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

Conflicts over Political Institutions

Disagreement over political institutions can also become a basis for an ethnic rivalries. The roots of these conflicts can be found not only in ideological doctrines. Confronted political parties, governmental fractions and institutions also serve for their basis. As a result of their analyzes, it was proved that each post-Soviet state has border dispute with it’s neighbour (Armenia vs. Azerbaidjan, Moldova vs. Ukraine, Russia vs. Kazakhstan, Russia vs. Estonia)[1].
Inter-ethnic tensions on the basis of political institutions generally coincides with the period a political transition, when power is transmitted from one group to another. This phenomenon has different explanations: 1. when transition is accompanied by the transformation of political institutions (for example, communism is changed by capitalism) an ethno nationalism and ethnic tensions are used by political elites in order to distance from an old regimes. 2. during transition there are no political institutions managing ethnic conflicts, thus conflict can not be developed in a peaceful way and it takes form of violence. According to another explanation, as the institutions and ideologies, once used for mobilization of masses, ceased their existence during transition period, they are replaced with another powerful tool – ethnicity[2].
[1]Rupesinghe K. Tishkov V. Ethnicity and Power in the Contemporary World
[2]Baird A. An Atmosphere of Reconciliation: A Theory of Resolving Ethnic Conflicts Based on the Transcaucasian Conflicts. The Online Journal of Peace and Conflict Resolution. Issue 2.4 November 1999. ISSN 1522-211X.

Conflicts of Uncontrolled Emotions

Rebellions and massacres are often caused due to the hysterical behavior. Their organizators generally have very implicit aims and objectives. Thus, neither researchers, nor politicians are able to find justification for Phergan case: attacks on Meskhetian Turks in 1989, during the Phergan rebellion and other instances of assaults on other ethnic groups, residing on this territory[1].
[1]Rupesinghe K. Tishkov V. Ethnicity and Power in the Contemporary World

Conflicts of Historical Contention

These type of conflicts stem from historically contested territories. In this case, the following issues can serve as a basis for further controversy:
1. An administrative status of an ethnic territory (Cases in Abkhazia, Chechnya, are illustration of this statement);
2. Conflicts that arise due to the alteration of demographic situation in particular regions or as a result of increase of non-indigenous population. Ethnic majorities are afraid of loosing of their privilege status or they try to regain their status in terms of their national rights.
3. Conflicts, bearing ethno-territorial character, that arise as a “historical echo” of people’s deportations. Generally, this type of conflicts occur over particular territories, where forcibly deportated people were resettled during deportations, or after their repatriation. These processes, in both cases, sparkle ethnic clashes between indigenous people and settlers[1].
[1]Rupesinghe K. Tishkov V. Ethnicity and Power in the Contemporary World