Abstract
The founding works of nationalism theory identify two overarching categories of nationalism: civic and ethnic. While the former is lauded as liberal, inclusive, and rational, the latter is derided as regressive, restrictive, and exclusionary. More recent work on nationalism has problematized these characterizations, but has largely retained the civic/ethnic binary. This article critiques the civic/ethnic binary from the perspective of postcolonial theory. Drawing on de Sousa Santos’s abyssal line and Fanon’s zones of being and non-being, the article argues that the relationship between metropolis and empire is foundational to the relationship between civic and ethnic nationalism. Yet the category of civic nationalism obscures racialized patterns of exclusion within civic nations, such that the standards of inclusion within a civic nation are constructed on the basis of excluding the nation’s Others. Because civic nationalism is predicated on the creation and denial of Others, presenting civic nationalism as a global ideal is impossible. The article concludes by considering the promise of transnational social movements in the global South as an answer to both civic and ethnic nationalism.
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.