EDM 6210
Education Policy and Society
Lecture 5
Education Policy and Social Integration:
Dialectic of Education for Nationality and Citizenship
A. Dialectic of the Nation-State: The Emergence of the Conception Ethnicity
1. To recapitulate, in previous lectures…
a. The state is conceived as a sovereign power apparatus (legitimate
monopoly of use of physical force), which has successfully established
over residents of a definite territory. It is the “engineering” outcome of a
power-steering system and/or struggle between power-steering systems.
b. The nation is conceived as a community of sentiment, which emerges
“spontaneously” from frequent communications among residents of a
territory. It is the “practical” outcome of the lifeworld built on
common-languages and territory.
c. However, human history especially in the past five centuries has witnessed
many different forms of institutional configurations between these two
types of human groupings. For example
i. Monarchy-state over nations in France and subsequently republic-state
(Jacobin-state) over nations in France
ii. The state of the United Kingdom over nations in the British Isles
iii. Migrant-states over natives in American continents and Australia
iv. Empire-states over nations, e.g. Ching Empire over nations in China,
and subsequently modern republic-state over nations in China
v. Nazi- and Fascist-states over nations in Germany and Italy
vi. Sovereign states gaining independence from former colonizers and
striving to build national sentiment of solidarity among various ethnic
groups
2. Are nation modern? Two prevailing dichotomous perspectives in the studies of
nation
a. The first theoretical dichotomy consists of: (Calhoun, 1994, 1997, Jenkins,
2008)
i. Essentialism: Essentialism approaches identity as essentials or
attributes, which are naturally endowed or structurally determined. This
perspective takes gender identity, national identity or class identity as
given facts and preexisting reality. Hence, the formations of identities
are conditioned, shaped, or determined by sets of essentially fixed traits,
such as biological sex, skin color, birth place, position in relation of
production, etc.
ii. Constructionism: Constructionism approaches identity as socially
constructed reality, which are negotiable and maneuverable. They are
on the one hand collectively constituted in social process or even social
movement, and individually constructed in deliberately presentations
and articulations.
b. The second theoretical dichotomy is made up of (Smith, 1986; Gellner,
1997)
i. Primordialism: Primordialism tends to attribute the basis of identity to
some essences that are in-born, inherited from ancestoral past, or
Pong & Tsang
Education Policy & Society
1
accumulated through cultural tradition within a given social entity.
These primordial ties may include kinship tie, consanguineous bondage,
homeland boundedness, or connections to some traditional mythomoteur
(myth-symbol complex).(Smith, 1986, Pp. 57-68).
ii. Instrumentalism or Modernism: It approaches identity as psycho-social
phenomena grown out of functional requisite or instrumental necessity
of a given social system. For instance, sentiment of solidarity or even
readiness to scarify shared among members of the colonized nations in
fighting for independence against the colonizers are instrumental in
national liberation movement; or sense of commonality and cooperation
permeated among members of industrialized and urbanized society are
functional to the complex division of labor in industrial capitalism.
Instrumentalism/Modernism
• Negotiating identity
• Citizenship Identity
• National identity
Essentialism
Constructionism
• Ethnical identity
• Familial identity
Primordialism
3. Max Weber’s conception of ethnic group:
a. Definition: “We shall call ‘ethnic groups’ those human groups that entertain
a subjective belief in their common descent because of similarities of
physical type or of customs or both, or because of memories of
colonization and migration; this belief must be important for the
propagation of group formation; conversely, it does not matter whether or
not an objective blood relationship exist. Ethnic membership differs from
the kinship group precisely by being a presumed identity, not a group with
concrete social action, like the latter.” (Weber, 1978, p. 289)
b. Having analyzed a list of contributing factors to the formation of ethnic
group, Weber comes to the conclusion that
“All in all, the notion of ‘ethnically’ determined social action subsumes
phenomena that s rigorous sociological analysis …would have to
distinguish carefully……. It is certain in this process the collective term
Pong & Tsang
Education Policy & Society
2
‘ethnic’ would be abandoned, for it is unsuitable for a really rigorous
analysis. …The concept of the ‘ethnic’ group…dissolves if we define our
term exactly.” (Weber, 1978, p. 394-395)
c. Ambiguity in distinguishing the notions of ethnicity and nationality:
i. “The concept of ‘nationality’ shares with that of the ‘people’ (Volk) — in
the ethnic sense — the vague connotation. …In reality…persons who
consider themselves members of the same nationality are often much
less related by common descent than are persons belonging to different
and hostile nationalities. Differences of nationality may exist even
among groups closely related by common descent, merely because
