The formation of group identity:
Ethnicity and nationalism – appreciating
particularities and appeasing collectives
Lecture for the MA course:
“Ethnic Challenges to the Nation-State:
Studying State Responses from a Human Rights Perspective”
Kjetil Tronvoll, NCHR, 11 September 2007
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
1
What is a collective identity?
 A collective is not a given ‘pre-existing’ category
 It is a symbolic representation of ‘commonness’ among a group
of people, in contrast to other collectives
 The boundaries are flexible and constantly reproduced through
social interaction
 Since they are symbolic representations, their appearance are
multivocal
 They are generated through perceived aspects of shared
knowledge and recognised social routines (‘common’ behaviour
and institutions)
 They appear self-ascribed or ascribed by others
 It is a relevant and meaningful category for its members
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
2
Collective identities: primordial or
instrumental?
 Are ethnicity and nationalism (collective identities) an
intrinsic, primordial aspect of human existence and selfconsciousness? Are identities somehow clearly
definable and demarcated? Are they basically
unchanging and unchangeable in the fundamental
demands they make on individuals and in the bonds
they create and sustain between the individual and
his/her group?
 Or are ethnicity and nationalism to whatever extent
defined situationally and contextual? Being strategically
and tactically manipulative? Do they have the quality of
being capable of change at both the individual and
collective level?
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
3
Primordialist vs.
instrumentalist/constructivist
 Primordialist: identity as something intrinsic and inherent (importance
of blood and descent, religion and language, custom and culture) →
static, non-changing perception of identity

Neo-primordialism: ethnic consciousness is only realised when the group is
threatened (culturally, politically, socially) by external forces (the fundament of
right to self-determination?) (Comaroff 1996)
 Instrumentalist/constructivist: identity as a created sentiment, based
on social, political and cultural resources → flexible, manipulative,
processual, multivocal, ever-changing perception of identity



Realist perspective: ‘objective’ interest underpin collective identities
Cultural constructionism: formation of groups as a function of shared ‘culture’
Political constructionism: elite-driven hegemonic production of ‘culture’
(Comaroff 1996)
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
4
What is ethnicity?
 “Ethnicity is an aspect of social relationship between
agents who consider themselves as culturally
distinctive from members of other groups with whom
they have a minimum of regular interaction” (Eriksen,
2002: 12)
 I.e.:
 it is an aspect of social relationship, not a cultural
‘entity’ in itself;
 it is relational;
 it makes cultural differences relevant in communication;
 it requires social interaction with ‘others’
 it is contextually influenced
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
5
Understanding ethnic boundaries
 Fredrik Barth’ seminal work Ethnic group and
boundaries (1969)
 Ethnicity as a form of social organisation, not an
aspect of culture
 Focus on boundary mechanism which upholds the
ethnic group, not the ‘cultural stuff it encloses’
 Allows for self-ascription of identity and ascription by
others
 Shifting from a static to an relational and processual
approach
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
6
Ethnic boundary ‘maintenance’
 The ethnic boundary markers define the difference
between groups (customs, traits, language, political
ideas)
 The boundary markers may change through time and
according to context (some markers emphasised vs.
one group, different markers emphasised vs. another):
what is made relevant? (Barth)
 Who defines culture/markers, for which purpose
(power)?
 The groups ‘culture’ and social organisation may
change without removing/changing the ethnic
boundary markers
 Cultural differences relate to ethnicity if, and only if,
7
such differences are made relevant in social
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
Ethnic boundary transcendence
 Ethnic boundaries are not necessary territorial
boundaries, but social ones
 There is a continuous flow of information, interaction,
exchange and even people across them
 People may change ethnic identity, individually or
collectively (intermarriage/cultural adoption,
economic/production strategies, escape social stigma,
political pragmatism, etc)
 Boundaries connect, as well as distinguishes
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
8
Ethnicity as political organisation
 “Ethnicity is fundamentally a political phenomenon, as the symbols
of the traditional culture are used as mechanisms for the
articulation of political alignments” (A. Cohen, 1974)
 Dual capacity of ethnicity:


