Nations+and+Nationalism+(Oxford+University+Press,+1983)

Summary by Annie Gillman Gellner offers an explanation of why nationalism has emerged and why it has come pervasive. His argument centers around the idea of the establishment of a modern “nation” (think group of homogenized, atomized, individuals who have shed their distinct local cultures, are literate, interchangeable) and a modern “state” (monopolizes legitimate violence, but also monitors and promotes the “high culture” of homogenizing education to which individuals aspire). Such elements are essential to, and emerge out of, the industrialized economy. Nationalism is the established conviction among those identifying themselves as part of this nation that the state and nation should be “congruent” with it—aka that political and national boundaries (physical and metaphorical) should align. Different combinations and permutations of three key variables (power holders, access to education, and heterogeneity of local cultures) determines how nationalism plays out in different contexts. · Nationalism = political principle that holds that and the national unit should be congruent. Nationalist sentiment occurs when this principle is violated (causing negative sentiment) or followed (causing satisfaction). · State= Uses Weber’s definition of monopoly over legitimate violence. While has not been true of all states, he argues, it is true of modern states. You have to have a state for nationalism: “The existence of politically centralized unites, and of moral-political climate in which such centralized units are taken for granted and are treated as normative is a necessary though by no means sufficient condition of nationalism.” In modern society the presence of the state is unavoidable because complexity of industrial societies and division of society within needed to organize. · Nation = Harder to define. Fact that nation seems so necessary is not a given, but rather an aspect of nationalism. He considers two theories for nation: a) a sharing of //culture//, as defined by system of ideas, signs, associations, and ways of communication; b) the recognition of being of the same nation, which causes loyalties and solidarities (he refers to this as //will//). Will and culture, however, both in themselves if used as definitions “bring in far too rich a catch,” as they would include things that we don’t define as nations. · Therefore he concludes: “Nations can be defined only in terms of the age of nationalism, rather than, as you might expect, the other way around….When general social conditions making for standardized, homogeneous, centrally sustained high cultures, pervading entire populations and not just elite minorities, a situation arise in which well-defined educationally sanctioned and unified cultures constitute very nearly the only kind of unit with which men willingly and often ardently identify.” These cultures then seem to be natural boundaries of political legitimacy, and incongruence with their boundaries and that of state “constitutes a scandal.” · Nations worship themselves (per Durkheim idea of religion) and call up pastoral ideals of rural, traditional cultures in doing so, when in fact, the very nature of the nation is a culture which is characterized by “anonymous, impersonal society with mutually substitutable atomized individuals.” · Typologies of nationalism: There are three categories of variables which, in different combinations and permutations, suggest the typologies of nationalism: 1) //power// relations, 2) access to //education// (high culture), 3)degree of //shared culture// (distinguished from high culture—in the anthropological, non normative sense of culture). You can mix these up and have different types of societies, for example, those in which the powerful have access to education and there is a monoculture, or those in which the educated are the powerless and there is more than one culture.  · He then goes on to describe why different combinations lead to different forms of nationalism (Silvia mentioned these typologies as not that important). African type, for example, is a case in which only powerful have access to high culture, and so powerless (which have their own local culture, but can’t access power and education), create their own state. There is also Western nationalism, in which case the powerless do have access to high culture, and therefore are educated and organized enough to easily create their own state without much conflict, and Eastern nationalism, where the powerless don’t have access to high culture, so even after they take control, they have to deal with the mess of diverse ethnic identities, kinships, etc that are the content of their local (anthropological sense) culture. · Diaspora nationalism occurs when you have a culturally ostracized group that takes on the specialized and potentially powerful occupations (such as finance). In traditional societies, this is no problem, because such groups can be kept down and as such do not constitute a threat to society. But once you have a move to industrial, division of labor, homogenized modern society, where interactions are rational, people are atomized and interchangeable, etc. these groups can in fact ascend to power. Consequentially, it’s likely that the powers that be will try to quash them and will rile up the uneducated majority culture members to do so (hence genocide). Members of the diaspora minority culture (the financiers, etc) are then either forced to assimilate, or must find some territory to create their own nation (aka Israel). · Nationalism is distinct from patriotism (which is not new in human history) in that the allegiance is to a group under certain characteristics of the modern world. In defining these conditions, homogeneity (culturally so, with everyone striving to be part of a high culture), literacy (with a n educational system that can keep a literate culture going), and anonymity (don’t have rigid internal subgroupings) are the key traits. · Ultimately, the economy is what necessitates the culture/state combo that is the core of nationalism. For the modern economy, you need mobility and communication between a large group of individuals, and that means that these individuals have to be literate, be fairly homogenous, etc. Also the economy needs a state that can monitor and monopolize legitimate high culture to which such individuals strive, at the same time it monopolizes the use of force
 * Ernest Gellner, __Nations and Nationalism__**