What is ethnicity - Essay Example

To say that nationalism is a complex phenomenon, referencing sentiments and provoking actions which, at best, are almost impossible to explain, is anunderstatement. Complexity partially stems from the fact that feelings of nationalism need not be invoked by a nation, per se, and may not be directed towards a defined geographical space.1 Indeed, as Sabhlok asserts, some political scientists, anthropologists and sociologists, have argued the concepts of the nation and nationalism as distinct and autonomous. Certainly, they often co-exist and it is hardly uncommon that the latter be invoked by the former but, both contemporary and historical events evidence the fact that nationalism can be independent from the nation.2 Not only may feelings of nationalism precede the geo-political realization of the nation, as in the case of Palestine or Kurdistan but it often survives the demise of the nation, as in the case of Armenia, to name but one example. While some scholars have disputed the separation between nationalism and the nation, others have maintained it to be an undeniable reality which is influenced by the ethnic roots of nationalism. Pending the presentation of definitions for both the nation and nationalism, through reference to several examples, this essay will show that nationalism is more ethnic-based than it is nation-based. Some political scientists maintain that nationalism and the nation are inseparable contrasts, wherein the one cannot exist without the other. This is precisely the argument forwarded by Seymour (1999), a political scholar. As he argues, defining the concept of nationalism without first defining that of the nation is nothing other than a futile and impossible undertaking. The nation must first be defined and to this end, Seymour proposes the following definition: "a sovereign state founded upon the will of the people," and an area which a people of specific ethnic origin claims to be theirs and are prepared to defend this claim against any aggression.3 The nation, in other words, is defined in specific geopolitical terms and refers to a well-defined geographic space. That space invokes nationalism, or feelings of pride, often even defensiveness when real or imagined threats are perceived. When invoked by real or imagined threats, whether internal, as in emanating from within that space, or external, as in emerging from without it, nationalism tends to assume an ethnic undertone. In such instance, the nationalism becomes ethno-nationalism, leading to the redefinition of the nation in ethnic terms.4 The implication here is that not only are the concepts of the nation and nationalism inextricably linked but that the invocation of nationalist sentiments, of nationalism, is dependant upon the existence of the nation. Should one reflect upon Seymour's definition and argument, however, one will find that it is somewhat self-contradictory. On the one hand, it maintains that nationalism can only be invoked by the nation, following which it proceeds to define the nation as a concrete geopolitical entity. On the other hand, however, it argues that when the nation, that concrete geopolitical entity, is exposed to threat, not only does nationalism become ethno-nationalism but that the nation itself is redefined along ethnic lines. The implication here is that the core of nationalism is not the nation but is ethnicity which, at the same time, is the center-force of the nation. This is precisely the argument forwarded by May, Modood and Squires (2005). As may be inferred from their argument, nations are formed by ethnic communities and are founded upon ethnicity, wherein nationalism becomes the celebration of a particular ethnic or religious group and the nation the space which protects and sustains this group. 5 Israel is a case in point. As Yiftachel (2006) points out, Jewish nationalism, sometimes referred to as Zionism, preceded formation of the Jewish nation and, indeed, the nation was predicated upon pre-existing nationalism6 and not, as Seymour (1999) argues, nationalism on the nation. According to Yiftachel, as such, and as the facts indicate, Israel became the nation for the global Jewry and the space which protected and sustained the Jewish people, just as it became that force which celebrated the Jewish ethnicity.7 If ethnicity is the force upon which nations are founded and the invocator of nationalism, it stands to reason that it can function to divide, just as it does to unite. This point has been highlighted by several scholars and supported with examples from all of the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa. Emmert and Ingrao (2006) maintain that the primary reason for the splintering of the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republic and several Eastern European nations, such as Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, following the collapse of communism is that these nations were false constructs, held together by sheer force. The collapse of communism, implying the removal of the iron-grip that was holding these nations together, immediately led to ethnic cleansing. The Serbian massacre of Bosnians was incited by ethno-nationalism, as in the overriding belief that the nation, the politico-geographic space in question, was formed by, and should be reformed in, the image of the dominant ethnic group. Within the context of the stated, the minority ethnic group functioned as a threat to the homogeneity and unity of the Serbian nation and, accordingly, had to be expelled and eliminated.8 The case of Lebanon similarly indicates the extent to which nationalism is incited by ethnicity. Lebanon, a nation comprised of several equally powerful ethno-religious groups, is being constantly torn apart by internal conflicts such as which undermine national unity.9 As Yiftachel contends, the extent to which nationalism is intertwined with ethnicity has determined the continued eruption of domestic conflicts, as engendered by ethnic identity, consequent to the fact that each ethnic group believes that the nation should be formed in its image10. In other words, nationalism is as dependant upon the concept of the nation as it is upon that of ethnicity. Acknowledging the fact that nationalism is too complex a construct to be