PO377 ETHNIC CONFLICT

AND POLITICAL VIOLENCE

Week 7: Ethnicity, Nations

and
Nationalisms

Lecture Outline

Conceptual Approaches to Ethnicity:

Primordialism vs. Instrumentalism

History and Nature of Nationalism(s)

Ethnicity as primordial and ethnicity as

instrumental
Critique of primordialism
Critique of instrumentalism
Primordialism vs. modernism
Civic nationalism and ethnic or ethnonationalism
The nation-state

Summary

Primordialism vs.
Instrumentalism
Ethnicity as
primordial

Ethnicity is deeply
ingrained in human
history and experience
(Wolff 2006, p. 33).
Ethnic bonds are
primordial and unlike
other bonds: have an
over-powering nonrational, emotional
quality; are largely
inexplicable; are
ancient, enduring and
recurrent; given,
natural and immutable.

Ethnicity as
instrumental

Ethnicity is socially and

politically constructed
over time. Ethnicity is
foremost a resource in
the hands of leaders to
mobilize followers in the
pursuit of other interests
(Wolff 2006, p. 33). Ethnic
bonds are related to
political and social
projects; instrumentally
mobilized as a means to
gain material goals.

Primordialism vs.
Instrumentalism (2)

Early modernization theory predicted that

modernization would break down peoples
localised ethnic identities and replace them
with loyalties to larger communities.

The resurgence/persistence of ethnic conflict

seems to challenge this.

Explanations for the persistence of ethnic

conflict in a modernizing world can often be
divided into primordialist and instrumentalist
schools; Harff and Gurr see constructivism as
a third position (2004 chpt. 5, week 9 reading
list).

Primordialism vs.
Instrumentalism (3)

Scholars we might categorise as

primordialists (to some degree): Edward Shils,
Clifford Geertz, Harold Isaacs, Walker Connor.

Scholars we might categorise as

constructivists (more or less): Michael
Hechter, Charles Tilly, Ernest Gellner, Donald
Horowitz, most feminist scholars of ethnicity.

Anthony Smith as an ethno-symbolist.

Primordialism vs.
Instrumentalism (4)
Critique of primordialism
James McKay (1982) challenges implication that ethnic
identities are static and rejects sense of primacy about
ethnicity. Primordialists also dont account for why
ethnic relations are peaceful in some instances but
conflictual in others.

Horowitz (2002): primordialists ignore how ethnicity is

formed and causes, varieties of and solutions to conflict.
Primordialists focus on the nature of ethnic identification
and dont produce detailed theories of ethnic conflict.

Primordialists dont sufficiently distinguish between

maintenance of ingroup solidarity and cultivation of
outgroup hostility; between affirming identity and
pursuing conflict (Horowitz 2002).

Primordialism vs.
Instrumentalism (4)
Critique of instrumentalism

McKay (1982): approach has explanatory power for

some groups in some situations, but not for all.

McKay (1982): Humans struggle over ideals and values

as well as economic and political interests cannot
reduce all ethnic disputes to economic disparities. (See
Douglass 1988 too.)

Instrumentalism fails to understand the non-rational,

emotional depth of national identity: the passions at
either extreme end of the hate-love continuum which the
nation often inspires, and the countless fanatical
sacrifices which have been made in its name (Connor
1994, see chpt. 8).

Ethnicity is not primordial but members experience it

primordially (Horowitz 2002).

Primordialism vs.
Instrumentalism (6)
[E]thnic identity should perhaps rather
be seen as something that has roots in
a groups culture, and historical
experiences and traditions, but that is
also dependent upon contemporary
opportunities that can be a useful
instrument for mobilizing people for
social, political, or economic purposes
that may or may not be related directly
to their ethnic origins
(Wolff 2006, pp. 36-37).

History and Nature of

Nationalism(s)
Primordialism vs. modernism
Primordialists focus on ancient and inherited social
practices as the source of authentic national
community; nations are seen to have ancient roots.

