“Displaying ‘Turkish Culture’ to Audiences within and beyond Borders: An Ethnography of the State”
By Nese Karahasan

“Equal education, unequal identities: primary school children’s construction of identities and Taiwanese nationalism”
By Jessica Chang

Our most sincere apologies for the last minute change of the seminar date. Some students had a clash with a course on Tuesdays so seminars have been moved to Wednesdays. We hope that some of you will still be able to attend despite of the late announcement.

Link: https://twitter.com/#!/nationalismnews

Applicants should email the following information, along with a cover letter, to asen@lse.ac.uk by 15 May 2012:

–ASEN membership number

–CV

–1,000 word research proposal

–500 word statement explaining how the scholarship would contribute to your programme of research

–reference letter from your supervisor

Details at: http://www2.lse.ac.uk/researchAndExpertise/units/ASEN/Home.aspx

Rogers Brubaker is Professor of Sociology and UCLA Foundation Chair at the University of California, Los Angeles. His works include Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany (1992), Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe (1996), Nationalist Politics and Everyday Ethnicity in a Transylvanian Town (2006) and Ethnicity Without Groups (2004).

Notwithstanding this movement, the electoral prospects of the Socialist Party remained low in the pre-election polls and the conservative Popular Party (PP) entered the election campaign in a comfortable position. The PP’s election manifesto was rather ambiguous though, with no specific details about what economic measures they would implement if they won the electoral contest.

On the election day, the PP got an unquestionable victory with 44% of the popular vote and an overall majority of 186 MPs in the Spanish Parliament (350 seats). This will allow Mariano Rajoy, the conservative leader who had lost the last two general elections against Mr Zapatero, to have a comfortable position in the Spanish Parliament for the next four years. Although the victory of the conservatives was very clear, political analysts point out that the PP only got an extra half-a-million votes, whereas the PSOE lost almost four-and-a-half. Therefore, there is no clear voting transfer between the two parties and some analysts and politicians suggest that the election should not be understood as an overwhelming conservative victory, but rather as a catastrophe for the Socialists. Indeed, the PSOE got its worst result since the first democratic election in 1977, gathering only 110 seats (a loss of 59).

The PP’s victory (or the Socialists’ defeat) has followed a homogeneous pattern across Spain. The conservatives have won in all the Spanish Autonomous Communities, except in Catalonia and the Basque Country.

The PSOE had clearly won in both sub-state nations in 2008. Their good results were due to its agressive campaign against the PP, which is more centralist and Spanish nationalist in nature, so a majority of Basques and Catalans supported the PSOE, which was perceived as more willing to accept political decentralisation and Spain’s cultural diversity. However, this image did not save the Socialists from being punished by the two nations’ voters either, but instead of voting for the conservatives, a majority of the electorate supported Catalan and Basque nationalist political parties.

The victory of the Catalan nationalists of CiU (Convergència i Unió) was totally unexpected. The polls suggested that the Socialist would lose many votes in Catalonia, but none had shown a victory of CiU. Actually, it is the first time that the Socialists do not win a general election in Catalonia. CiU got 16 MPs and gathered 29% of the vote compared to the PSOE’s 14 seats and 26%. The result in Catalonia means a double victory for the centre-right nationalist party: they beat the Socialists in a general election for the first time, and CiU leading also the Catalan government, their budget cuts and austerity measures have received the backing of many Catalans. After this general election there is no doubt about who speaks for Catalonia: CiU won the Catalan election and the general election in Catalonia, and also they won in May the municipal election in Barcelona , the capital, and thus another victory of huge political significance.

The results in the Basque Country also diverged from the Spanish trend. The centre-right nationalist party, the PNV, won the general election with 27% of the vote and gathered 5 seats in the Basque Country. However, another Basque nationalist party, Amaiur, gathered 6 seats despite its 23% of the popular vote due to the effects of the electoral system. Amaiur is a left-wing Basque nationalist coalition of different parties, including members of the outlawed Batasuna, which had links with the separatist armed organisation ETA. After the abandonment of violence declared by ETA in October, the left-wing Basque nationalist coalition was allowed to take part in the election and ranked first, in number of seats, amongst all Basque political parties. The PSOE and the PP in the Basque lands got 21% and 17% of votes respectively.

