13.1 The concept of ethnopolitics and its role in the world community
Ethnopolitology is a new scientific discipline. Its emergence was stipulated by the need to find solutions to the ethnopolitical problems in the last third of the XX century. The growth of ethnic nationalism and armed ethnic conflicts in many regions of the world, the disintegration of the federative states of the USSR, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia based on the ethnoterritorial principle showed not only the actualization of the ethnopolitical problems, but also the explosion of ethnicity, the ethnic paradox of modernity, and rebellious ethnicity. It became obvious that the role of the ethnic factor in political processes, as well as in the management of multi-ethnic states, was long underestimated.
At the same time, ethnopolitics is always followed by nationalism. Nationalism is ideology, politics and political movements that treat the nation as the basis of an independent state and the highest form of social union, the self-affirmation of peoples with a common language and culture as a single whole. Thus, it can be seen that there are no negative features in the definition of nationalism, but unfortunately, as practice shows, nationalism often tends to acquire an egoistic shade, and therefore extreme forms of nationalism are distinguished, such as chauvinism and Nazism.
It is known that the theory and methodology of ethnopolitical research originate in the 1970s; with the advent of a new interdisciplinary branch of social and humanitarian knowledge – ethnopolitics. It can be said that its institutionalisation began with the article by M. Parenti “Ethnopolitics and the viability of ethnic identifications” (1967) and ended with the publication of the fundamental work of J. Rothschild “Ethnopolitics” (1981).
According to the researches of M. Parenti, ethnopolitics deals with the analysis of the interrelation between ethnic identification and political choice. According to J. Rothschild, the study of the political dimension and the political and structural content of ethnicity should be at the centre of ethnopolitics, and the subject of this study is the political content of ethnic reality. In this regard, ethnopolitics studies politicised ethnicity, which, according to Rothschild’s ideas, is the most important political phenomenon of our time. In turn, under the politicisation of ethnic identity is understood a level of its mobilisation that turns it from a psychological, cultural and social magnitude into a political force.
So, ethnopolitics in the broad sense means a certain sphere of the political life of a society in which the interests and feelings of ethnic groups (communities) and other actors included in ethnopolitical relations are affected in one way or another. In a narrow sense, ethnopolitics is the concrete activity of state authorities and local self-government aimed at regulating national relations.
Thus, ethnopolitics is a manifestation of the ethnic factor in politics, the participation of ethnic groups in the affairs of the state and, in turn, the role of politics and the state of the affairs of ethnic communities, the management of multi-ethnic states, ensuring interethnic harmony and overcoming ethnopolitical conflicts.
The nature and content of modern ethnopolitical processes testify to a change in the meaning and values of ethnopolitics, and first of all the emergence of new ethnopolitical spaces and a new ethnopolitical time, their interdependence.
Political institutions, and above all the state, support the social order, forming and structuring not only social space but also social time. At the same time, in the conditions of a revolutionary change in the regulatory value and institutional matrix of society, the social reality of the past, present and future loses its certainty and stability. New meanings and value are being formed, including political content and direction.
Each ethnic community has its own social space and its own social time, which derive spatiotemporal structures from them, including ethnopolitical ones. Ethnic groups form their history, trying to determine their present and future through the past.
In the context of the multiplicity of social space-time structures and their interpenetration, social institutions acquire special significance, such as state, religion, education, the media, etc., that most successfully shape the meanings and content of the past, the present and the future.
Summarising, we would like to note that, firstly, multi-component societies are historical constructions that are in the process of constant change. But this does not mean that these designs are fragile and short-lived and represent only the result of social engineering. They are built on a social foundation, taking into account the socio-economic, political and cultural-historical contexts.
At the same time, the very content of the contexts and meanings of ethnopolitics is always situational and changeable. So, in the early 90’s of the past century, ethnopolitical processes were dominated by institutional factors, which are explained by the profound transformations of basic social institutions, but today the value factors come to the forefront. Today, it is the values that are shared by the majority and towards which most express loyalty, form social identities, primarily ethnic, national and closely related and closely related political identities.
