Miroslav Hroch The nation as the cradle of nationalism and patriotism
Why is having a positive relationship to one’s own nation nowadays always associated with the ‘extreme right’? If Marine Le Pen says that the EU harms the national interests of France, it is extreme-right nationalism; if Angela Merkel says that a strong EU is in the national interest of Germany, this is … what? When Montenegrins decided to expand their autonomy inside Serbia into independence, this was generally accepted, including by the EU. When the Scottish or Catalan parliament seeks to attain statehood for their nation through a referendum, this is condemned, also by the EU, as separatism and nationalism. When Helmuth Kohl negotiated the unification of the two German states, without asking the population for its opinion, this was celebrated, and still is, as the act of a patriotic statesman. Quod licet Jovi …? In the turbulence that has followed the Brexit decision, the migration crisis and the turnaround in Italy, a place could be found in the speeches of the German Chancellor and the French President to reflect on the difference between nationalism and patriotism. Is this a promising sign of a changing paradigm emerging, or merely a tactical manoeuvre? The nation is a specifically European phenomenon, and one of the main reasons for this is that it originally took shape (and to the present day still exists) in two interrelated senses – or in other terms, on two interrelated levels: on the level of a large social community that exists in reality (it is a ‘sociological fact’) and on the level of an abstract community of (shared) cultural values, i.e. as a specific cultural construct. This offers us a new and innovative approach or perspective from which to study the processes that led to the formation of modern European nations.
Why is having a positive relationship to one’s own nation nowadays always associated with the ‘extreme right’? If Marine Le Pen says that the EU harms the national interests of France, it is extreme-right nationalism; if Angela Merkel says that a strong EU is in the national interest of Germany, this is … what? When Montenegrins decided to expand their autonomy inside Serbia into independence, this was generally accepted, including by the EU. When the Scottish or Catalan parliament seeks to attain statehood for their nation through a referendum, this is condemned, also by the EU, as separatism and nationalism. When Helmuth Kohl negotiated the unification of the two German states, without asking the population for its opinion, this was celebrated, and still is, as the act of a patriotic statesman. Quod licet Jovi …? In the turbulence that has followed the Brexit decision, the migration crisis and the turnaround in Italy, a place could be found in the speeches of the German Chancellor and the French President to reflect on the difference between nationalism and patriotism. Is this a promising sign of a changing paradigm emerging, or merely a tactical manoeuvre? The nation is a specifically European phenomenon, and one of the main reasons for this is that it originally took shape (and to the present day still exists) in two interrelated senses – or in other terms, on two interrelated levels: on the level of a large social community that exists in reality (it is a ‘sociological fact’) and on the level of an abstract community of (shared) cultural values, i.e. as a specific cultural construct. This offers us a new and innovative approach or perspective from which to study the processes that led to the formation of modern European nations.
Why is having a positive relationship to one’s own nation nowadays always associated with the ‘extreme right’? If Marine Le Pen says that the EU harms the national interests of France, it is extreme-right nationalism; if Angela Merkel says that a strong EU is in the national interest of Germany, this is … what? When Montenegrins decided to expand their autonomy inside Serbia into independence, this was generally accepted, including by the EU. When the Scottish or Catalan parliament seeks to attain statehood for their nation through a referendum, this is condemned, also by the EU, as separatism and nationalism. When Helmuth Kohl negotiated the unification of the two German states, without asking the population for its opinion, this was celebrated, and still is, as the act of a patriotic statesman. Quod licet Jovi …? In the turbulence that has followed the Brexit decision, the migration crisis and the turnaround in Italy, a place could be found in the speeches of the German Chancellor and the French President to reflect on the difference between nationalism and patriotism. Is this a promising sign of a changing paradigm emerging, or merely a tactical manoeuvre? The nation is a specifically European phenomenon, and one of the main reasons for this is that it originally took shape (and to the present day still exists) in two interrelated senses – or in other terms, on two interrelated levels: on the level of a large social community that exists in reality (it is a ‘sociological fact’) and on the level of an abstract community of (shared) cultural values, i.e. as a specific cultural construct. This offers us a new and innovative approach or perspective from which to study the processes that led to the formation of modern European nations.
Why is having a positive relationship to one’s own nation nowadays always associated with the ‘extreme right’? If Marine Le Pen says that the EU harms the national interests of France, it is extreme-right nationalism; if Angela Merkel says that a strong EU is in the national interest of Germany, this is … what? When Montenegrins decided to expand their autonomy inside Serbia into independence, this was generally accepted, including by the EU. When the Scottish or Catalan parliament seeks to attain statehood for their nation through a referendum, this is condemned, also by the EU, as separatism and nationalism. When Helmuth Kohl negotiated the unification of the two German states, without asking the population for its opinion, this was celebrated, and still is, as the act of a patriotic statesman. Quod licet Jovi …? In the turbulence that has followed the Brexit decision, the migration crisis and the turnaround in Italy, a place could be found in the speeches of the German Chancellor and the French President to reflect on the difference between nationalism and patriotism. Is this a promising sign of a changing paradigm emerging, or merely a tactical manoeuvre? The nation is a specifically European phenomenon, and one of the main reasons for this is that it originally took shape (and to the present day still exists) in two interrelated senses – or in other terms, on two interrelated levels: on the level of a large social community that exists in reality (it is a ‘sociological fact’) and on the level of an abstract community of (shared) cultural values, i.e. as a specific cultural construct. This offers us a new and innovative approach or perspective from which to study the processes that led to the formation of modern European nations.