde majoritatea populaiei se
caracterizeaz printr-o contiin comun generat de unitatea de limb, cultur, religie, strmoi
comuni, producii culturale etc. (de ex. Romnia) i exist de asemenea o identitate naional
bazat pe principiul ceteniei. n acest din urm caz trstura comun principal a membrilor
grupului respectiv este cetenia. Pe aceste coordonate vorbim de americani, elveieni, canadieni,
moldoveni, bosniaci, australieni care manifest o identitate naional (prin prisma apartenenei la
un grup comun determinat de cetenie) dar nu au neaprat i o identitate etnic comun.
Naiune.naionalism. Sintetiznd contribuiile istoriografice, Pompiliu Teodor remarca
faptul c studiile romneti consacrate naiunii, n marea lor majoritate de sorginte sociologic,
i-au concentrat atenia asupra premiselor istorice ale apariiei naiunii. [] Ele au insistat mai
puin asupra perceperii fenomenului constituit, au neglijat expansiunea contiinei naionale n
societate []55. Acelai istoric arta c termenul naiune a fost introdus n vocabularul politic
n epoca Luminilor56. n concepia sa, secolul al XVIII-lea a reprezentat, pentru romni, o epoc
a asimilrii ideilor lumii moderne i a integrrii n Europa iluminist57. Conceptul de naiune
sufer transformri substaniale n aceast perioad, nsemnnd deplasarea sensului de la viziunea
elitar la reevaluarea tradiiilor naionale, la studiul poporului, la aprarea drepturilor tuturor
categoriilor sociale58. (Vezi Dinu Balan, etapa paoptist, Eftimie Murgu, limba, Xenopol)
Termenul naionalism, ptruns n vocabularul istoric i politic mult mai trziu dect cel de
naiune, are o bogie conceptual exemplar. Fuziunea sa cu diferite curente ideologice i
supravieuirea n diferite sisteme politice, asocierea cu construcia statului modern, abuzurile din
diferite etape i locuri, utilizarea polemic, nelesurile diferite ce i-au fost acordate n diverse
culturi, toate acestea contribuie la ambiguitatea termenului i la definirea sa extrem de variat78.
n unele enciclopedii, se propune o abordare cronologic, evitndu-se enunarea unor definiii ale
naionalismului79. Pentru prima oar cuvntul naionalism este folosit n spaiul german. Studenii
Universitii din Leipzig, organizai n naiuni, depuneau n 1661 un jurmnt, n care apare
acest termen, n accepiunea relativ de ovinism provincial. n limba englez, adjectivul
naionalist este menionat din 1715. n 1774, Herder utiliza termenul naionalism. n limba
francez, cuvntul, aprut pe la 1798, avea conotaia de spirit revoluionar, desemnnd excesele
patriotismului iacobin. Abatele Barruel, n Memorii pentru a servi istoriei iacobinismului,
publicate la Hamburg, n anii 1798-1799, considera naionalismul o exacerbare a patriotismului.
n 1836, poetul Lamartine i atribuia nelesul de ataament patriotic. Proudhon i conferea o nuan
peiorativ cnd condamna agresivitatea naiunilor care aveau un stat propriu, dar nutreau ambiii
expansioniste; n schimb, aproba lupta pentru constituirea unui stat naional n cazul naiunilor
neemancipate.
Folosit mult timp episodic i cu un neles incert, termenul s-a generalizat n vocabularul
francez n ultimii ani ai secolului al XIX-lea, pstrnd ns o tripl semnificaie: a) forma extrem
a patriotismului, cnd devine sinonim cu ovinismul i capt o nuan peiorativ; b) exprim
revendicrile popoarelor asuprite aspirnd spre independen; c) reprezint o etichet i o profesie
de credin a unor grupuri care, afirmnd prioritatea aprrii valorilor i intereselor naionale n
ordinea politic, sunt clasificate la dreapta sau la extrema dreapt a opiniei publice. Pluralitatea
sensurilor se pstreaz i n italian i german. O situaie aparte exist n limba englez, unde
termenul naionalism desemneaz diversele manifestri ale contiinei naionale i ale caracterului
naional8 Literatura consacrat naionalismului este de o diversitate uluitoare81. O sistematizare
extrem de util a tipologiilor naionalismului i a principalelor orientri metodologice a fost
realizat n istoriografia romn de cercettorul Ctlin Turliuc82.
National identity has no widespread standard definition. Members of a nation are provided
with a national identity, but the construction of national identity can be undertaken, according to
various theoretical approaches, through the employment of a variety of factors such as language,
customs, culture5. The study of nationalism has undergone a renaissance in recent times, coming
back into favour as an area of study (Calhoun 1993, Ozkirimli 2000). Indeed McCrone argues that
the study of nationalism is only just over forty years old (1998). This is a harsh assertion, as many
works on the subject can be identified long before the 1960s. Smith discusses the existence of
discourse in the 19th Century (1986) and others identifying nationalist discourse well before the
20th Century (Greenfeld 1992, Anderson, 1991, Breuilly 1982). However McCrone is implying
that a clear divide between the studies of nationalism preceding the 1960s and since can be made.
He dismisses works prior to those of Gellner, considering him an inspiration (and irritant) for much
ofthe work done in the last forty years and puts him "at the heart of modern nationalism studies"
(McCrone 1998: viii). Yet this dismissal of pre 1960s work seems cavalier at best. Kant, Herder,
Fichte, Marx, Engels and Rousseau all contributed to the discourse on nationalism (Kedourie 1985,
Ozkirimli 2000) and many historians considered the subject at the same time.