The regional map of the election results shows what has been called a ‘blue tsunami’ of the Spanish conservative party. Two territories show a different colour, though, the Basque Country and Catalonia, where nationalist parties have clearly benefitted form the Socialist setback. Nationalist parties in both nations run for election raising demands for further constitutional change. The main proposal of the Catalan CiU was full fiscal autonomy for Catalonia; whereas the PNV aims to revise the constitutional status of the Basque Country and Amaiur claims the recognition of the self-determination right of the Basque people and pushes for independence. The election results strengthened the territorial claims of the Catalan and Basque nationalists, but also strengthened the PP in Madrid. The conservatives will probably not concede any of the demands presented by the nationalists on grounds of territorial homogeneity and equality amongst all Spaniards. However, the election results suggest that not all Spaniards are equal, at least on political preferences. If demands are not satisfied to some extent, we will probably see an escalade of territorial conflict in the years to come between the majority nation, which backed a centralist and Spanish nationalist party, and the two minority nations, which backed parties demanding further self-government and national recognition. In conclusion, then, a scenario of one state, three nations.

While the separatist movement in Québec is suffering from disunity and an historical collapse in the last federal elections, the SNP is getting closer to its goal of achieving independence.  We will need to wait and see if the support for the SNP will result in a yes vote in a referendum, but if it does, it will inevitably influence the whole movement in Québec.

As Daniel Turp, professor at the University of Montreal, says:

A Scottish referendum win “will inspire Quebec nationalists and be seen as a very strong precedent.  The achievement of independence will have occurred in a democratic setting similar to Canada. The precedent will even be more interesting if the United Kingdom accepts, without arguing about and challenging the 50-per-cent-plus-one threshold.”

The victory of a yes vote for an independent Scotland would therefore not only transform British politics, but would also open up new debates and discussions in Canadian politics.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/sovereignty+movements+Scotland+rises+while+Quebec+languishes/5702389/story.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-radio-and-tv-15520933

Where do you feel that you belong?

This book just out is based on papers given at the 2009 ASEN annual conference, provides a good current set of chapters on this topic, combining, theoretical, historical, and contemporary issue perspectives. Authors include: John A. Hall, Sarah Danielson, John Breuilly, John Hutchinson, Ronald Grigor Suny, Jonathan Hearn, Stephen Castles, Anthony D. Smith, Stephanie Lawson, and the editors.

Our seminar focuses mainly on Individualistic-civic vs. ethnic nationalism and the modern economy in a contemporary setting.

We have chosen three examples of nationalism in order to challenge and debate Greenfeld’s theory. Québec was chosen as an example because of its contemporary development of nationalism, and China was chosen because it does not necessarily comply with Greenfeld’s argument of nationalism co-existing with capitalism, what with the rise of technology.  The Canadian province is not completely ‘sovereign’ and it may be argued that China ideologically opposes capitalism, yet they experience an intensive nationalism.

1)   Does China contradict or challenge Greenfeld’s theories of Nationalism? How so?

2)   How does digital capitalism, that goes beyond the conventional boundaries of nationalism, challenge Greenfield’s theory of specific physical boundaries?

3)   Historically, Quebec has seen examples of both ethnic nationalism (Prior to the Quiet Revolution in the 1960s, the province’s natural resources were mainly developed by foreign investors or the English-Canadian minority) and individualistic nationalism. Based on Greenfeld’s definitions of ‘ethnic’, do you believe that Quebec embodies civic, individualistic nationalism or ethnic nationalism?

4)   Would Greenfeld feel that Quebec is a good example of a ‘nation’, even though it is not fully sovereign?

An exploration of Greenfeld’s thesis in terms of how it relates to America is described within ‘Spirit of Capitalism: nationalism and economic growth’. Greenfeld states:  ”the modern consciousness is a product of the dynamics of American society, in turn shaped by the singular characteristics of American nationalism”. To Greenfeld, the United States is the ideal case study for her ‘nationalism leads to capitalism’ theory because she sees the USA as the natural heirs to the original nationalism that developed in England.

5) Does Greenfeld’s argument make sense when it comes to the United States? Did economic competition, resulting from national pride, lead to the USA’s contemporary position; or, can we reverse this and ask if the origins of the USA’s capitalism lie in the rejection of English nationalism in the 18th century as they worked to boost the economy of the colonies, leading to the desire for independence, which in turn lead to nationalist feeling?

6)  If groupings of nations like the European Union become more commonplace, do you think that this will lead to economic stagnation, as the number of disinfect bodies competing is reduced? Or do you think that cohesive and coherent groups of nations will be able to compete effectively with nations such as the USA who Greenfeld does not think need to combine forces to dominate the market?

5)   How do two examples that do not perfectly fit Greenfield’s theories compare to Greenfield’s own example of the USA as one of the ‘five roads to modernity’?
….
Last but not least,
Group Five!