Today the problem of ethnic interaction and its influence on ethnopolitical processes is first of all the problem of the coincidence of ethnic codes and national identity with the cultural matrix of the dominant ethnic group.
Thus, the specificity of modern ethnopolitics and ethnopolitical processes is a direct and reverse reflection of the values and meanings of the present day.
First and foremost, the phenomenon of ethnicity is a form of human identity and a cultural tradition that put a background for human coalitions (or groups), called ethnic communities (peoples, nationalities or nations) that exist in various configurations and interrelations.
The methods of ethnopolitology do not differ significantly from the methods of other social sciences, and they can be divided into general scientific and special. Of general scientific methods, the most important for ethnopolitology is sociological, which involves identifying dependencies in the functioning of social institutions, in the social behaviour of people; and in ethnopolitical studies it is a method of studying the impact of social factors on the solution of national problems and on the sphere of political activity of ethnic groups. The sociological method presupposes a systematic study of the phenomena of social life, i.e. their consideration through the prism of the whole set of relations, through the identification of the stabilising and destabilising conditions of the social environment.
In addition to the general sociological approach to the study of ethnopolitical processes and phenomena in the arsenal of ethnopolitology, there are specific sociological methods and methods of research. Among these methods and techniques, there are polls, questionnaires, interviewing, statistical analysis. Among the effective sociological methods for studying ethnopolitical problems is monitoring research. Monitoring is the collection of various data on the state of the environment (natural and social) on the formalised indicators in any particular territory. In the case of ethnopolitology, we are talking about the collection of data, characterising the state of interethnic relations, the political activity of ethnopolitical organisations, the activities of the authorities in the field of national policy, and so on. System analysis of all these indicators allows identifying and monitoring problematic situations at the initial stage, and in the case of an open conflict – to prevent the escalation and develop a strategy for its transformation and resolution.
Special methods can include a less expensive, but no less popular method of ethnological expertise. This method is associated with the solution of several applied problems, including the review of draft normative legal documents.
The next method, which finds application in ethnopolitology, is a comparative method of research. Its essence lies in the comparison of two or more objects of study, analysed by similar parameters. Comparative research has a strict logical sequence. The comparative ethnopolitical analysis is necessary when it comes to countries with a multi-ethnic population, heterogeneous in ethnic, religious and racial relations. Here, in determining the rights of representatives of ethnic communities, it is necessary to use a general democratic approach and, at the same time, take into account the specific situation that develops on the territory of individual peoples and ethnic groups, especially ethnic minorities and such original communities as indigenous small peoples. Comparison of various political practices and instruments of political protection of the interests of ethnic, religious or racial minorities at different times and in different countries allows the development of a general model of state policy in the sphere of relations with minority communities that would take into account both the interests of the majority and the minority of population. It is primarily about finding a balance of these interests, permissible in this particular country and at the moment and not violating the national stability.
Very important is the psychological method. Moreover, in ethnopolitology this method proves to be much more important, since ethnic self-consciousness is now recognized by ethnologists as perhaps the main differentiating factor, for in many cases the features of everyday life, economy and a number of other factors have lost their previously significant role as distinctive features of an ethnic group or community. Especially it concerns the states and regions of the industrialized world. The psychological method is aimed at studying the subjective mechanisms of political behaviour, the specifics of the perception of political leaders, political institutions and political actions by ethnic communities, as well as the typical mechanisms of psychological motivations. A special role in this regard is played by the study of ethnic stereotypes of behaviour, ethnic attitudes toward electoral behaviour, and the adoption or rejection of political and other decisions.
Any science has its own functions, which determine its social significance.
The main functions of ethnopolitics are:
1) The epistemological (cognitive) function. First of all, it is called upon to identify and assess how ethnicity influences politics and how politics affects ethnic processes, what objective links and patterns it has.
