PO377 ETHNIC CONFLICT AND
POLITICAL VIOLENCE
Week 7: Ethnicity, Nations and
Nationalisms
Lecture Outline

Conceptual Approaches to Ethnicity: Primordialism
vs. Instrumentalism




History and Nature of Nationalism(s)




Ethnicity as primordial and ethnicity as instrumental
Critique of primordialism
Critique of instrumentalism
Primordialism vs. modernism
Civic nationalism and ethnic or ethno-nationalism
The nation-state
Summary
Primordialism vs. Instrumentalism
Ethnicity as primordial

Ethnicity is ‘deeply
ingrained in human history
and experience’ (Wolff
2006, p. 33). Ethnic bonds
are primordial and unlike
other bonds: have an overpowering non-rational,
emotional quality; are
largely inexplicable; are
ancient, enduring and
recurrent; given, natural and
immutable.
Ethnicity as instrumental

Ethnicity is socially and
politically constructed over
time. Ethnicity is ‘foremost a
resource in the hands of
leaders to mobilize followers
in the pursuit of other
interests’ (Wolff 2006, p. 33).
Ethnic bonds are related to
political and social projects;
instrumentally mobilized as a
means to gain material goals.
Primordialism vs. Instrumentalism (2)



Early modernization theory predicted that
modernization would break down people’s localised
ethnic identities and replace them with loyalties to
larger communities.
The resurgence/persistence of ethnic conflict seems to
challenge this.
Explanations for the persistence of ethnic conflict in a
modernizing world can often be divided into
primordialist and instrumentalist schools; Harff and
Gurr see constructivism as a third position (2004 chpt.
5, week 9 reading list).
Primordialism vs. Instrumentalism (3)



Scholars we might categorise as primordialists (to
some degree): Edward Shils, Clifford Geertz, Harold
Isaacs, Walker Connor.
Scholars we might categorise as constructivists (more
or less): Michael Hechter, Charles Tilly, Ernest Gellner,
Donald Horowitz, most feminist scholars of ethnicity.
Anthony Smith as an ethno-symbolist.
Primordialism vs. Instrumentalism (4)
Critique of primordialism



James McKay (1982) challenges implication that ethnic
identities are static and rejects ‘sense of primacy about
ethnicity’. Primordialists also don’t account for why ethnic
relations are peaceful in some instances but conflictual in others.
Horowitz (2002): primordialists ignore how ethnicity is formed
and causes, varieties of and solutions to conflict. Primordialists
focus on the nature of ethnic identification and don’t produce
detailed theories of ethnic conflict.
Primordialists don’t sufficiently distinguish between maintenance
of ingroup solidarity and cultivation of outgroup hostility;
between affirming identity and pursuing conflict (Horowitz
2002).
Primordialism vs. Instrumentalism (4)
Critique of instrumentalism




McKay (1982): approach has explanatory power for some
groups in some situations, but not for all.
McKay (1982): Humans struggle over ideals and values as well
as economic and political interests – cannot reduce all ethnic
disputes to economic disparities. (See Douglass 1988 too.)
Instrumentalism fails to understand the non-rational, ‘emotional
depth of national identity: the passions at either extreme end
of the hate-love continuum which the nation often inspires, and
the countless fanatical sacrifices which have been made in its
name’ (Connor 1994, see chpt. 8).
Ethnicity is not primordial but members experience it
primordially (Horowitz 2002).
Primordialism vs. Instrumentalism (6)
‘[E]thnic identity should perhaps rather be seen
as something that has roots in a group’s culture,
and historical experiences and traditions, but
that is also dependent upon contemporary
opportunities that can be a useful instrument for
mobilizing people for social, political, or
economic purposes that may or may not be
related directly to their ethnic origins’
(Wolff 2006, pp. 36-37).
History and Nature of Nationalism(s)
Primordialism vs. modernism



Primordialists focus on ancient and inherited social
practices as the source of authentic national community;
nations are seen to have ancient roots.
Modernists (e.g. Benedict Anderson, Ernest Gellner, Eric
Hobsbawm) view nations as specifically modern, the result
of political and economic developments in European
history, traced to last quarter of 18th century
(Enlightenment).
First conceptions of nationalism were primarily civic and
territorial; ethnic nationalism rose in importance in 19th
century (see Anthony Smith 2000 or 1998).
History and Nature of Nationalism(s) (2)
Civic nationalism
 Civic/territorial conceptions of
the nation ‘regard it as a
community of shared culture,
common laws, and territorial
citizenship’.

