“Us and Them: The
Enduring Power of Ethnic Nationalism” by J. Muller (2008)
Introduction:
For Americans, Ethnic Nationalism in politics is not an easy
concept to grasp of which to give merit, most find it discomfiting both
intellectually and morally
Two of best ways (least bad”) responses to ethnic
nationalism is ethnic disaggregation or partition.
People who come to the US usually do so with the expectation
that their ethnic identities will lessen or disappear.
In regions where there is peace now it is only a byproduct
of violent ethnic separations—where separation hasn’t occurred—watch out.
Ethnonationalism formed the Europe we know today despite
their claims that nationalism is now supplanted by globalism and transnational
institutions. Today, every European
state except for two has a dominant nationalit.
The Politics of
Identity:
Two schools on the idea of a national identity:
Civic/Liberal:
American conception. If you live
within the borders you are part of the nation, regardless of ethnic or racial
background
Ethno: nations
defined by a shared heritage (blood)—common language, faith, ethnicity
But civic nationalism is a relatively new phenomenon in
Europe and US. (e.g. WASPs)
Differing levels of civic vs. ethnonationalism as one
travels east from western Europe. The countries in Western Europe had a longer
period to develop a more homogenous population—enabling them to become nation-states.
The Rise of
Ethnonationalism (EN):
Idea of a nation-state is a recent phenomenon—for most of
history people lived in Empires—their own little nations.
Gellner defines:
Rise of ethnonationalism driven by modernity. Military competition between state led to
demand for continual economic growth—this depended on mass literacy and
communication—promotion of education and common language—leading to conflicts
over language and communal opportunities.
EN also responded to modern state’s weakening of familial
and religious social bonds—offering a common ethnic identity.
The ugly side of EN is that the creation of a nation-state
necessarily means that there will be minorities created and treated as
inferior.
The Great
Transformation:
Ethnic cleansing, population transfer, genocide were all
byproducts of post World War I breakup of empires as borders were moved to
align them with populations and victors.
This nationalism continued to build up through World War II—with
Hitler’s Germany as an unholy culmination.
Postwar but not
PostNational:
After WWII, instead of borders being moved, populations
were—in the name of postwar stability.
Mixture of ethnic populations deemed subversive and troublesome, this
was characterized by the expulsion of ethnic Germans from non Germanic
countries. Carried through the end of
the Cold War—this has been the story of ethnic disaggregation and and EN.
Decolonization and
After:
EN happened elsewhere too: British partition of India and
Pakistan; later partition of Pakistan and Bangladesh; mandate of Palestine’s
disestablishment into Israel; expulsion of pied-noirs in Algeria, Asians in
Uganda.
The Balance Sheet:
Obvious deleterious effects of EN, but also good things and
stability have occurred:
EN has motivated countries to mutual trust and
sacrifice—through appeals to that shared heritage. Post WWII Europe has been so stable because
of EN—those sourcers of conflict having been removed.
New Ethnic Mixing:
Today ethnic mixing occurs largely due to a north and west
migration pattern from Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Whether these groups will assimilate will
largely determine future conflict or perhaps another rise of EN.
Future Implications:
Since modernization is a key cause of EN, one can expect
future conflict in modernizing states.
This is especially true in developing new states (think Africa) with
borders that cross ethnic boundaries.
Once a certain level of conflict has been reached—remaining
a single state becomes counterproductive (Chaim Kaufmann). Once this point has been reached partition
may be the most human response. Yes, it
creates problematic refugee flows but it at least addresses the source of the
conflict. It does however, require a
substantial financial commitment from the international community.
EN is here to stay and ignoring and trying to write it off
as imagined and therefore irrelevant might only provoke future conflict.
No comments:
Post a Comment