complexity, nationalism and political theory how complexity permits ethnic nationalists and...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
216 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Complexity, Nationalism and Political Theory
How complexity permits ethnic nationalists and multiculturalists to rub along together
Eric Kaufmann, Birkbeck College, University of Londone.kaufmann@bbk.ac.uk
The Communitarian Challenge• Starting point is Rawls' Theory of
Justice (1971) • Idea of 'archimedean point': a
universal perspective on ethics free of particularity of place and time
• Communitarians critique it from mid-70s: Alasdair MacIntyre, Michael Sandel, Charles Taylor and Michael Walzer
• Charge that ethics must be implemented in the concrete social reality of this world, not an abstract one
Deeper Questions Posed by Communitarians
• Must autonomy and equality be the only versions of the Good?
• Can we really construct our authentic selves by inward reflection ('I think therefore I am' or Sartre's café existentialism) or are not we not in some way the product of our upbringing and social interactions?
• Is western liberalism really a universal creed that all cultures should come to adopt?
Multiculturalism• Liberalism, Community and
Culture (1989), followed by a number of works in 1990s
• Taylor's Multiculturalism and the Politics of Recognition (1994)
• Inspired partly by 'multicultural' movement of minorities for 'recognition' vis a vis majority culture in Canada
• Canadian multiculturalism policy dates from 1971, similar demands in US since late 60s
Liberal Nationalism
•Abstract state of Rawls•Jurgen Habermas suggests a 'constitutional patriotism'•Viroli argues for a more romantic republican 'patriotism' based on state institutions•Yael Tamir (1993) and David Miller (1995) argue that this is too 'thin' to be meaningful•Liberal Nationalism is fair, feasible, desirable
Liberal Nationalism
• Need solidarity for welfare state, democracy, equality to function
• Strike a balance between minority recognition and the nation
• “Civic nationalism” is the best compromise• Cul de sac of multiculturalism vs. national integration
National Identity and Multiculturalism:
breaking the deadlock
• In most western societies, issues around immigrant incorporation are symbolic rather than material or political
• Official discourse• School curriculum• Very little power/money allocated to ethnic group bodies
Complexity Theory and the Nation
• Complexity from simplicity: higher level coordination emerges from uncoordinated lower-level actions. Self-organising. Emergence
• ‘Wisdom of crowds’: knowledge is distributed among individuals rather than centralised in the state
• Examples: market, forest, city
Classic v Complex Diffusion
• ‘State’ – top down diffusion. Gradual, out from centre to peripheries and down social scale
• ‘Market’ – bottom-up. Peer-to-peer emergence. Erratic, subject to tipping points and ideas can go ‘viral’
Bottom-up processes of nationalism
• ‘Everyday nationalism’ (Deloye, Edensor, Fox, etc)
• Popular nationalism (Sidel on Philippines; Kammen/O’Leary on USA)
• Local nationalism: ‘Heimat’ version of nation (Confino, Applegate, Zimmer, Leersen 2014)
Multiple Perspectives on the Nation
• Zones of conflict (Hutchinson 2005)• Lenses of nationhood (Kaufmann 2008)• Multivocality (Turner 1967; Eriksen 2014)
Multivocal, not multicultural
Multicultural, with white peripheries
English ethnic nation, multicultural cities, Celtic periphery
Multivocalism/Multi-Nationalism
• Current vogue for integrationist civic nationalism alienates multiculturalists and ethno-nationalists
• Why not establish a common minimum (mutual respect, equality) and fill in the blanks?
• Wide range of lenses on the nation tolerated and validated
• Tailor-made nationalism, multivocal symbols
Constructive Ambiguity
• Wording is ambiguous• Sold differently to each
side• Leaders allow each side to
believe the deal favours them
• No problem if ethnic Englishman identifies with Britain through her ethnicity
Examples
• Decentralised Social movements (ie Muslim Brotherhood – Wickham 2002)
• ‘franchise’ model of political parties (Carty 2002)
• Should not be extended into realms of hard power and expenditure (ie ‘Big Society’, devo-max, ‘multi-speed Europe’)
• Power/money remain zero-sum; symbols more flexible for positive sum solutions
top related