The Functions of Nationalism

The essence of a particular national ideology is determined by it’s functions. In the contemporary world, nationalism has the two main functions: mobilizational and compensatory. As for it’s legitimational function, it’s importance considerably declined due to the expansion of the liberal-democratic discourse and activation of religious, confessional system, of legitimation. Nowadays, nationalism is comfortably used for mass mobilization, or for compensation of collective traumas. At the same time, nationalistic rhetoric turned out to be very effective tool for weakening of psychological feelings of society’s frustrated segment[1].
[1]Малахов В.С. Национализм как политическая идеология. М. 2005

Indentity in Psychology

There are many ways to research and define identity in psychology. We could tell about personal identity (knowledge and feeling about own uniqueness and differences from other people) as well as about social identity (knowledge and feeling of own belongingness to certain social group or social category). Also identity explores like a role identity, social identity, situational identity, given identity etc.
Modern psychological science suggest multitude of identities, build them into different systems, hierarchies, structures. Psychologists argue about exact definition of identity, try to oppose social and personal identities to each other, and try to find the most appropriate model for representation of personality, like a system, schema, of elaborated identities.
Identity in its true sense could be defined in different categories, situations, relations through which we produce own Selves, personalities, uniqueness of personal life. For that reason, I prefer the term subjectivity rather, than term identity. The term subjectivity elaborated in the course of modern philosophy and psychology of personality. It means the true, unique, non-adaptive mental core of individual, which includes all the things through which a personality signifies itself. Semantically, today, identity is a something that personality has, but subjectivity is something that personality is. Subjectivity is always a product of two issues: 1) personal life experience, 2) ethnic, cultural, social, any other type of the discourse a person lives in.
For the subjectivity we don’t have to separate and define some partial identities – ethnic, religious, professional, gender, etc. All of them involved in the process of subjectivity building and equally presented at the space of personality. So, identities, in the space of subjectivity, represent certain possibilities of the person to define and express own self, by very different ways.
To sum up:
1) Identity is not only the result, but also is the process of subjectivity building, so we need to look on it in both, structural and dynamic perspectives.
2) Identity exists as a discourse, could be expressed through narrative personality tells about own self or through the outside interpretation of that narrative.
3) Identity of the person always exist as intention and being turned to the social and cultural spheres, to the Other (From the capital letter), who personalized itself all possible social identifications (ethnic, religious, national, etc).

Separatist Nationalism

Separatist Nationalism, it’s peculiar ideology, is based on ethnic, linguistic or confessional group’s aspiration towards separation from a particular state. In general, an international society does not support their demands, justifying behavior by means of political-pragmatic, as well as through moral-judicial considerations[1].
Малахов В.С. Национализм как политическая идеология. М. 2005

Religious Nationalism

Religious Nationalism defines nation through a common religion. If a state derives it’s legitimacy in conjunction with religious doctrines, we can characterize it more as a theocracy, rather as a nation-state. In reality, most ethnic and cultural nationalisms have religious aspect in their core. Religion is the marker of a group identity and it is not the motivation for nationalistic demands and pretensions (for example, Irish nationalism)[1].
[1]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/

Cultural Nationalism

Cultural Nationalism defines nation through the scope of culture. Membership in a nation is neither totally voluntaristic (it’s impossible to familiarize with culture immediately), nor hereditary (particular nation’s successors can be considered as foreigners, if they are brought up in different culture)[1].
[1]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/

Romantic Nationalism

Romantic Nationalism (organic nationalism, identity’s nationalism) is an extraordinary form of ethnic nationalism, where state derives it’s political legitimacy as a result of nation’s (or race’s) expression. It was the reflection of Romantism and was opposed to the rationalism of enlightenment. Romantic nationalism was stressing on historical ethnic culture, which was totally correlative with the idea of Romantism[1].
[1]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/

Ethnic Nationalism

Ethnic Nationalism ­defines nation through concept of ethnicity, always including some elements of ancestry. It also contains the idea of shared culture and language of its members. Membership in a nation is hereditary. State derives it’s legitimacy through it’s status – to defend a national group and strengthen it’s culture and social life. An idea of ethnicity is too old, but recent nationalism was heavily influenced by Johan Gottfried Von Herder, who made the concept people soundness, and by Johan Gothlib Fixte. Nowadays, ethnic nationalism is a prevailing form of nationalism and generally it is quoted as nationalism. We have to note, Anthony Smith, an influential theoretician of nationalism studies, uses the term ethnic nationalism to refer to the non Western conceptions of nationalism. He confronts this term to the Western viewpoints, where a geographical territory plays a crucial role in nations’ definition[1].
According to the essence of ethnic nationalism ethnos should be exclusive politically, endowed with the right of self-determination[2].
[1]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/
[2]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/

