Racism and Nationalism

Abstract. The article seeks to define the relationship between nationalism and racism in modem times. First, it defines racism as one of the principal nineteenth-century ideologies, sharply focused and centred upon the human body itself as its most potent symbol. Then it discusses nationalism as a much more loosely constructed faith which made alliances with most nineteenth-century ideologies such as liberalism, conservatism and socialism. When nationalism allied itself with racism it made racism operative -for example, within the integral nationalist movements from the end of the nineteenth century onwards. The article discusses how this alliance came about, and its consequences. It concludes that racism was never an indispensable element of nationalism. Moreover, it was not merely a form of discrimination, but a determinate way of looking at men and women which presented a total picture of the world. If nationalism made racism a reality, racism came to dominate nationalism once an alliance between the two movements had been consummated.     

Notions in Nationalism

Abstract. The French Revolution and the Romantic Movement subscribed to a common objective, the reintegration of a fractured society. That required establishing the peculiar identity of each nation, its origins and extent – all defined in cultural and psychological rather than, as hitherto, in juridical terms. This shift turned nationalism into a system and in doing so conferred new meanings on the vocabulary of politics. Derived from philosophers and philologists, the changes were conveyed to the people at large by historians through the educational system. They thus fixed the meanings in the public consciousness and underwrote the legitimacy of the national mission.     

Nationalism chez Gellner

The central distinguishing feature of Ernest Gellner's most important treatment of nationalism is the proposition that nationalism is necessary for industrial society. Relatively little attention has been paid to the philosophical dimension of this proposition. The question of necessity in social explanation, however, is a complicated philosophical problem and must be dealt with directly if this proposition is to be endorsed. I argue that Gellner's argument is philosophically flawed. The ‘ordinary prose’ of Nations and Nationalism fails to deliver what Gellner claims to have delivered: the demonstration of a necessary connection between nationalism and industrial society. This result is of particular relevance given Gellner's philosophical interests.     

Nationalism and Historicity

Abstract. In this article the nation is shown to be a historical subject. As such, it is constructed and constantly reconstructed by discursive practices of power and knowledge. The author argues that the symbiotic interlinkage between nationalism and the organising knowledge principle of historicity, is an example of a power practice in the modern state. Throughout the article, it is shown that this practice is produced by interaction between the institutionally represented, sovereign or objective state and intellectual knowledge and its institutionalisation within the state as an academy, which acquires sovereignty in the production of objective truth. This peculiar discursive representation of making what really is personal interactions and struggles into official institutions has managed to produce the subject of the historical nation. The empirical case of Sweden is briefly discussed. During the age of great power, an exclusivist discourse of noble genealogical distinction of the ‘Goths’ was established. In modem Sweden, this genealogical myth is transformed to a popular national myth of exclusivity, a myth with great power potentials in the ‘national projects’ of modem politics.     

Nationalism and the Internet*

ABSTRACT. The territorial integrity of nations is often taken as the premise for a functioning, unifying national identity. Yet, the economic and technological developments of recent decades have made it necessary to question this assumption. It can no longer be taken for granted that the people who identify with a given nation inhabit the same space, nor can it be assumed that cultural homogenisation takes place at the level of the nation through mass media. When the Internet appeared, many social scientists and commentators predicted that it would threaten the cultural integrity of nations; that the non‐territorial character of the Internet would lead to fragmentation and unprecedented cultural differentiation, making it difficult, eventually impossible, to uphold a collective sense of national identity based on shared images, representations, myths and so on. Although it is too early to draw any conclusions regarding the long‐term effects of the Internet, experiences so far suggest that such predictions were mistaken. In fact, nations thrive in cyberspace, and the Internet has in the space of only a few years become a key technology for keeping nations (and other abstract communities) together. Nations which have lost their territory (such as Afrikaner‐led South Africa), nations which are for political reasons dispersed (such as Tamil Sri Lanka or Kurdistan), nations with large temporary overseas diasporas (such as Scandinavian countries, with their large communities in Spain during winter), or nations where many citizens work abroad temporarily or permanently (such as India or Caribbean island‐states), appear in many sites on the Internet – from online newspapers and magazines to semi‐official information sites and ‘virtual community’ homepages. In a ‘global era’ of movement and deterritorialisation, the Internet is used to strengthen, rather than weaken, national identities.