5
From Scottish thesis
 Nationalism stretches across the academic spectrum, involving all the social sciences, as
well as the arts and sciences. Sociologists, historians, psychologists, and others espouse ideas,
comments and thoughts on the subject. Typologies and other frameworks are employed to specify
how and why nationalism should be studied. Major schools of thought are identified, major
theorists, and their critics are used as classification, and even timeframes are used to
compartmentalise the consideration of the subject. Some of the major works on the subject,
including those mentioned above, have taken a variety of approaches to the subject. Smith (1998)
focuses on the issue of modernism, employing this umbrella to consider a series of theories and
then their critics and alternatives - mostly primordialism and ethno-symbolism (of which Smith is
a major contributor and proponent). Ozkirimli considers these and more contemporary "new"
approaches (2000). Kellas focus on individual scholars, highlighting their contributions (1998)6.

Formation of national identity

National identity is not an inborn trait and it is essentially socially constructed. A person's national
identity results directly from the presence of elements from the "common points" in people's daily
lives: national symbols, language, colors, nation's history, blood ties, culture, music, cuisine, radio,
television, and so on. Under various social influences, people incorporate national identity into
their personal identities by adopting beliefs, values, assumptions and expectations which align with
ones national identity. People with identification of their nation view national beliefs and values
as personally meaningful, and translate these beliefs and values into daily practices.
Two concepts of national identity are prevalent in contemporary political philosophy
A strict one that regards nationality as based on a belief in common ancestry or ethnicity and a
loose one that views nationality as a malleable term without fixed properties. The strict definition,
as expressed by Max Weber and Walker Connor, among others, is both realist and subjectivist and
has the advantages of both avoiding the nominalist indeterminacy of defining nations by reference
to a medley of characteristics and the false objectivism of attributing nationality to an actual
common identity. The loose definition, as given recent philosophical exposition by Ross Poole
and Paul Gilbert, fails to give a determinate meaning to national identity. Yet, when the term is
used to justify a principle of national self-determination, as by such liberal nationalists as David
Miller, Kai Nielsen, and Yael Tamir, the strict definition must be used to fix a meaning, while the

6
Scottish thesis
loose definition is also employed, necessarily but inconsistently, to make selfdetermination
compatible with liberal principles. The failings of indeterminacy and inconsistency can only be
avoided by maintaining a strict definition of national identity, in spite of its divergence from some
usages of the term in ordinary language.
Nationalism is a theory of political legitimacy, which requires that ethnic boundaries should not
cut across political ones (Gellner 1983); or
Nationalism/nation: is an imagined political community and imagined as both inherently limited
and sovereign (Anderson 1991)
A process to establish the ideological justification of the state (Eriksen 1993/2002)