they have different religious persuasions, as in the case of Serb and
Croats.” (Weber, 1978, p. 395)
ii. “A common language is also insufficient in sustaining a sense of
national identity. …Many German-speaking Alsatian feel a sense of
community with the French because they share certain custom and
some of their ‘sensual culture’ …and also because of common political
experiences.” (Weber, 1978, p. 396)
4. Anthony Smith’s thesis on The Ethnic Origins of the Nation (1986)
Anthony D. Smith, one of the prominent scholars in the studies of nationalism
and ethnicity professing in London School opf Economics specifies his
conception of ethnie (ethnic group) with the following points:
a. Definition of ethnie: “We arrive at the following definition of the term ethnie:
‘a named human population with myths of common ancestry, shared
historical memories, one or more elements of common culture (e.g. religion,
custom or language), a link with a homeland and a sense of solidarity
among at least some of its members.’” (Hutchinson & Smith, 1996, p. 6)
b. Main features/dimensions of ethnie: “Ethnie habitually exhibit, albeit in
varying degrees six main features:
i. a common proper name, to identity and express the ‘essence’ of the
community;
ii. a myth of common ancestry, a myth rather than a fact, a myth that
includes the idea of a common origin in time and that give an ethnie a
sense of fictive kinship, what Horowitz terms a ‘super-family’ (Horowitz,
1985: ch.2);
iii. shared historical memories, or better, shared memories of a common
past or pasts, including heros, events, and their commemoration;
iv. one or more elements of common culture, which need not be specified
but normally include religion, custom, or language;
v. a link with homeland, not necessarily its physical occupation by the
ethnie, only its symbolic attachedment to the ancestral land, as with
diaspora peoples;
vi. a sense of solidarity on the part of at least some sections of the ethnie’s
population (Smith, 1986, ch.2)
c. The cultural-symbolic nature of the social phenomenon called ethnie:
Anthony Smith underlines that
“We are dealing with the sense of common ethnicity rather than any
‘objective’ ethnic reality. For the purposes of the analysis that follows, such
reality’ as we shall impute to ethnie is essentially social and cultural: the
generic features of ethnie are derived, less from ‘objective’ indicators like
fertility, literacy or urbanization rates (important though these are in given
circumstances), than from the meaning conferred by a number of men and
Pong & Tsang
Education Policy & Society
3
women over some generations on certain cultural, spatial and temporal
properties of their interaction and shared experiences..” (Smith, 1986, P.
22)
5. Anthony D. Smith’s typology of nation-formation in Europe:
With reference to his conception of ethnie, Smith has distinguish induced two
models of nation formation from European experiences
a. The territorial-civic model: It refers mainly to the developmental
experiences in nations in Western Europe, such as France, England (letter
Britain), Spain, Sweden, and Holland. These nations are formed on
numbers of territorially based building blocks: (Smith , 1986, Pp. 134-140)
i. Territorially centralized and coordinated bureaucratic states,
ii. Territorially coordinated economy and more specifically capitalistic
market
iii. Territorially integrated cultural system and more specifically territorially
centralized or even standardized educational system
As a result, the sense of solidarity derived from residents of these
territories is kind of legal, political and latter social citizenship.
b. The primordial-ethnic model: It refers mainly to the developmental
experiences in nations in Eastern Europe, such Polishes, Hungarians,
Czechs, Slovaks, Croats, Bulgarians, Rumanians, Ukrainians, and Greeks.
Most of these nations were under imperial rules by empires such as the
Austrian-Hungarian Empire, Ottoman Empire, and Tsarist Empire in the
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Under these external and imperial
rules, these nations turn inversely to their primordial solidarities, such
agrarian sedentarization, religious orthodox, dialects, etc.
6. T.K. Oommen’s conception of ethnicity and ethnification: Conception from the
periphery
a. Oommen’s definition of ethnie and ethnicity:
“An ethnie is a collectivity, members of which share a common lifestyle,
history and language, but whose identification with its ancestral homeland
is weak or endangered. Ethnicity, then, is a product of attenuation between
territory and culture. Id an ethnie aspires to and succeeded in establishing
a moral claim over the territory to which it has migrated, and with which it
identifies as its homeland, it becomes a nation.” (Oommen, 1997, p. 45)
b. Conception of ethnification: “Ethnification is a process through which the
link between territory and culture is attenuated, and the possibility of a
nation sustaining it integrity is put into jeopardy.” (Oommen, 1997, p. 13)
c. Types of ethnification:
i. Native Indians in American continent and native Australian (aborigines)
in Australia: “A nation may continue to be in its ancestral or adopted
homeland and yet it may be ethnifiied by the colonizing or native
dominant collectivity.” (Oommen, 1997, p. 13)
ii. Natives in multinational-states in former USSR, PRC, and many
independent states from former colonial states in Africa and Asia, e.g.