2) The function of rationalisation of ethnonational policy. It proposes and justifies the ways of creating and reforming special political institutions for regulating interethnic relations and for solving local problems of ethnic communities and groups.
3) The function of political socialisation. It provides for the involvement of ethnic minorities in political life, especially those that, with the help of conventional democratic procedures, do not have the ability to ensure the political representation of their communities in government and local government.
4) The prognostic function. The forecasting tasks of ethnopolitology include analysis of the interethnic relations development in various regions of the country in the short and long term, an assessment of the activities of public authorities in terms of how various measures will affect inter-ethnic tensions in the country as a whole and in problem regions in particular.
All functions of ethnopolitology, like any other science, are interrelated. In this connection, it can be stressed that an accurate ethnopolitical analysis and its skilful use give obvious benefits and help to avoid losses both in domestic and foreign policy, both social and economic.
13.2 Ethnicity as a political resource
Analysis of the main approaches to the study of ethnicity shows that ethnos is a complex multidimensional entity. Ethnicity has an impact on the biological, economic, political and cultural spheres of human being.
Ethnicity is a phenomenon that possesses the qualities of a political resource. Today, the political significance of ethnicity is increasing; there are methods and ways to politicize ethnicity. And what is more, ethnicity today is an instrument of modern politics. For example, the role of ethnicity becomes evident in the formation and disintegration of states, in interstate relations, in the emergence and escalation of ethnic conflicts, in the process of state building, in the domestic political life of states and international politics.
Ethnicity often serves as an ideological justification for the requirements of the creation of a national state. Ethnicity is also one of the foundations of the doctrine of self-determination and the source of the problem of indigenous peoples.
Numerous historical examples show that the national awakening and movement in favour of state independence begins with the cultivation of interest in the ethnic roots of culture, the development of language. In the world there were few states that were built on the principle of ethnic federalism. They proved to be unstable towards national movements that arose within states. Such states include the USSR, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. So, the multinational Soviet Union has disintegrated, including, on the ethnic principle – all the national republics have become independent.
Ethnicity is a resource when used within the framework of nationalism. Nationalism is defined as a movement the goal of which is to fight to ensure that the ethnic and political boundaries of communities coincide and the ethnic community is politically independent.
In addition to nationalism, there are many other forms of politicization of ethnicity that involve the creation and activity of ethnopolitical associations and movements, manipulation of ethnic feelings in order to attract voters’ sympathies to one or another candidate for an elective office or to political parties, or to form ethnic institutions for political representation.
At the same time, there are distinguished the political mobilization of ethnicity and the nationalization of ethnicity.
The analysis of the processes of ethnic mobilization is directly related to the understanding of such social phenomena as social competition and the competition of languages and cultures. The processes of mobilizing ethnic groups on the territory of the state can be provoked in two cases.
The first is when the dominant ethnic group tries to assert its state over other groups that have entered into competition with it, or when oppressed ethnic groups begin to demand access to existing power structures, which often leads to conflicts between the minority and the majority.
The second is when the political mobilization of an ethnic group can be caused not only by competition between ethnic communities, but also by policies pursued by governments.
Statehood of ethnicity is, in fact, giving the ethnic institutions and ethnic requirements the status of state institutions and programs.
Ethnopolitics plays a special role in the management of ethnicity as a resource. The essence of this policy is to determine the balance of interests between dominant ethnic groups and national minorities.
Ethnopolitics is the consistent state regulation of the collective rights of ethnic communities in the territories of their historical residence and the institutionalization of this regulation through the adoption of appropriate legislative acts and the creation of state bodies responsible for the ethnic component of the domestic policy of the state.
Ethnic politics is formed depending on the type of state, its ethnic composition, state ideology and is divided into two main models – assimilatory and multicultural.
The classic example of the assimilation model is the United States of America. In the formation of the nation, the method of the so-called melting pot was used. The essence of the method was that a man of any nationality should first of all feel himself as an American. In the United States, there are no national territories, except for the ghetto for the Indians.