Thus, the English term nation, can be traced directly to the Latin verb nasci (to be born). As will
be seen, however, given my focus on ethnic nationalism in the modern world, the matter is a
great deal more complex than this. For example, whereas the Greeks have just one word to express
this combined or compound idea, ethnos, which means both ethnic and nation, other societies
make a definite distinction between the two. To elaborate, in Greek the notions of ethnicity and
nationality are synonymous, and such terms as ethnikos (ethnic or national) and ethnikotis
(ethnicity or nationality), would suggest that the concept of ethnic nationalism is somewhat
redundant. This is so because the Greek conception of ethnos speaks to the idea of a nation-state
or a state that comprises a single ethnic group. This is obviously very much at odds with most
modern day multiethnic states such as those that characterize the Caribbean region, where the
contested politics of national identity can and has assumed ethnic dimensions, and is often
conducted in competitive and acrimonious terms. But it is not necessarily irrelevant to the post-
socialist states of Eastern Europe and Central Asia7.
Rezultatele arat c, n timp ce identitatea naional este n principal un fenomen modern,
comunitile etnice i identitile sunt larg rspndite i procesele de formare naional se gsesc
n toate epocile. Dei abordarea empiric are problemele sale, este mai sensibil la contextul istoric
i nuan, i transmite o imagine mai complet, dect perspectivele dominante n domeniu astzi8.

7
Din Anton Allahar
8
Smith, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01419870.1994.9993832?src=recsys
Ethnic nationalism, also known as ethno-nationalism, is a form of nationalism wherein the "nation"
is defined in terms of ethnicity.[ the central theme of ethnic nationalists is that "nations are defined
by a shared heritage, which usually includes a common language, a common faith, and a common
ethnic ancestry".[2] It also includes ideas of a culture shared between members of the group, and
with their ancestors. However, it is different from a purely cultural definition of "the nation," which
allows people to become members of a nation by cultural assimilation; and from a purely linguistic
definition, according to which "the nation" consists of all speakers of a specific language. First of
all, ethno-nationalism is deeply woven into the very notion of the nation-state. The Greek word
ethnos, used frequently in the New Testament, is often translated as nation: the idea of a people
and that of a nation were seen as tightly linked. Millennia later, when progressives sought to redraw
the map of Europe after WWI, they did so under the principle that each ethnos should have its
own nation-state. Wilsons Fourteen Points stresses the principle that each ethnos should be free
to develop autonomously.
To darkly hint that ethno-nationalism really means white nationalism, as some critics of
Bannon seem to be doing, is hinting nonsense.
Identiti intermediare: apartenena etno-naional i provocrile ei
https://www.idsa-india.org/an-sep8-2.html

Din Lund
The concept of national identity relies on a thick layer of common assumptions that compels us
to extract some of the primary features of this notion.

Nations often do not have a single history, but they are competing tales to be told. Walter Benjamin
(quoted by Smith, 1991: 64) claims that the voice of nation is fiction, and history is always a
tale of victors celebrating triumphs. If we are to imagine ourselves as unique, we need a name
2
to do so . We have exemplified how identity is placed on a paradigm of continuity, in one of our
previous studies, focused on the relation between Swedish people and one of their earliest
minority: the Saami. Accordingly, the Swedes consider as their ancestors and the indigenous
people of their land, the Vikings. The Saami presence is often ignored or undermined in local
history, politics, and culture.
Din Demeter Atilla
Today it is not an original or isolated attempt to consider that modern nationalism in the historical
sense was born out of the political experiences and measures of the French Revolution. No matter
how school-bookish the thesis may seem, the conclusions it allows are very productive, but also
quite diverse. My basic thesis: the French Revolution created the modern nation, not as a social,
but primarily as a political entity, where the nation was seen by the revolutionaries as the exclusive
and direct depositary of sovereignty. Nevertheless, as an unintended effect of the conscious,
centrally controlled homogenization policy, this entity acquired cultural substance, or at least a
possibility was created for the national idea to gain a cultural interpretation, particularly by
attempting to eliminate Frances existing linguistic diversity for political reasons,2 and to arouse
in the inhabitants of France the feeling of belonging to the French nation as a political and linguistic
community.