State Nationalism

A variety of civic nationalism, quiet often combined with ethnic nationalism. State Nationalism considers nation to be an unity of people, contributing to state’s maintenance and development. This standpoint is briefly expressed in Mussolini’s slogan: “everything in state, nothing beyond it, nothing against it”. It is not surprising though that this is in opposition with the liberal ideas of individual freedom and liberal-democratic principles. The Jacobin creation of an unitary and centralized French state is considered to be the initial version of state nationalism. Franco’s Spain and modern Turkish nationalism are the later examples of state nationalism[1].
The term State Nationalism is reffered for describing a contradiction of different nationalisms, especially in a case when secession movement is confronted with existed nation state. Secessionists point to state nationalism in order to discredit legitimacy of larger existing state. Thus state nationalism is perceived to be less authentic and less democratic.[2].
[1]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/
[2]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/

Civic Nationalism

State derives it’s political legitimacy through an active participation of it’s citizens. The degree of political legitimacy correlates with the degree of people’s will’s representation. The idea of civic nationalism was coined by Jan-Jak Russo and was spread through his theories of social contract. The term social contract itself derives from his book, entitled as Social Contract, published in 1762. Civic nationalism fits well with the framework of nationalisms’ traditions and liberalism. As a type of nationalism, it is in a sharp contrast with ethnic nationalism. Membership in a civic nation is voluntaristic. The civic national ideas were heavily influenced by the development of representative democracy in countries, like the United States and France[1].
[1]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/

Anti-Colonial/Post-Colonial Nationalism

Anti-Colonial/Post-Colonial Nationalism started just after the process of decolonization, following 1945 . It was directed against the West and the Western values[1].
[1]Heiwood E. Political Ideologies, 2004, pp. 177-214.

Expansionist Nationalism

Expansionist Nationalism is an aggressive and militaristic one, opposing the belief in nation’s self-determination. Chauvinism, once own nation’s priority and domination, is its undividable characteristics. This type of nationalism quiet often is followed by militarism[1].
[1]heivudi e. politikuri ideologiebi. Tb., 2004, gv. 177-214.

Conservative Nationalism

Conservative Nationalism is directed towards the development of existed nation-state and it does not aim to form a new nation-state. On the basis of patriotism and “national pride” it targets at the maintenance of unity. It bears a nostalgic character and is oriented towards the past triumph and might[1].
[1]heivudi e. politikuri ideologiebi. Tb., 2004, gv. 177-214.

Liberal Nationalism

The ancient form of nationalism. It dates back to the French Revolution. The ideas of liberal nationalism was offered by Joseph Madzini; it’s various aspects are also highlighted in the works of Jan-Jack Russo. Woodrow Wilson’s “14 Points” were based on the principles of Liberal Nationalism[1]. Liberal nationalism was strongly backed by political philosophers as they believed in existence of non-xenophobic nationalism, apart from freedom, tolerance, equality and individual rights. Ernest Renan and John Stuart Mill are considered to be liberal nationalists. The liberal nationalists defend the importance of national identity, proclaiming it to be necessary for individuals in order to be endowed with significant and representational autonomy. On the other hand it contributes to proper functioning of liberal democratic state[2].
[1]heivudi e. politikuri ideologiebi. Tb., 2004, gv. 177-214.
[2]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/

Western and Eastern Nationalisms

Scientists, distinguish two types of nationalisms according to their various characteristics and manifestations: the Western Nationalism and the Eastern Nationalism. In the West (England, France, Netherlands, Swiss, USA, British dominions) the occurrence of nationalism was determined by political factors. It was followed by the formation of nation-state, or, like the case of the US, these two processes were coinciding. Beyond the West, in the central and Eastern Europe, in Asia, nationalism was expressed on later stage of socio-political development. In this case, quiet often, the boundaries of existed nation-state and the boundaries of rising nation were incompatible, so nationalism was found in conflict with the existing nation state. The adjustment of political boundaries in accordance with ethnic demands was primary goal of conflict. As in the Western Europe nationalism arose on later stage of socio-political development, it was expressed through culture. At the same time, newly formed national movements and nationalisms of the Eastern Europe, and in other parts of the World, were heavily influenced by the West, served as a model and example. Such strong dependence on the West was humiliating the pride of indigenous people and local elites, thus, when their own nationalisms, accompanied with liberal and rational viewpoints, emerged, they turned out to be confronted with the “alien” models of nationalism[1].
It should be noted, each nationalism is spurred by the cultural contact with an old, previously existed nationalism. Nationalism and nationalists of the central and Eastern Europe were motivated by the past myths and dreams about future; they hoped for the better future and homeland, which was closely connected to ancient times and historical past. These nationalisms did not have any links with their contemporary time and they hoped for transformation into political reality. The Western nationalism, with it’s origins, was related with the 18th century’s personal freedom and rational cosmopolitism. While the Central and Eastern European, as well as Asian nationalisms, had different way of development. They were not based on political and social reality, thus missing self-confidence and faithfulness[2].
[1]Kohn H. Western and Eastern Nationalisms. Nationalism Edited by John Hutchinson and Anthony D.Smith; Oxford-New York, Oxford University Press 1994. pp.162-165
[2]Kohn H. Western and Eastern Nationalisms. Nationalism Edited by John Hutchinson and Anthony D.Smith; Oxford-New York, Oxford University Press 1994. pp.162-165