Countries with a stable political culture and liberal views tend to use the model of multicultural politics. Multicultural politics does not aim to assimilate different ethnic groups; on the contrary, it enables the development of a variety of cultures. For example, this policy is used in Canada.
In connection with this, scientists are offered various versions of the concept and principles for the implementation of ethnopolitics. Many scientists believe that the modern state strategy in the field of ethnopolitics should be based on the following tasks.
The first task of the state concerning its constituent ethnic groups and communities is the integration of all of them into a single civil society, the formation of common civil values and ideals. Strategies for the formation of such a community can be different. The optimal strategy is multiculturalism, i.e. integration of local communities into a single whole while preserving cultural pluralism within a given social organism.
The second task of state institutions and state national policy is to maintain a balance between the interests of dominant majority and the ethnic minority, excluding, through special institutions and political procedures, ethnocratic tendencies in majority politics and excessive politicization of ethnicity by minorities.
The third task is the formation of integrated elites: political, cultural, economic, national and regional.
The authors of this vision believe that a successful solution of the three tasks mentioned above will mean that along with political democracy, the state’s political culture is oriented toward ethnic democracy, that is, on the full representation of minorities in all the main spheres of state life.
13.3 Nationalism and its typology
Nationalism is ideology, politics and political movements that treat the nation as the foundation of an independent state and the highest form of social union, the self-affirmation of peoples with a common language and culture as a single whole.
Nationalism is distinguished by a variety of currents, some of which contradict each other. As a political movement, nationalism seeks to protect the interests of the national community in relations with state power.
This ideology preaches loyalty and loyalty to its nation, political independence and work for the benefit of its own people, the unification of national self-consciousness for the practical protection of the living conditions of the nation, its territory and residence, economic resources and spiritual values. Nationalism is based on a national feeling, which is related to patriotism. This ideology tends to unite the various strata of society despite the opposite class interests. It was able to ensure the mobilization of the population for the sake of common political goals during the transition to a capitalist economy.
We would like to dwell on the main elements of the ideology of nationalism:
Nationalism emphasizes the differences, the individuality of nations and their specifics. These distinctive features, in turn, are of a cultural and ethnic character. National self-consciousness promotes the development and self-improvement of the nation, which subsequently realizes its imperatives through statehood.
Depending on the nature of the tasks, several types of national movements are being formed in the modern world. The most widely used classification was made by H. Kohn, who introduced the concepts of political and ethnic nationalism. Most experts believe that each mature nation contains both options.
The scholar considers the following types of nationalism.
Civil nationalism (other names: revolutionary-democratic, political, Western nationalism) argues that the legitimacy of the state is determined by the active participation of its citizens in the process of political decision-making, i.e., the degree to which the state represents the will of the nation. The main tool for determining the will of the nation is a plebiscite, which can take the form of elections, referendums, polls, open public discussions, etc. In this case, the person’s belonging to the nation is determined on the basis of voluntary personal choice and is identified with citizenship. It is important that the nation consist of people who want to live next to each other in a single territory.
Within the framework of civic nationalism, the following subspecies are distinguished:
State nationalism asserts that the nation is formed by people who subordinate their own interests to the tasks of strengthening and maintaining the power of the state. It does not recognize independent interests and rights related to gender, race or ethnicity, since it believes that such autonomy violates the unity of the nation.
Liberal nationalism emphasizes liberal values and argues that there are universal values, such as human rights, in relation to which patriotic moral categories occupy a subordinate position. Liberal nationalism does not deny the priority of those who are closer and more valuable, but believes that this should not be at the expense of others.
Ethnic nationalism (other names: ethno-nationalism, cultural-ethnic, organic, romantic, eastern nationalism) believes that the nation is the phase of the development of the ethnos and partly counterpoises itself to civilian nationalism. Currently, nationalist tendencies refer to those movements that emphasize ethno-nationalism. Members of the nation share a common heritage, language, religion, traditions, history, blood ties based on common origin, emotional attachment to the land, so that together they form one people, the kindred community. For cultural traditions or ethnicity to form the basis of nationalism, they must contain generally accepted ideas that can become a guide for society.
