European Nations and Nationalism

Theoretical and Historical Perspectives

Louk Hagendoorn, György Csepeli, Russell Farnen

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781351938471
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politik & Internationale Beziehungen
• Subtopic: Nationalismus & Patriotismus

This rich source book informs its reader in a comparative perspective about the political and social-economic past and present of fifteen Western, Central and Eastern European countries. This includes the economic and social aspects of the development of the nation state, descriptions of the current political structures and institutions, an account of the types of ethnic composition of the populations, definitions of citizenship and a background to the existing political parties and preferences. The countries involved are: the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Poland, Germany, Sweden, The Netherlands, Belgium, Britain, France, Spain and Italy. The authors are scholars in the fields of nationalism and ethnic conflict and they were invited to write their country chapters along the lines of a common format, paying special attention to the notion of state and nation building processes, citizenship definitions and minority issues. This book is a comprehensive reference guide for students and scholars in the fields of social sciences, European studies, history and other related disciplines and generally to those who are interested in the past and present of any one of the large number of countries described.

1 European Nations and Nationalism: An Introductory Analysis

Louk Hagendoorn and José Pepels

Introduction

The idea for this book emerged at a conference on nationalism, ethnic conflict and conceptions of citizenship and democracy held in Utrecht, the Netherlands in 1995. The European Research Centre on Migration and Ethnic Relations organized and the European Science Foundation funded the conference. Scholars from the fields of ethnic relations, ethnic conflict, and nationalism from 20 West, Central, and East European countries discussed the possibility of producing such a comparative and cross-national survey. Its aim would be to determine factors which led to negative popular attitudes toward ethnic or national minorities, to popular nationalism and its projected political goals (which affects the popular evaluation of the democratic quality of the national political system), and to popular conceptions of who belongs to the state and nation in terms of citizenship. Unfortunately or not, this survey did not occur because of funding constraints. Consequently, we never had an opportunity to see if the technical problems in such a comparative research project were insurmountable. So, good and bad luck are relative in life as well as in social science. However, the conference still produced something valuable. As preparation for a comparative survey, all participants wrote a paper on their country, covering national historical development, political and economic systems, ethnic demography and tensions, and current nationalistic sentiments. These were to be used as background for concepts that were to be measured cross-nationally. Since these country papers had the same format, they were useful for a book, even more so than we realised in advance. Therefore, at the conference's end, the editors were appointed. Their joint task was to review and evaluate the papers so that appropriate revisions could satisfy the requirements for an interesting publication. So, this is that book.

The Structure of Contributions

The authors' task was not easy since they came from different scientific disciplines. The group consisted of sociologists, political scientists, social psychologists, historians, and anthropologists. Furthermore, they all had to use a format which dealt with historical, social, economic, and political factors. Each chapter on a nation-state was to include four sections: an historical overview of the state and nation, a sketch of the development of the economic and social structure, a description of the present political structure (including political parties and their support), and a description of the existing laws on citizenship and relevant national symbols. Because of the abstract and general nature of these suggestions, we made them more specific as follows.

The first section on historical development was to describe long-term trends up to its current political form: from kingdom to empire, from being part of an empire to independence, from hereditary rule to democracy, from feudal structure to popular sovereignty, and so forth. It could start with the population(s) inhabiting or migrating to the current territory in early history, follow up with a historical overview of the development of the political structure of the state, and sketch the effects of wars, regime changes, domination, and revolutions. Authors were free to determine at which relevant point in the past the overview should start. Older phases in the development of the nations would be shorter; the major emphasis was to be on when the nation, as such, took form. Then the development of the political structure of the state was to be sketched, indicating when nationalism sprang up and ending with the state's formation as a democracy (including its definition of citizenship).

The second section was to cover key economic and social transformations in the history of the state: the transition from a feudal to capitalistic or socialist economy, the spread of literacy, the development of educational institutions, and the onset of the process of industrialisation and modernisation. This section was also to include social classes and strata as well as their economic and political power, all connected to the development of the political structure and its turning points described in the previous section. The link between these two processes might be treated in terms of the political ideas, ideals, and ideologies of the relevant social groups and strata, their political parties' aims, and the parties' role in relation to nationalism and democracy.