Modernists (e.g. Benedict Anderson, Ernest

Gellner, Eric Hobsbawm) view nations as
specifically modern, the result of political and
economic developments in European history, traced
to last quarter of 18 th century (Enlightenment).

First conceptions of nationalism were primarily

civic and territorial; ethnic nationalism rose in
importance in 19th century (see Anthony Smith
2000 or 1998).

History and Nature of

Nationalism(s) (2)
Civic nationalism
Civic/territorial
conceptions of the nation
regard it as a community
of shared culture, common
laws, and territorial
citizenship.

With civic nationalism

residence and political
participation in a public
culture tend[s] to
determine citizenship and
membership of the nation
(Smith 1993).

Ethnic or ethno-nationalism
Ethnic conceptions of the
nation focus on the
genealogy of its members,
however fictive; on popular
mobilization of the folk; on
native history and customs;
and on the vernacular
culture (Smith 1993).

Therefore, ethno-nationalism
involves the politicisation of
ethnicity and usually
territorial as well as political
claims.

History and Nature of

Nationalism(s) (3)

Anderson (1991): the nation as an imagined political

community and imagined as both inherently limited and
sovereign.

Smith: agrees nationalism is a modern phenomenon yet

stresses ethnic origins of modern nations.

Yuval-Davis (1997): a sense of common destiny is as

important in constructing nations as the myth of common
origins. Nationalism is Janus-faced (week 8 reading list).

Many different forms of nationalism: dominant/state;

settler-state (or settler-colonial); anti-colonial; postcolonial; indigenous; linguistic (integrally connected to
ethno-nationalism); revolutionary socialist or communist
nationalisms; etc.

History and Nature of

Nationalism(s) (4)
The nation-state
Proposition that a nation should have self-government
within the same state; assumes a complete
correspondence between the boundaries of the nation and
the boundaries of those who live in a specific state (YuvalDavis 1997, p. 11).

BUT in most societies are people who arent members of

the hegemonic nation (in ethnic or civic terms); some
members of national collectivities live in other states;
some nations have never had a state.

Ethnic nation-states: Pierre van den Berghe (1990):

less than 15% of contemporary states are nation-states
and most are micro-states. David Welsh (1993): less than
20 of approx. 180 contemporary states are ethnically
homogeneous.

History and Nature of

Nationalism(s) (5)
The nation-state
Civic nation-states: requires difficult nation-building
project. Can have ethnic undertones that make
minorities feel excluded.
Talk of the nation-state is usually uncritical. Effect of
the nation-state fiction has been to naturalize the
hegemony of one collectivity and its access to the
ideological apparatuses of both state and civil society
(Yuval-Davis 1997, p. 11).

So there are problems with both ethnic and civic

conceptualizations of the nation-state.

Summary

Different conceptual approaches to the study of

ethnicity:

Primordialism: given and more or less immutable

conception of ethnicity; ethnicity (and nationalism) as a
real and deeply felt emotional bond; pushes it towards
ideas of inevitable ethnic and ethno-national conflict.
Instrumentalism: social constructionist, recognises
potential for change in conceptions of ethnicity; ethnic
conflict stems from competition for material resources
and perceived or real deprivation; leaders stir up ethnic
mobilization.

Arguably neither school of thought accurately

captures the entirety of processes of ethnic
identification or fully explains the varied elements of
ethnic mobilization towards conflict with the other.

Summary (2)

Modernist theorists of nationalism view nations as

being a result of specific 18th century political,
economic and ideological developments in Europe.

Primordialist sympathisers argue that even if the

ideology of nationalism is modern, nations as
communities and identities have existed for far
longer and are largely based on ethnicity.

Numerous different forms of nationalism and

specific variants in particular places and time
periods, but a significant overarching typology
divides nationalism into civic and ethnic forms
(though this is not unproblematic).