National identity in the era of globalisation

With the influences of global development on almost every sphere of human activity, the future of
national identity is attracting heightened attention and is frequently debated. The idea of the
emergence of a global identity becomes increasingly topical and occupies a prominent position in
academic and political discourse on globalisation and national identity (A.D. Smith, 1995,
Hetherington, 1998, Kennedy and Danks (eds), 2001, Scholte, 2005, Freeland, 2007, The
Economist, 2008). A.D. Smith (1991), for example, admitting that some
elements of global culture and the effect of communication technologies on global
interconnections provoke stronger ties between people in the world, suggests that
there is no global identity-in-the-making; a global culture could only be a memoryless
construct or break up into its constituent national elements. But a memory-less
culture is a contradiction; any attempt to create such a global culture would simply
accentuate the plurality of folk memories and identities that have been plundered in
order to constitute this giant bricolage (p.159).
utnd o definiie pentru un fenomen pe ct de rspndit, pe att de agresiv, Winock merge pe
urmele celor care resping raportarea identitii naionale la o origine comun (pmntul, sngele),
prefernd raportarea la voina oamenilor de a tri mpreun, pe care Ernest Renan o numea "
plebiscit permanent". Aadar, nu un concept biologic ( Renan i zicea zoologic), ci unul politic.
Id naional Alternatively, we will remain on a sociological macro-social perspective.9 As we
acknowledged from the arguments presented,

Din Purici. Alteritatea - Sociologul Dan Dungaciu completeaz aceast stratificare cu dimensiunile
istoric, economic i geografic, definind naiunea ca .un grup de persoane ce au n comun un
set de elemente culturale distincte, un sentiment de solidaritate izvort din experiena comun, un
sentiment economic relativ unificat, drepturi ceteneti pentru toi membrii acceptai ca atare i
care ocup un teritoriu.47. ntr-o abordare tradiionalist48, identitatea naional nu poate exista
fr etnonim, limb, religie comun, stat (care poate fi i o piedic n procesul conturrii
identitii), contiina istoric49, adic un element dat care urmeaz s se manifeste la momentul
oportun. Dimpotriv, consider reprezentanii generaiei mai noi, naiunea nsi i valorile
asociate ei nu constituie, n primul rnd, dect construcii de natur ideologic, .realiti. de la
nivelul imaginarului social, a cror .existen obiectiv. este instituit de fapt de voina
circumstanializat istoric a unor grupuri de oameni (intelectuali, n primul rnd) de a le conferi
consisten i sens50. n cadrul ambelor abordri, naiunea apare ca nivelul suprem al
identitii51. De identitatea naional sunt strns legate conceptele de patriotism i naionalism.
Primul este apreciat drept un .atribut funcional., o dimensiune menit s contribuie la conservarea
identitii naionale a ceteanului, n timp ce naionalismul este calificat drept .atribut
disfuncional., periclitant pentru sntatea identitii naionale, avnd tendina alunecrii spre
eliminarea coninutului raional al acesteia58. n condiiile n care identitatea se manifest n
cazul unei naiuni ncadrat parial sau total ntre frontierele unui stat strin, aceasta i poate pune
n valoare potenialul politic combativ. n asemenea situaii apare micarea naional, definit
drept .micare cultural-politic ndreptat spre aprarea, meninerea, construcia i promovarea de
instituii care s asigure liberti i drepturi egale cu ceilali membri ai societii, s permit
eliberarea de energii a indivizilor dintr-o comunitate etnic i, n final, s realizeze unificarea
politic a ntregii naiuni.59.