The section on the present political structure and landscape should first give an overview of the country's current political situation in terms of the nature and functions of the main political institutions (presidency, monarchy, type of government, main political parties and their ideology, and relation between central and local levels of government), the typical features of current national consciousness (type and strength of nationalism, feelings of dependence on foreign powers, etc.), ethnic divisions within the population and stereotypes associated with them, current definitions of citizenship and democracy, and the measure of their popular support. In the second part, an overview was to appear using data (polls) on current participation in elections, support for the main political parties, ethnic stereotypes and racism, and evidence of support for democracy and various conceptions of citizenship. The possible dangers of nationalism and ethnic antagonism in the current political situation were to be indicated.

The last section (on the state, citizens, and national symbols) was to indicate the current legal definition of citizenship, analyse its consequences, and illustrate national symbols. This included defining the relation between the state and its citizens in the constitution (or in specific laws), indicating minority legislation and minority rights, and describing any problems which the existing definition of citizenship created.

Authors were free to adapt this detailed scheme to their county's circumstances. However, the price of this freedom is that all chapters are not alike in structure and a neat paragraph-by-paragraph comparison of countries is not possible. Rather than that reality should adapt to our desired format, we thought it wiser that the format fit the reality of a country. Since countries are rather like persons, each has its own biography and character, its own typical Gestalt of features. As social scientists, we did not really expect this outcome; whereas for historians, this result may be so obvious as not to be at all remarkable. After all, history is biography stored in and retrieved from (collective) national memory. Outcomes of social processes appear to be the intended achievements of collective actors. Even if the suggestion of an individual Gestalt of a nation does not follow from the text of a chapter, the reader may sense it as a result of making contrasts between countries. This is, perhaps, one of the main values of the book.

What is Nationalism?

Nationalism is not a well-defined concept. At conferences on nationalism, much time is often wasted on discussing what it is. But nationalism is a phenomenon with many different aspects. Let us try to summarise the aspects and the concepts related to nationalism.

First, nationalism has to be placed in its time dimension. Nation-states developed through history and manifested themselves as we know them only recently. This is not to say that nations (people) and states did not exist before the last two centuries. There were many nations (in the meaning of people or races) and states (in the forms of kingdoms and empires). The concept of a people may even be older than that of a state. The New Testament of the Christian Bible already refers to this division of nations: 'And all the peoples will be assembled in front of Him and He will divide them like the shepherd divides the sheep and the goats, and He will place the sheep right and the goats left. Then the King will address those at the right and say: "You, who are blessed by my father, will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven"' (Matthew, 25:32-35; translated from the Dutch). It is an old idea that nations have populations which consider themselves different from or superior to others. But these peoples did not always have their own state; states could also reach across many peoples. Historically, this is exactly what changed: the fit or congruence of different peoples with different states. The concept of popular sovereignty was the foundation for this attempted organization of a nation as a nation-state

Second, there is a vertical dimension for nationalism. The striving for a nation-state can manifest itself, whether or not simultaneously, at different levels of the society. It may be the ideal of a leader, a political elite, or an idea uniting a popular social movement. Hence, it can manifest itself as a grand scheme, an elite policy, or a popular sentiment.

Third, nationalism can be placed on a dimension of accomplishment. Nationalism can refer to a cognitively envisioned and emotionally charged ideal or end-state that yet has to be realised or it can refer to an accomplished state. Nationalism as an envisioned state refers to specific goals such as bringing together different populations under one state, seceding from a larger state, founding an empire in which one population group is the leading party, expelling groups perceived as 'alien', or denying rights to groups and individuals not conceived of as belonging to the 'true' nation.

The phenomenon of the nation's political organization in the form of a state is an historical one. Essential for it is that populations came to matter politically through democracy, economic power, or military conscription. Populations did not always matter in that sense in history. Also essential is that these populations identified with themselves, that they felt similar, and had unity vis à vis other populations. States contributed to such identifications because they divided people from others in terms of frontiers, rights, and territories. Generally, nationalism refers to the phenomenon that leaders, elite groups, or populations feel that the state they live in should be the state of their nation. In other words, nationalism refers to ethnicity, a feeling of a common heritage (in terms of history, lineage, language, or religion) and fate. Nationalism is a scheme, vision, or matter of elite propaganda if the identification of a people with itself as a state has yet to be evoked. Nationalism is an actual social force if the identification is already there and has widespread, popular support. In both cases, nationalism specifies political goals. If it starts as an elite movement, it strives to spark national attachment among the population; when it is widespread, its further goal is to establish its specifically envisioned state (through irredentism, imperialism, ethnic cleansing, secession, etc.).

