How to Approach Nationalism: Modernism, Ethnosymbolism, Everyday Nationalism

According to Özkirimli (2003), ethno-symbolism is not an internal critique and expansion of modernism d-according to which nations are modern constructions of the last two centuries and nationalism comes before nations-d, but "more an attempt to resuscitate nationalism rather than to explain it". He criticizes ethno-symbolism ideologically for its support to nationalism because of its search for an essentialist core of myths, symbols and memories; and methodically because of the search for a grand theory.

Özkirimli, Umut (2003) The nation as an artichoke? A critique of ethnosymbolist interpretations of nationalism, Nations and Nationalism, 9 (3), pp. 339-355

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Neo-traditionalism tries to accept the technical achievements and some of the methods of western science and rationalism without any of its underlying assumptions. Socially and politically, it utilizes modern methods of mobilising people but for traditionalist ends"--- 

"Assimilationists accept science and rationalism together with their associated modes of critical reflection, systematic observation and open argument. [...] To them, the modern West was the only worthwhile civilization." ---akpnin kemalizm eleştirisi

"Reformists do not completely reject all religious authority or cosmic theodicies, despite their commitment to critical rationalism and science. They are aware of the dual legitimation of God and man-made scientific state.  ". In order to reform and modernize the religion, they look for the beginning of the "real" and "pure" religion and in order to find it they reconsider their ethnic past. "Through a cultural ethnic nationalism, the dual legitimation can be overcome, and the ethnic community can regain its former faith and dignity in a rationalist world."

Smith, Anthony D. (1994) The Crisis of Dual Legitimation, Nationalism, John Hutchinson & Anthony D. Smith (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford/NY.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Turkey presents the clearest case of bureaucratic nationalism. The first Turk who separated nationalism from bureaucratic reform and treated it as an issue by itself was Ziya Gökalp (1875-1924)". According to Sugar (1994) until the second half of the 1930s there were no significant nationalistic manifestations free from bureaucratic sponsorship.

Sugar, Peter (1994)  Nationalism in Eastern Europe, Nationalism, John Hutchinson & Anthony D. Smith (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford/NY.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mazzinian phase of nationalism (1830-1870)/ Liberal Era: "every nation a state" and "only one state for the entire nation"

The nationalism of 1880-1914: 

1. no 'threshold principle' (no need for a certain size, population, resources, etc..)

2. ethnicity and language becomes central criteria

3. shift to the political right of nation and flag

Hroch's Periodization

Phase A: no political movement, populist cultural renaissance (under the influence of German romanticism)

Phase B: political agitation by activists in favor of the 'national idea'

Phase C:  mass support for the 'national idea'

Hobsbauwm, E. (1994) The Rise of Ethno-Linguistic Nationalisms, Nationalism, John Hutchinson & Anthony D. Smith (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford/NY.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If nationalism works through emotions, by controlling and manipulating emotions, then things which create emotions are one of the most important nationalistic tools. Non-regular, non-everyday life events (crisis) change the emotions of the people. Discourses, enunciations, images, music and movies create emotions. Monuments do not suppose to give historical information but certain feelings about a historical person or event, which continue to affect the individuals according to contemporary events. So, history is not used to legitimize present actions rationally but to produce affects/feelings for the masses, which will legitimize past, present, and future actions.