Nation-States and State-Nations

Abstract

Nationalism takes a variety of forms and carries with it a variety of political consequences. A major variable distinguishing one pattern of nationalism from another has been the interplay between nation and state. At bottom, this is a relationship between national identity and political autonomy, between national integration and political sovereignty. In many of the developed countries of the post-World War II world the sense of national identity evolved prior to the crystallization of the structures of political authority. By contrast, in most of the currently underdeveloped, newly independent countries this sequence is reversed: authority and sovereignty have run ahead of self-conscious national identity and cultural integration. To this extent it can be said that Europe produced nation-states, whereas Asia and Africa have produced state-nations. These two broad patterns of relationships have never been as clear-cut as has been traditionally supposed. Their implications are particularly pertinent for understanding the role of nationalism in political stabilization and economic modernization, as well as its possible role in reshaping the patterns of political control and consolidation. What is called for is an appreciation of the mobilization character of nationalism-specifically, nationalism as the embodiment of at least two types of mobilization that may outstrip one another.