linked with that of the nation, some political science, anthropology and sociology scholars have argued that nationalism can exist separate of the nation and withstands independent definition. This is the argument forwarded by van den Bossche (2003) who maintains that nationalism is predicated upon the presence of two factors. The first is "shared preoccupation," and the second is a common past.11 The former refers to the common goals which a people share, on the one hand, and their common destiny and fate on the other. The second refers to the shared historical memories, heritage and tradition common to a people, irrespective of place. For example, as a religious ethnic group, the Jewish people had never had a homeland, a nation of their own.12 They were, as Yiftachel asserts, scattered across much of the world and yet, they were held together by their shared past, goals and aspirations. They existed as a well-defined and united people for centuries prior to the formation of the nation. Indeed, the formation of Israel was incited by Jewish nationalism.13 This example, along with that of the Tamil, the Basque and several others, evidences the fact that nationalism supersedes the nation and that, indeed, it can exist independent of it, just as van den Bossche maintains. Precisely because nationalism derives from the shared past, identity, goals and aspirations particular to ethnicity, it survives the demise of nations, as in the case of the Tamil. According to Nesiah (2001), their land, their politico-geographic space, had been overtaken by India and Sri Lanka centuries ago, leading to the enforced assimilation of this ethnic group into another culture, nation and heritage. Despite, however, the violent efforts undertaken by either nation, especially Sri Lana, to suppress the Tamil identity, to obliterate its culture and annihilate its language, the Tamil people, irrespective of geo-political space, held on to their ethnic identity. They maintained their language, culture and traditions and, in so doing, sustained the nationalism which, in turn, informs their continued efforts to re-create the Tamil nation.14 Ethnicity ensured the survival and the continued strengthening of nationalism, even in the absence of the nation, ultimately evidencing the fact that nationalism is ethno-nationalism. The fact that nationalism is ethno-nationalism and that it can exist separate of the physical presence of a geo-political space, referred to as the nation, does not imply that either ethnicity or nationalism are divorced from the concept of the nation. As Sabholk (2004) argues, the ultimate aspiration of the majority of ethnic groups and the goal of nationalism is the creation of the nation. Nationalism does not operate in a void, nor is it simply content with existing; instead it exists with a purpose and drives towards the formation of a geo-political space in which a particular brand of nationalism can be freely expressed and wherein an ethnic group's heritage, culture, traditions and, if relevant, language can be celebrated.15 Ethno-nationalism, in other words, exists with a purpose and that purpose is the nation. The implication of the above stated is clear: nation-states are, often although not always, the concrete outcomes of nationalism and ethnicity. While the current blurring of national boundaries and ethnic identities are, according to some sociologists, being blurred by globalization, others have maintained that this is far from the truth. Certainly, immigration and the proliferation of global social networks has influenced a change in the socio-ethnic composition of nations but it has not undermined the identity of the nation as geo-political space founded on, and held together, by ethno-nationalism.16 Indeed, as he makes this argument, Heilbrunn supports it with references to the rise in right-wing fascism across many parts of the world, most notably Germany and Denmark. To the extent that immigration and globalization have been regarded as immediate threats to the nation's ethnic identity and composition, extremist ethno-nationalism whose goal it is to preserve the nation's ethnic heritage and culture, is on the rise.17 This is very interesting because it evidences the fact that, not only are nations, in the final analysis, primarily ethnic constructs but that upon the detection of a threat to the ethnic composition of the nation, as in the case of globalization and immigration, extremist nationalism tends to express itself in a right-wing form. On the basis of the above argued, this research will conclude with an affirmation of the fact that nationalism can precede the nation and can exist independent of it. This is because nationalism is, ultimately, informed by ethnicity and a shared ethnic identity, as opposed to a specific geo-political space. This does not mean that nationalism is divorced from the nation because, ultimately, the creation of the nation is the aspiration of ethno-nationalism. As such, the nation becomes a geo-political space which celebrates and protects a particular ethnic group. It is, thus, that when the ethnic identity of nations confronts a real or imagined threat that ethno-nationalism tends towards right-wing expression. Bibliography Emmert, T. and Ingrao, C (2006) Conflict in Southeastern Europe at the End of the Twentieth Century: A 'Scholars' Initiative' Assesses Some of the Controversies. NY: Routledge. Heilbrunn, J. (1998) Thunder On The Right.' New Republic. 218(26). Keddie, N.R. (1969) Pan-Islam as Proto-Nationalism.' The Journal of Modern History, 41(4). May, S., Modood, T. and Squires, J. (2005) Ethnicity, Nationalism and Minority Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nesiah, D. (2001) The Claim to Self-Determination: A Sri Lankan Tamil Perspective.' Contemporary South Asia, 10 (1). Sabhlok, S.G. (2002) Nationalism and Ethnicity and the Nation-state in South Asia.' Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 83. Seymour, M. (1999) On Redefining the Nation.' Monist, 82(3). Van Den Bossche, G. (2003) Is There Nationalism After Ernest Geller An Exploration of Methodological Choices.' Nations & Nationalism, 9(4). Yiftachel, O. (2006) Ethnocracy: Land and Identity Politics in Israel/Palestine. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press. Read More