Extreme nationalism is often associated with extremism and leads to acute internal and interstate conflicts. Aspiration to allocate a separate state for the nation living inside the country leads to separatism. Radical state nationalism is a key component of fascism and Nazism. Many ethnic nationalists share ideas of national superiority and national exclusivity, as well as cultural and religious intolerance. In most countries, extreme nationalism is officially recognized as a socially dangerous phenomenon.
At the same time, we would like to present the classification of Snyder and Hayes. Snyder distinguishes four types of nationalism:
Integrating nationalism (1845–1871). During this period, nationalism was a unifying force that contributed to the consolidation of feudal-fragmented peoples (Italy, Germany).
Disjoining nationalism (1871–1890). The success of nationalism in the cause of the unification of Italy and Germany led to the struggle for the national independence of the peoples belonging to the Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian and other empires, as well as their disintegration.
Aggressive nationalism (1900–1945). The first half of the XX century witnessed an acute conflict of opposing national interests, which resulted in two world wars. During this period, nationalism becomes identical to imperialism.
Modern nationalism (1945–present). New nationalism declared itself mainly through anti-colonial revolutions. This period is marked by the spread of nationalism on a global scale.
A western scholar Hayes presented the following types of nationalism: the Jacobin, the traditional, the liberal, the integral, the economic.
Both classifications do not explain anything, but only serve to confirm that nationalism is politics and ideology, using national feelings to achieve their goals.
In the first half of the 90’s the problem of conceptualization and classification of nationalism in modern Western democracies was reflected in the works of H. Kohn, Anthony Smith, Peter Alter and other researchers.
H. Kohn believes that each mature nation contains both components, and, as recent studies show, now in Western Europe there is a strong cultural component, and in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe – the civilian component of nationalism. This is associated with the importance of culture as a cementing factor for a mature nation and with the spread of liberal-democratic values in the world. At the same time, as an indirect indicator of national identity, the researcher does not consider the attitude to the political course in the sphere of culture, but actually the content of the policy pursued by the political elite.
Having considered the point of view of American researchers, it can be concluded that for them nationalism is a national feeling that is inseparable from the culture of ancestors and love of the motherland. And if nationalism is identical with patriotism and national feeling, then it is inherent in all times and peoples, and to fight it or condemn it would be tantamount to fighting against other feelings typical for a person.
Accordingly, the nationalist is a person who loves his country, and to puts its interests in the cornerstone. This does not imply any ill-will toward other nations, but emphasizes that the criterion for assessing the activities of a person or group of people is that it corresponds to the interests of the nation.
The concept of nationalism is closely connected with the notion of patriotism. Patriotism implies love for the Motherland, devotion to it, the desire to serve its interests by their actions.
In conclusion, it should be noted that nationalism is nothing more than politics and ideology in their inseparable unity. Removing one and the other, we will get a sufficiently innocuous sense of attachment to our people, loyalty to our homeland. In itself, it does not represent a driving force. But if we add in the appropriate ideology and policy, we will get nationalism, stirring up enmity, hatred and conflicts around.
13.4 The role of nationalism in modern society
Nationalism is one of the most fundamental characteristics of the modern world. Although modern Western countries view it as a disease that affects underdeveloped societies, and are associated with it by genocide, xenophobia, wars, blood and violence, nationalism remains a fundamental aspect of modern society as a whole. Nationalism is the dominant idea of the XX century. Nationalist doctrines can be used in a variety of ways, both for good and for evil.
We would like to consider and analyse the leading approaches to nationalism, presented in the literature of the last decades of the XXI century, conditionally dividing them into three groups.
This problem is highlighted by scientists E. Gellner, E. D. Smith and U Connor. Connor is the founder of the modernist school of political analysis of nationalism and ethnic conflicts.