History of Nationalism

An idea of nationalism, followed by the formation of it’s various forms, was structured long before the era of nationalism. It’s roots trace back to Greeks and Jews. Nationalism’s revitalization in Europe coincides with the epoch of Renaissance and Reformation. Greek-Roman patriotism was literary revived and restored in the era of Renaissance. But this new occurrence did not have any all encompassing effect on masses by that time and it disappeared with the start of Europe’s retheologization, just after the beginning of Reformation and Counter-Reformation. We have to note, Reformation, and Calvinist form in particular, sparked the resurgence of Old Testament’s nationalism[1].
[1]Kohn H. Western and Eastern Nationalisms (pp.162-165). Nationalism Edited by John Hutchinson and Anthony D.Smith; Oxford-New York, Oxford University Press 1994.

Modernism

According to various modernist theories by 1800 no nation had ever had more, than local loyalty. National identity and unity wes constructed from above, by the European states, as it was necessary for modernization of economics and society. Printing press and capitalism was considered as a necessary precondition of nationalism by modernist theoreticians. According to their viewpoint ethnic conflicts are indispensable side effects of nationalism[1].
Contemporary theoreticians are influenced by postmodernism and point to social constructivism of nations. Benedict Anderson terms nations as “imagined communities”. Ernest Gellenr admits: “Nationalism is not an awaking of nations’ self-consciousness: It gives birth to nations on various places, where they had not existed in the past”. Anderson and Gellenr use the terms imagined and invented neutrally and descriptively. In this context, nations are not considered as a factual and fantastic substances[2].

[1]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/
[2]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/

Instrumentalism

Instrumentalism defines ethnic identity as an ideology of group’s mobilization and a tool of their interests’ achievement[1]. Instrumentalism emphasis the analyzes of material interests (first of all economic interests, promoting to conflicting behavior of particular ethnic group). Instumentalists stress on political motivation. Instrumentalism was formed in the framework of Marxism and functionalism. According to Marxists’ viewpoint, class conflict is superior then ethnic conflict. Bourgeoisie uses ethnic conflict in order to fulfill their interests. Hechter, Rabushka and others stress on the role and importance of “ethnic producers” and representatives of cultural sphere in various ethnic conflicts. They fulfill their political goals through a proper manipulation of people’s ethnic solidarity[2].
[1]Шадже А.Ю. Феномен кавказской идентичности – В журн. Научная мысль кавказа. №1 (29), Ростов-н/Д, 2002, с.36-45.
[2]Малахов В.С. Национализм как политическая идеология. М. 2005

Constructivism

Constructivism perceives ethnic identity to be a product of human activity.

Primordialism

Primordialism considers ethnic identity to be an objective creation. It is a historically formed entity on the basis of biological, cultural and geopolitical characteristics. Some nationalists consider themselves to be the decedents of previously existed nation. This assumption is backed by the primordialist theoreticians of nationalism. According to this theory, nation, or at least an ethnic group, is conceded as a social reality, having 20.000 years long history[1]. According to primordial theory, roots of ethnic conflicts takes us back, down to the history of particular ethnic groups. Thus, an analyzes of historical background is a primary goal.
[1]Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org/

Race

Term race has two meaning. The first one has classificatory connotation and refers to various types and samples of people. While the second one is assosiated with genetics, as it is bound with the idea of family and ancestors. In the era of enlightens, another connotation was added to this concept: the term race was used to describe the various sub-groups of humanity, according to morphological differences: color of skin, shape of head, etc. As a result of significant development of philology, language was considered as an important determinant of nations’ “race” by European intellectuals and thus these two terms were mixed erroneously. Shortly, in the 19th century there existed two confronted viewpoints about nation: in the first case, subjective will of individual was stressed and highlighted (conceptualized by Ernest Renan in 1880’s), while the other was biological version, underling the various aspects, like fatality of birth, blood and genes[1].
[1]Ghelabi V.Y. Ethnicity in International Conflicts: Revisiting an Elusive Issue