Anton Allahar

9
Din Lund
To begin, there is so much disagreement over the definition and proper meaning of nationalism
as a concept, that Ernst Haas has questioned why bother even to ask what is nationalism and why
should we study it (Haas 1986)? At the very broadest of levels, nationalism can be seen as an
ideology espoused by those who live in already-established nations, complete with economic,
political, legal, military, economic and civic autonomy in a clearly demarcated territorial space.
Thus, the ideology of nationalism can, and has been used to rally individuals and
groups behind the flag of a nation, to give them a sense of belonging to that nation,
and to separate them from others who do not belong. But as an ideology, the term
nationalism can also be used to characterize a sentiment, a yearning or movement for
independence and autonomy on the part peoples, who, though sharing what Clifford
Geertz calls a corporate sentiment of oneness and a consciousness of kind (1973:
b260; 307), do not yet inhabit a clearly defined territorial space. Therefore, nationalist movements
are quintessentially political movements. And as we have
seen in the srtugglesof various social and cultural groups from the former USSR,
national and cultural identities are neither natural nor automatic. As Daniel Chirot
writes: almost all the present nations would like to become nation-states, but many
nations are actually parts of other states, and many states are not nation-states
(1977: b11).
suggestive of post-colonial and post-socialist social formations in areas such as
the former Soviet Union and the Caribbean, where multi-ethnic states like those of
Russian Federation and the Caribbean house nations in search of homes. I am
thinking of nations as ethnic groupings that share the above-mentioned corporate
sentiment of oneness, and of homes as places (territories) where the members of
such groupings can feel a sense of unquestioned belonging and acceptance. My
approach to the nation, then, deals as much with unwritten sentiment as with
juridical meaning, and differs somewhat from Anthony Giddens strictly
state-centered view:
By a nation I refer to a collectivity existing within a clearly demarcated
territory, which is subject to a unitary administration, reflexively monitored
both by the internal state apparatus and those of other states. A nation only
exists when a state has a unified administrative reach over the territory over
which its sovereignty is claimed (Giddens 1984:116) Whether dealing with capitalist or socialist
colonialism, colonies and those
colonial subjects that inhabit them are by definition not independent or sovereign
entities. It is possible, however, for colonial subjects to develop a sense of
nation-ness and to agitate for independence and national self-determination while
still under the colonizers yoke. This was clearly the case in the former Soviet
republics of Georgia and Chechenia, and in the English-speaking Caribbean on the
eve of independence as Crown Colony government paved the way for the emergence
of nationalist politics. However, it is after securing political independence, whether
by war or by peaceful negotiation with the colonial master, that the process of nation
building can be said to begin. But since no two countries are exactly alike in their
historical experiences, their social class structure and composition, their natural
resource endowment, their demographic make-up, or even in the specific values that
their cultures embrace, the process of nation building can be expected to vary from
country to country. It stands to reason too, that in multiethnic states where two or
more ethnic groups are more or less even in numbers, the process of nation building
could be a very contentious one. And this is likely to be even more accentuated
where the ethnic groups in question have a developed racialized consciousness
(Serbia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Trinidad and Guyana). Further, in order fully to understand the sentiment
of nationalism one must
look at its proponents and interrogate their motives. In other words, whether as
sentiment or as movement, nationalism cannot be divorced from the class and
political interests of its leading promoters. By this I mean that nationalism, along
with the peculiar brands of ideological appeal that nationalists make, will most often
be linked to the discrete economic and political interests of its champions. But one
must be cautious in absolutizing the class claim, for in the specific case of ethnic
nationalism, for example, Robin Williams has noted that to dismiss ethnicity as
false consciousness ignores the clear evidence that ethnies often sacrifice economic
interests in favour of symbolic gains (1994: 6465). Even beyond this, economic
gain is not all that is sacrificed for as Ronaldo Munck reminds us, nationalism
matters because people die for it. And, If people are prepared to die for their
country, then this must be a phenomenon worth investigating (1986: 2). The class
reductionism of orthodox Marxism must therefore be guarded against, for at
different times some peoples and groups will value the symbolic and cultural aspects
of group identity higher than the rationally calculated, economic and political gains
to be derived (or lost) from pursuing class interests.
On the other hand, as will be seen presently, while the concept of false
consciousness generally is fraught with difficulty, it cannot be entirely ignored in
any assessment of the political calculations of specific actors, especially when those
calculations relate to claims of ethnic belonging. In other words, what to some may
appear as false consciousness, to others will represent strategic, rational calculation.
It all depends on the situation at hand, and the long-term and short-term goals and
class interests of the leading actors. In what follows I will flesh out the concept of
false consciousness as it speaks to social classes, with a view later to applying it to an
understanding of ethnic and national consciousness.