Manipulated from the outside to create ethnic antagonism and
schism
May also serve as a residual category for people to mobilise behind
from within
 Ethnicity is a social organisation which might be used as mobilising
force, since it simultaneously may serve political ends and satisfy
psychological needs for belongingness
 The ethnic group as a political actor is a product of the situation,
not of history → concerns for future prospects, not past grievances.
 A political strategy to achieve collectively what one cannot obtain
Kjetil Tronvoll
individually
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
9
Ethnic mobilisation
 A political issue, conflict or race for natural resources,
does not in itself produce ‘ethnicity’
 An idea of common identity is inspired by and rooted
in several factors, invented or real:
 The appropriation of shared history (Tonkin)
 Creation of common myths of origin (Hoskins)
 Idea of a chosen people (Smith)
 Nurturing the image of ‘historical’ enemies
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
10
Ethnicity and the state
 “The concept of ethnicity … is most useful when used as a
label for a dimension of the identity formation process in a
single political unit, most specifically the nation-sate”
(Williams, 1989)
 Ethnicity is a product of state formation, not the other way
around, i.e. heterogeneity precedes homogeneity (Wilmsen)
 Ethnicity as a response to state intervention/imposition;
strategy to achieve collectively what one could not achieve
individually
 It is in contexts of imposed assimilation and simultaneous
discrimination followed by a process of mobilisation, that an
Kjetil Tronvoll
ethnic discourse, and a leadership, emerges
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
 A minority group does not exist without a state
11
Ethnicity from below, and above
1) Ethnic boundaries of identity have referents to personal
consciousness, social interaction and cultural symbolism: i.e.
they are contestable and multivocal (Anthony Cohen, 1994)
2) Ethnicity is also a collective expression of identify formation
related to a hierarchical political system/state. Ethnicity has its
origin in inequality (Comaroff, 1996)
3) Ethnicity is constructed in routine, everyday social interaction
where relevant cultural differences are communicated (Barth and
Comaroff)
4) Once ethnic identities/boundaries are constructed and
objectified, their manifestations have a salient impact on the
members of the group (Comaroff)
5) The conditions that give rise to ethnogenesis, are not
necessarily the same as those that sustain it (Comaroff)
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
12
Nationalism: in defence of the state
 Globalisation challenges the politico-ideological foundation of
nationalism (Comaroff 1996; Keating/McGarry 2001)
 Growth of trans-national institutions, movements and diasporas
 Weakening of the nation-state
 Rise of a new politics of identity and difference
 What is nationalism?
 Ethnicity writ large and adapted to the state: “Nationalism is a theory
of political legitimacy, which requires that ethnic boundaries should
not cut across political ones” (Gellner 1983); or
 Nationalism/nation: is an imagined political community and
imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign” (Anderson 1991)
 A process to establish the ideological justification of the state
(Eriksen 1993/2002)
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
13
Nationalism in practice
 Try to make ethnicity and other sub- and supra national
identities irrelevant (regionalism, religion, etc)
 Establish/re-establish the state’s hegemony and
authority over its citizenry (political and territorial
control, etc)
 The state must be relevant to its citizens (service
delivery, sentimental attachment → “imagined
community”, etc)
 Manifestation of its geographical borders
 Be prepared to use violence to defend the “nation”
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
14
Two types of contemporary nationalism
(Comaroff)
1) Ethno-nationalism: the ideology of uniting an ethno-cultural
group with territory by way of genealogy. I.e. one dominating
ethnic group defines the national content (Smith 1991). Emphasis
on cultural particularism; membership by ascription; ‘transnational’ character.
2) Euronationalism: an ideology that promotes a secular state
founded on universalist principles of citizenship and social
contract. Emphasis on heroic origin, historical continuity, not
ethnic basis, politico-territorial community.
“From the perspective of Euronationalism, all ethninationalism appear
primitive, irrational, magical, and above all, threatening; in the eyes of
ethnonationalism – which appears perfectly rational from within –
Kjetil Tronvoll
Euronationalism remains inherently colonising, lacking in humanity,
and
Norwegian Centre
for Human Rights
University of Oslo
bereft of social conscience” (Comaroff 1996)
15
… and the third
 Heteronationalism: a synthesis that seeks to integrate
ethno-national identity politics within a euronationalist
understanding of political community.
 “Its objective is to accommodate cultural diversity within
a civil society composed of autonomous citizens …
equal and undifferentiated before the law.” It promotes
the rights to difference, understood as multiculturalism
(Comaroff 1996)
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
16
Positioning the 3 theories of nationalism
 Ethno-nationalism: primordial attachments gives
validity and justifies claims to ethnic self-determination
 Heteronationalism: also based on primordial group
sentiments but recognises individual rights multiculturalism; rationalised and explained by
neoprimordial instrumentalism; self-determination
 Euronationalism: relies on heroic human agency,
justified by constructionism: emphasises individual
rights and equal citizenship privileges
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
17
Understanding collectives
 Boundaries both distinguish and connect collectives
 Must distinguish between the cognitive premises that construct
the boundary – by what might be called acts of imposition – and
the sociology of people living and acting around that boundary
and thereby shaping an outcome (Barth 2000)
 Boundaries are multivocal symbolic expressions, thus
individually perceived based on personal experience and
cognition (Barth/Anthony Cohen 200)
 Whose boundaries?
 Boundaries of identity are amorphous and ambiguous
 Thus must be infused with symbolic content to create collective
distinctions
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo
18