A significant contribution to the development of the modernist school for the modern nationalism studies was the substantiation of the principle of legitimacy by W. Connor as central to the political analysis of nationalism. Nationalism is a movement that challenges or tends to revise the current political order. Connor emphasizes the crucial importance of political legitimacy for the very existence and survival of the nation. The very fact of the activation of nationalist movements reflects the lack of legitimacy of state power as incapable of translating and representing the interests of the nation. In general, the approach of W. Connor is rather late modernism in the study of modern nationalism.
The classical school of modernism reflects the works of Ernst Gellner in the book “Nation and Nationalism” (1983), where he criticizes the Marxist theory of historical formations, based on the defining role of the economy in relation to social organization, and offers a completely different periodization of history, reminiscent of the structuralist concept of traditional and modern societies.
The essence of the concept is that nations have a purely political origin, i.e. an ethnos acquires the features of a nation not as a result of self-development on an ethnic basis, but of political action and are essentially the products of the state itself. “In fact, nations, like states, are just an accident, and not a universal necessity”, E. Gellner emphasizes. And, therefore, they do not have territorial, cultural, economic, linguistic, psychological characteristics; they have only political and legal signs. “A group of people... becomes a nation, if and when members of this group firmly recognize certain common rights and obligations towards each other.”
Modern nationalism arose on the ruins of old traditional structures, with the onset of industrialization. This is it that, according to the researcher, radically changed the culture, society, its structure, ways and directions of social mobility. The proof is the fact that the unprecedented glow of nationalism arose precisely in the XIX and XX centuries.
Thereby, in the book “Nations and Nationalism” three types of nationalism are considered. The first can be defined as “classical Habsburg”. According to this model, those who are in power have advantages in the accessibility of the central state culture, deprived of the same power are deprived and also the opportunity to get an education. For them or a part of them, a popular culture is available, which with great difficulty can turn into a new high culture that opposes the old one. This task is given to the most conscious representatives of this ethnic group. The second type – some have power, others do not. Differences coincide and are expressed in the same way as cultural ones. This nationalism acts in the name of spreading a high culture and needs a political roof. Gellner calls the third type of nationalism the nationalism of the Diaspora. We are talking about ethnic minorities deprived of political rights, but not economically backward, therefore, attached to a high culture.
In his book, E. Gellner also tries to imagine the future of nationalism. The author believes that only in the era of an industrial society – the society of the movement – nationalism can exist.
The main provisions of modernism are challenged by representatives of ethnicity, developing the ideas of Anthony Smith, who attributes ethnicity to the main determinants of nationalism, believing that ethnic groups pre-empt nations. According to E. Smith, under certain circumstances, some ethnic groups may disappear, while others may become the basis for the formation of national identities.
One of the drawbacks of modernism is its distinctive high level of abstraction and orientation to the comprehension of nationalism, mainly in the general theoretical sense. Ethnicity allows us to concretize the political analysis of the problem in relation to specific cases, in which modernism and its principles are not always self-sufficient.
The second important advantage of the ethnic approach to modernism is that it allows one to explore specific examples of specific nationalist mobilizations that are characteristic of various national movements, including examples of nationalist conflicts and nationalistic terrorist strategies. Modernism, with its emphasis on economic determinants and factors, as well as underestimation of the importance of ethnic ties and identities, was less effective in the political analysis of examples of modern nationalism and nationalist terrorism.
At the same time, the ethnic-oriented approach also did not fully correspond to the complicated tasks of the political analysis of nationalism. First of all, it did not have sufficient capacity to provide adequate interpretation of the patterns and trajectories of nationalist conflicts, as well as the prospects for the development of nationalist terrorism in the context of globalization.
From the point of view of E. Smith, modern nationalism structures the past of the ethnos, politicizing its ideological and value structures, in particular such as the values of the golden age of the ethnos.
New national identities are formed, believes E. Smith, not only under the influence of ethnic factors, but also under the factors of modernization. Under the influence of modernization, the process of creating new, modern identities is intensified, the formation of which is affected by the processes associated with modernization.