With civic nationalism
‘residence and political
participation in a public culture
tend[s] to determine citizenship
and membership of the nation’
(Smith 1993).
Ethnic or ethno-nationalism
 Ethnic conceptions of the nation
‘focus on the genealogy of its
members, however fictive; on
popular mobilization of “the
folk”; on native history and
customs; and on the vernacular
culture’ (Smith 1993).

Therefore, ethno-nationalism
involves the politicisation of
ethnicity and usually territorial
as well as political claims.
History and Nature of Nationalism(s) (3)




Anderson (1991): the nation as ‘an imagined political community –
and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign.’
Smith: agrees nationalism is a modern phenomenon yet stresses
‘ethnic origins’ of modern nations.
Yuval-Davis (1997): a sense of ‘common destiny’ is as important in
constructing nations as the myth of common origins. Nationalism is
‘Janus-faced’ (week 8 reading list).
Many different forms of nationalism: dominant/state; settler-state
(or settler-colonial); anti-colonial; post-colonial; indigenous;
linguistic (integrally connected to ethno-nationalism); revolutionary
socialist or communist nationalisms; etc.
History and Nature of Nationalism(s) (4)
The nation-state



Proposition that a nation should have self-government within the
same state; ‘assumes a complete correspondence between the
boundaries of the nation and the boundaries of those who live
in a specific state’ (Yuval-Davis 1997, p. 11).
BUT in most societies are people who aren’t members of the
hegemonic nation (in ethnic or civic terms); some members of
national collectivities live in other states; some nations have
never had a state.
Ethnic nation-states: Pierre van den Berghe (1990): less than
15% of contemporary states are nation-states and most are
micro-states. David Welsh (1993): less than 20 of approx. 180
contemporary states are ethnically homogeneous.
History and Nature of Nationalism(s) (5)
The nation-state
 Civic nation-states: requires difficult nation-building project.
Can have ethnic undertones that make minorities feel
excluded.


Talk of the ‘nation-state’ is usually uncritical. Effect of the
nation-state fiction has been ‘to naturalize the hegemony of
one collectivity and its access to the ideological apparatuses
of both state and civil society’ (Yuval-Davis 1997, p. 11).
So there are problems with both ethnic and civic
conceptualizations of the nation-state.
Summary

Different conceptual approaches to the study of ethnicity:
Primordialism: given and more or less immutable conception
of ethnicity; ethnicity (and nationalism) as a real and deeply
felt emotional bond; pushes it towards ideas of inevitable
ethnic and ethno-national conflict.
 Instrumentalism: social constructionist, recognises potential
for change in conceptions of ethnicity; ethnic conflict stems
from competition for material resources and perceived or
real deprivation; leaders stir up ethnic mobilization.


Arguably neither school of thought accurately captures the
entirety of processes of ethnic identification or fully
explains the varied elements of ethnic mobilization
towards conflict with the ‘other’.
Summary (2)



Modernist theorists of nationalism view nations as being a
result of specific 18th century political, economic and
ideological developments in Europe.
Primordialist sympathisers argue that even if the ideology
of nationalism is modern, nations as communities and
identities have existed for far longer and are largely
based on ethnicity.
Numerous different forms of nationalism and specific
variants in particular places and time periods, but a
significant overarching typology divides nationalism into
‘civic’ and ‘ethnic’ forms (though this is not unproblematic).