This means that nationalism is not the same as identifying with a state or nation. Nationalism posits a nation-state as the ideal state and, thus, refers to identification with the nation-state. Simple civic identification with a state is not nationalism. Nationalism's hard core is ethnic identification with a nation-state. But identification is not yet enough to develop social and political power. Nationalism becomes a social power only if identifying with the nation-state evokes an impulse to change the existing state (namely to defend it, contribute to its interests, enlarge it, exclude non-nationals from it, or secede from it). Nationalism embodies a social fever; it is an activity aimed at changing the current state of affairs. This change is intended through political action and is directed at enlarging a population's self-control (autonomy, independence, secession) or controlling other peoples (ethnic cleansing, domination, expansion). This nationalistic fever's stature depends on how well nationalistic leaders and elite groups can arouse the people and on what conditions lead the population to believe they benefit from enduring the frenzy. Fervent attachment to the nation feeds national pride; heated pride feeds feelings of national superiority. The intensity of elite and popular nationalism can vary. The nationalistic scheme of a leader, the aims of a nationalistic elite, and the resultant popular nationalistic fever all refer to an imagined national community encapsulated in its own state. And this imagination is, paradoxically, the cause as well as the effect of the development of modern nation-states. That is not to say all states are nation-states or want to become so. All states have nations and have to come to terms with them. This book describes how this state of affairs developed in Europe's various nations and states.

National Groups in Europe

Nationalism would not be so relevant if it was not associated with conflict. This conflict is between as well as within nations. After the collapse of the communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe, our collective attention has been specifically directed to ethno-national conflict within states. In other words, the concept of nationalism was increasingly used as an introduction to understanding ethnic conflict and the fragmentation of national states. Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union, and Czechoslovakia are the main examples. It was common parlance to attribute their collapse to 'rising nationalism' (Goble, 1995). However, nationalism is not just a phenomenon of the post-communist world. In several Western European states, there are population groups which consider themselves to be separate national communities. In many Western European states, migrants evoke feelings of national distinctiveness among the indigenous population. Xenophobia and nationalism are closely related. Let us consider this situation in the European countries and how countries differ.

In Europe, migrant groups from EU (European Union) and non-EU countries are concentrated in northwestern Europe, 'Compact' (substantial, geographically concentrated) ethnic-national minorities are found mainly, but not solely, in Central and Eastern Europe. This is shown by data from the EU's statistical office (Eurostat) on the percentages of officially registered non-EU migrants in Western Europe (see Table 1.1 for data from 1992). Fuchs, Gerhards, and Roller (1993) maintain that xenophobia is positively correlated with the number of non-EU migrants in a country and xenophobia is most prevalent in northwestern Europe.

Additionally, there are EU migrants. In Luxembourg, EU migrants are about 25% of the population; in Belgium, about 6%; and in France, Ireland, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands, about 2%. EU-migrants originated mainly in Italy, Greece, and Spain. Hence, except for Luxembourg, the migrant populations in Western European countries constitute from 1% to 8% of the national populations (Eurostat Rapid Report, 1993).

Numerically substantial ethnic minorities which are territorially concentrated in specific parts of the country (compact minorities) may trigger negative reactions beyond mere xenophobia. Similarly, compact minorities may try to distinguish themselves from the national majority, plead for autonomy, or try to become independent. There are more compact minorities in Eastern than in Western European countries. In Western Europe, the countries with compact minorities are the United Kingdom (Scots 9.1%, Welshmen 5%, and Irish 2.5%), Spain (Catalans 15.6%, Galicians 7%, and Basques 5.4%), Switzerland (with Italian, French, and German language groups), and Belgium (about 50-50% Flemish and Walloons). In Eastern Europe, there are many compact minorities. This is shown in Table 1.2 (Hagendoorn et al., 1995).

Table 1.1 Non-EU migrants in Western Europe (in %)

Country	%	Largest Non-EU Minority Groups
Germany	6.1	Turks, Yugoslavs, Poles
France	4.1	Algerians, Tunesians, Moroccans
Belgium	3.6	Moroccans, Turks and Zairese
Netherlands	3.5	Turks, Moroccans, Surinamese
Luxembourg	3.3	Jugoslavs, Americans, Cape Verdeans
United Kingdom	1.8	Indians, Americans, Pakistani
Greece	1.7	Americans, Poles, Egyptians
Italy	1.1	Moroccans, Americans, Tunesians
Portugal	<1	-
Ireland	<1	-
Spain	<1	-

The ethno-national composition of Hungary, Albania, Poland, and the Czech Republic is comparable to that of ...