As an example, in this section there is considered the work of
B. Anderson, J. Breuilly. Benedict Anderson and Linda Collie are trying to establish the relationship between nationalism and national identity with the processes of political mobilization and political participation. Nationalism in this interpretation appears as the mobilized political activity of a previously non-politicized part of society, aimed at gaining its political identity.
In the 90s of the XX century an institutional approach is developing, emphasizing the political aims of nationalism in establishing control over the state power. John Breuilly, Michael Keating, wrote about the importance of the institutional political analysis of nationalism and the significance of including such a concept in the conceptualization of this problem as the state.
The institutional approach of embodied a critical line with the above-mentioned theories of the line of political analysis of modern nationalism. Pointing to the priority of the study of political changes and the problem of state power as the primary focus in the conceptualization of nationalism, he emphasized that the reduction of the political analysis of this political phenomenon to the study of aspects solely related to culture, ideology, identity, class affiliation or modernization means an underestimation of the importance of fundamental understanding of the modern nationalism of its political components. According to J. Breuilly, the key task in the study of nationalism is the correlation of this political phenomenon with the policy and political goals of nationalist movements.
Nevertheless, new identities and symbols created by them do not in themselves define examples of ethnic and nationalist mobilization. They should be considered, according to J. Breuilly, as sources of politicization of ethnicity and nationalism. The very same politicization of ethnic and nationalistic identities is attributed to the functions of political pressure used by that part of the ethnic elite that seeks to establish control over the state and power. According to J. Breuilly, it is the organization of nationalist movements, their resources, leadership, ideology and the structure of state power that enable these elites to determine the most effective mechanisms for gaining control over state power.
III. Analysis of global systems
Under this heading, the work of Craig Calhoun and Roger Brubaker is considered.
The ideas of J. Breuilly and other researchers on the role of political factors of nationalism were in the focus of political analysis of the late 1990s of the ХХ-beginning of the XXI century. The political aspects of nationalism, and above all the aspect of the relationship between the state and civil society as a political context within which nationalist identity ideas operate, were developed in the works of Michael Keating, who investigated nationalism from the perspective of the theory of globalization.
The conceptualization of ethnic nationalism in the interpretation of M. Keating establishes, as a feature distinguishing it from civic nationalism, above all the priority of the differentiation of values and the identity of an ethnos from other value structures and identities.
The specific feature and value of civic nationalism is not the differentiation and exclusivity of a separate identity, but the assimilation and mutual exclusion of identities developed in the direction of the formation of a common system of values and a common identity.
According to M. Keating, in the context of globalization, when the tendency towards the growth of civic nationalism and the weakening of ethnic nationalism prevail, the development of the nation becomes the sphere of competence and the scope of both civil society and the state.
Thus, M. Keating’s approach is distinguished by the combination of the accent’s characteristic for theories of modernization on the economic factors of nationalism and the emphasis on the institutional factors of an emphasis on political factors. From the point of view of Keating, nationalistic identities and ideologies are determined predominantly, though not completely, by the processes of socioeconomic changes associated with modernization and forcing the political elites of civil society to adapt to changing conditions.
Pointing to the risks of globalization and modernization, M. Keating notes that while the new processes associated with them basically allow political actors to remain within the existing structural, legal and ideological structures, under certain circumstances, they may be threatened by the need for restructuring in accordance with changes occurring. Moreover, the economic processes of globalization increase the risks of maintaining the sovereignty of the state, and, accordingly, socio-political stability.
In these conditions, the role of nationalist movements increases, since the weakening of the positions of state power is accompanied by the loss of the influence of state institutions in the arena of political conflict, which are incapable of structuring nationalist conflicts. The transfer of these functions to nationalist movements helps to strengthen the positions of nationalism in the political arena, expanding their potential and the possibilities for implementing strategies for transforming the system of state power.
Control questions
Self-control questions
Give examples of countries in which nationalism has a strong influence on the political course.