,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Ethno-nationalism is in fact a West European contribution to political thought
The Empire was the default mode of political organization for much of human history until the 17th century - following which the idea of a nation state bound by ethnic and lingual ties gained currency
The Empire was the default mode of political organization for much of human history until the 17th century - following which the idea of a nation state bound by ethnic and lingual ties gained currency
In part the nation state idea gained traction after the decline of the Holy Roman Empire, and the increasing success of the early nation states - England and Holland - which I am sure were an inspiration to other parts of Europe
So ethno-nationalism is very much Western. The liberals tend to downplay this, in part because they are confused.
On one hand they dislike the ethno nation state. Its so uncool
But they also dislike the "Empire" model that preceded the nation state
On one hand they dislike the ethno nation state. Its so uncool
But they also dislike the "Empire" model that preceded the nation state
Now the attempt is to forget the legacy of Westphalia, downplay cultural nationalisml that propelled the rise of Europe, but instead embrace vague notions of Constitutional patriotism
But then Constitutional patriotism can never provide a model for nation state formation
But then Constitutional patriotism can never provide a model for nation state formation
E.g. Why are India and Pakistan two separate nations? There is only one reason - and that is culture. There is a deep cultural cleavage on account of the religious demographics of the two countries necessitating a division
Critics of Cultural nationalism don't have an alternative model that can tell you where to draw the boundary between nation states
It is only a student of culture, lingual and religious demographics who can comment on that.
It is only a student of culture, lingual and religious demographics who can comment on that.