Public of India and South Africa: “Ethnification …occurs when a state
attempt to ‘integrate and homogenize the different nations in its territory
into a common people.” (Oommen, 1997, p.15)
iii. Chinese and Indian migrant labor settled in Malaysian peninsula:
Migrants, who have settled in colonial and subsequent independent
states, are ethnified by the majority nation, as in the case of the
Federation of Malaysia, or by the state-formation project as in the case
Pong & Tsang
Education Policy & Society
4
of the Republic of Singapore.
iv. Ethnification in the United States of America and Australia: In republic
dominated by migrant nations, ethnification is commonly or even
indiscriminately to all “nations”. In the US, citizens are commonly
ethnified as Anglo-Americans, Asian-Americans, Afro-Americans, or
Native-Americans.
v. Ethnification can be conceived as a two-way process: All the previous
examples are external ethnification imposed by state apparatus.
Ethnification may be generated from within, that is, natives or migrant
groups having settled in home countries for decades or even centuries
may deliberately ethnified themselves in order to constitute ethnic
identify, solidarity or even residential and occupational communities.
d. Typology of ethnification
Natives
Migrants
Externally imposed
differentiation
Aborigines,
Native-Americans
Chinese and Indian
migrants in Malaysia
Internally asserted
differentiation
Uyghur, Tibetan,
Mongol in PRC
Chinese-Americans
7. Institutionalization of democratic-civic model of modern nation-state:
History of Institutionalization of constitutional-democratic states and
civil-democratic citizenship in the past two centuries has made the
territorial-civic model become the ideal-typical model of nation-state formation
in different parts of the globe. As globalization spread, ethnic-sedentarization
communities are forced to transcend its primordial bases and be integrated
political community based on solidarity of citizenship participation and practice.
a. Through the institutions of constitutional-democratic state, residents within
the territory of a sovereign state are entitled to participate on equal bases
in political affairs as well as in socio-cultural and economic activities.
b. Through these equal-participatory practices of citizenship, it is anticipated
(as Habermas advocates) that a modern nation in the form of community
of sentiment (or even community of prestige) of equal entitlement of
citizenship.
B. Synthesis: Modern Citizenship as Means of Reconciling Ethnicity and Nationality
within Modern Nation State
1. The empirical paradox among ethnicity, nation and state
a. “Most countries today are culturally diverse. According to recent estimates,
the world's 184 independent states contain over 600 living language
groups, and 5,000 ethnic groups. In very few countries can the citizens be
said to share the same language, or belong to the same ethnonational
group.” (
b. “The distinction between states and nations is fundamental to my whole
theme. States can exist a nation, or with several nations, among their
subjects, and a nation can be coterminous with the population of one state,
or be included together with other nations within one state, or be divided
between several states. There were states long before there were nations,
and there are some nations that are much older that most states which
Pong & Tsang
Education Policy & Society
5
exist today. The belief that every state is a nation or that all sovereign
states are national states, has done much to obfuscate human
understanding of political realities. A state is a legal and political
organization, with the power to require obedience and loyalty from its
citizens. A nation is a community of people, whose members are bound
together by a sense of solidarity, a common culture, a national
consciousness. Yet in the common usage of English and of other modern
languages these two distinct relationships are frequently confused.”
(Seton-Watson, 1977, P.1)
2. Jurgen Habermas’s conception of nationality
a. In light of the two historical or even historic movements taken place at the
end of the twentieth century, namely the unification of the East and West
Germany and the constitution of the European Union, Habermas suggests
a thesis to reconcile the structural contradictions among states, nations
and ethnic groups and the identity conflicts among citizenship, nationality
and ethnicity.
b. Re-conceptualization of the nation
i. Classical meaning of the notion of nation: In its “classic
usage , …nations are communities of people of the same descent, who
are integrated geographically in the form of settlements or
neighborhoods, and culturally by their common language, customs and
traditions, but who are not yet politically integrated in the form of state
organization.” (Habermas, 1994, p. 22)
ii. Meaning of nation in the 21st century: “The meaning of the term ‘nation’
thus changed from designating a pre-political entity to something that
was supposed to play a constitutive role in defining the political identity
of the citizen within a democratic polity. …The nation of citizenshs does
not derive its identity from common ethnic and cultural properties but
rather from the praxis of citizens who actively exercise their right. At this
juncture, the republican strand of ‘citizenship’ parts company
completely from the idea of belonging to a pre-political community
integrated on the basis of descent, a shared tradition and a common
language.” (Habermas, 1994, p. 23)
c. Two types of nationality: In connection of the new conceoption of nation,
Habermas makes a distinction between two types of nationality
i. Hereditary nationality, which is identity built on elements such as
common descent, custom, language or even ancestral homeland. They
are ascribed from one’s traditional-cultural heredities
ii. Acquired nationality, which is identity and commitment individual
citizens who consciously strive to achieve collectively in the preview of
civil-democratic citizenship and constitutional-democratic state.
