1- Can any nation-state be considered a ‘civic’ nation?
It is critical to commence with a definition of the concept at the heart of the discussion as a way of setting the stage for the present discourse. The concept of civic nationhood is applied in reference to the identity in politics formed from common citizenship that thrives in a liberal state (Smith, 2013). The concept of a civic nation, therefore, goes beyond subjective variables, such as culture, language, customs or traditions of the individual components of the state. A state founded on civic principles is guided by a reference to shared institutions as well as accepted liberal principles. For this reason, the membership into such a state is open and subject only to the commitment …show more content…
Primordialists argue that it is not possible to eliminate the influence of ethnic groups in the formation of national identity given the long history of these groups (Geertz, 1994, p. 30). The traditional view is that primordialists define national identity as the exclusive product of common bloodlines, regional origins as well as shared language. However, a deeper analysis of the primordialist approach reflects an image of nationalism different from the conventional view as mentioned. Given the arguments presented by Horowitz (2004) , it is clear that the opinion of the primordialists is often misconstrued. Granted, the position of this school of thought is that ethnic identities are an inherent, unchangeable feature that sets the ground for inevitable conflict (Horowitz, 2004, p. 72). For example, European nationalism can be traced back to firm ancestry roots and mystical customs as well as to connections created by a shared territory (Horowitz, 2004, p. 73). Following this view, primordialists are seen to have an unhealthy association with the divisions created by differences that arise from ethnicity. It should be noted that the version of nationalism born to ethnicity I founded on the view that a certain ethnic group is the original and therefore most justified to subscribe to a certain form of national identity. Nonetheless, as mentioned, an in-depth analysis of the primordialist approach …show more content…
This argument is well captured by the ethno-symbolism approach to nationalism. Applying a modernism approach clarifies the challenge of establishing a civic nation. However, this approach provides ground for progress by making the establishment of a civic state the product of deliberate action that supersedes subjective differences. Finally, the primordialist approach, often seen as divisive comes out as a misunderstood school of thought that leaves room for additional thought on the issue of nationalism. More specifically, it is clear that the impact of factors, such as ethnicity cannot be ignored. While this does not eliminate the possibility of forming a civic state, it is critical to retain consciousness of the possibility of conflict due to competing interests. This fact is particularly important in the modern world due to the reality of
It is critical to commence with a definition of the concept at the heart of the discussion as a way of setting the stage for the present discourse. The concept of civic nationhood is applied in reference to the identity in politics formed from common citizenship that thrives in a liberal state (Smith, 2013). The concept of a civic nation, therefore, goes beyond subjective variables, such as culture, language, customs or traditions of the individual components of the state. A state founded on civic principles is guided by a reference to shared institutions as well as accepted liberal principles. For this reason, the membership into such a state is open and subject only to the commitment …show more content…
Primordialists argue that it is not possible to eliminate the influence of ethnic groups in the formation of national identity given the long history of these groups (Geertz, 1994, p. 30). The traditional view is that primordialists define national identity as the exclusive product of common bloodlines, regional origins as well as shared language. However, a deeper analysis of the primordialist approach reflects an image of nationalism different from the conventional view as mentioned. Given the arguments presented by Horowitz (2004) , it is clear that the opinion of the primordialists is often misconstrued. Granted, the position of this school of thought is that ethnic identities are an inherent, unchangeable feature that sets the ground for inevitable conflict (Horowitz, 2004, p. 72). For example, European nationalism can be traced back to firm ancestry roots and mystical customs as well as to connections created by a shared territory (Horowitz, 2004, p. 73). Following this view, primordialists are seen to have an unhealthy association with the divisions created by differences that arise from ethnicity. It should be noted that the version of nationalism born to ethnicity I founded on the view that a certain ethnic group is the original and therefore most justified to subscribe to a certain form of national identity. Nonetheless, as mentioned, an in-depth analysis of the primordialist approach …show more content…
This argument is well captured by the ethno-symbolism approach to nationalism. Applying a modernism approach clarifies the challenge of establishing a civic nation. However, this approach provides ground for progress by making the establishment of a civic state the product of deliberate action that supersedes subjective differences. Finally, the primordialist approach, often seen as divisive comes out as a misunderstood school of thought that leaves room for additional thought on the issue of nationalism. More specifically, it is clear that the impact of factors, such as ethnicity cannot be ignored. While this does not eliminate the possibility of forming a civic state, it is critical to retain consciousness of the possibility of conflict due to competing interests. This fact is particularly important in the modern world due to the reality of