Sociology of the Modern State Do you think that nationalism is a prevalent part of the modern state?
Morgan Rees
Sociology of the Modern State
Do you think that nationalism is a prevalent part of the modern state?
Word Count: 1386
“By ‘nationalism’ I mean […]the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognising no other duty than that of advancing its interests.”
The most general definition one can give to the idea of nationalism is inevitably extremely broad and in many respects controversial. Specific examples of nationalism are highly diverse, including elements of national consciousness, the expression of national identity and loyalty to the nation. It is thus difficult to describe and define and one of the main reasons for this difficulty is that people more often than not define nationalism on the basis of their local experience. The negative consequences of conflicting nationalisms between localities, ethnic tension, war, and political conflicts within states are therefore often taken for nationalism itself, leading some to view the general concept of nationalism negatively.
However, viewing nationalism through its most negative consequences distorts the meaning of the term. Nationalism is an ideology which can mean one of two things. The first definition holds that the nation, ethnicity or national identity is a fundamental unit of human social life, and makes certain cultural and political claims based upon that belief; in particular, the claim that the nation is the only legitimate basis for the state, and that each nation is entitled to its own state. The second definition is largely more liberal and based on shared purpose, beliefs and common goals and usually founded on such principles as democracy and individualism.
These two definitions are often referred to as ‘Ethnic Nationalism’ and ‘Civic Nationalism’ and usually co-exist to form the nationalist tendencies of numerous modern states. Civic and Ethnic Nationalism, although theoretically distinct, may therefore intermesh in practice. Contrarily however, one can argue that many of the Western states – especially those that are multi-cultural – commonly hold that civic nationalism is the only form of acceptable nationalism . The United States of America (USA) and France – for example – are nations that can be considered to be based on civic nationalism since both nations have been founded on constitutions expressing common rights and privileges, and the principle of citizenship. One may also argue that despite Britain’s unwritten constitution, it too is a nation state based on civic nationalism. It is indeed a multi-ethnic and multi-national state, and, for all intents and purposes, a unitary nation with a shared purpose and equal constitutional rights for all. However, an argument that entertains the idea that these states, especially Britain, are based solely on civic nationalism is surely mistaken. One may equally argue that in Britain there also exists ethnic nationalist tendencies, especially now that the devolutionary Acts of 1998 are in force. For example, Scottish nationalism was, and still is, a hybrid of civic and ethnic nationalism because the path to independence sought by many in Scotland, especially by political parties such as the Scottish National Party – while constrained by the civic nationalist tendencies of a unitary Parliament – is driven by forms of ethnic nationalism and a preoccupation with what it is to be Scottish, or rather what it is not to be Scottish.