Therefore, Habermas proposes that hereditary nationality should give way
to acquired nationality. (Habermas, 1994, p. 23)
3. T.K. Oommen’s conclusion
a. On the pessimistic part, “given the above, it is unrealistic to expect that a
common civilization which embaces the multiplicity of nations and ethnies
will emerge even in a distant future; it is a wrong agenda to be pursued.”
(Oommen, 1997, p. 243)
b. On the optimistic part, “one must recognize the role of citizenship as an
instrument that can reconcile the two identities of nationality and ethnicity
and the competing demands of equality and identity.
Pong & Tsang
Education Policy & Society
6
C. Universal Education as Means of Integration in Modern Nation-State
1. Universal education as part of project of state formation and citizenship
development
a. Universal provision of education as the primary basis of equality of future
citizens of modern state
b. Universal education as means of construction of identity of citizenship
i. Entitlement to universal provision of equal education as citizenship
rights to literate and intellectual developments as well as equal
opportunities to socio-economic developments
ii. Participation in universal provision of equal education as citizenship
obligation to participate in common socio-cultural activities of the
modern state
2. Universal education as part of the project of nation formation and nationality
development
a. Universal education as means to nurture common language of
communication among future citizenship
b. Universal education as means of construction of identity of acquired
nationality
c. Universal education as means of construction of identity of hereditary
nationality
3. Education as part of the project of de-ethnification and national
homogenization: Universal education as means to integrate ethnic identities
into identity acquired nationality
E. The Constituents of Education for Nationality and Citizenship
Constituents of Nationality
1. Hereditary Nationality
a. Territorial and ethnic nationality
- Geographic characteristic &
landscape
- Ethnic homogeneity and
heterogeneity
b. Historical and cultural nationality
- Linguistic and symbolic system
- Historical experience & system of
memory
2. Acquired Nationality
a. Common participation in economic
activities
b. Citizenship & equality in political
participation
c. Common and equal participation in
social & cultural activities
d. Ethic duties and obligations owe to
fellow citizens
Pong & Tsang
Education Policy & Society
Constituents of Citizenship
1. Citizenship-right education
a. Civil rights
b. Political rights
c. Social and participation rights
2. Citizenship-obligation education
a. Civil obligations
b. Political obligation
c. Social and participation
obligations
7
F. Development of Citizenship Education in HK
1. Citizenship-education in the lifeboat on the high tide of the Cold War (1948-56)
a. HK Government’s initiatives of civic education in 1948
i. Special section – “Education for Citizenship” - in ED annual report
ii. Training courses on teaching civics
iii. Introducing a new subject – Civics into the Hong Kong School
Certificate examination in 1948.
b. Complying subjects/refugees under the British colonial rules
c. No rocking of the lifeboat on the high tide of the Cold War
2. Citizenship education under the Subject Political Culture (1957-84)
a. Changes in citizenship-education curricula
i. The syllabus of Civics in 1957
ii. The syllabus of Economic and Public Affairs (EPA) in the 1960s
iii. The syllabus of EPA in 1975
iv. The syllabus of EPA in 1982
b. Responsible residents in an industrial colony
c. The constitution of the subject political culture
3. Citizenship education under the shadow of the 1997 handover
a. Changes in citizenship-education curricula
i. Guidelines on Civic Education in Schools, 1985
ii. Guidance on Civic Education in Schools, 1995
4. Chief Executive of HKSAR proposed in his Policy Address in 2011 to establish
“Moral and National Education” as an independent subject in all primary and
secondary schools in HKSAR
5. EDB published Moral and National Education Curriculum Guide (Primary 1 to
Secondary 6) Consultation Draft in May 2011
6. EDB published Moral and National Education Curriculum Guide (Primary 1 to
Secondary 6) in April 2012.
Additional References
Hutchinson, John and A.D. Smith (1996) “Introduction.” Pp. 3-14. In J. Hutchinson
and A.D. Smith (Eds.) Ethnicity: Oxford Readers. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Miller, David (1995) On Nationality. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
OOmmen, T.K. (1997) Citizenship, Nationality, and Ethnicity: Reconciling Competing
Identities. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.
OOmmen. T.K. (1997) (Ed.) Citizenship and National Identity: From Colonialism to
Globalism. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Smith, Anthony D. (1986) The Ethnic Origins of the Nation. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Pong & Tsang
Education Policy & Society
8