Primordialism Essay

“The existing nationalism literature is a conceptual labyrinth characterized by questionable instruments, lack of empirical data, and poor explanatory power”

Compare and contrast the nature and meaning of nationalism by focusing on the main theoretical approaches that define the literature on nationalism: Primordialist, Situationalist, Constructivist.

The nature and meaning of the term ‘nationalism’ has many different facets and dimensions. At times, deconstructing the different theoretical literature can become confusing and complicated process. These ambiguities arise from the different meanings scholars attribute to the term, while also the nature and meaning of nationalism is constantly being contested. To Primordialists, the *path to nationalism

This creates debates about which factors scholars should focus on for any given form of nationalism. Should scholars take a primordialist approach and focus on kinship ties, myths of ancestry, and instinctual loyalty? Or, should scholars take a situationalist approach focus upon changing economic and political factors which influence the rational decisions of individuals? Or, should scholars study nationalism as an ideology and explain the role of the state as an ideological enforcer and the role nationalism plays in securing the insecure masses? In certain cases people may think it is adequate to take all of the separate theories into considerations, mixing primordialist ideas of instinctual loyalty and myths of homeland with constructivist ideas of constructed national identity. Others argue that it is necessary to not combine the three separate approaches but to study each one to attempt to figure out which one can provide the deeper understanding. This means that when analyzing nationalism, the frameworks for nationalism are always being compared and contrasted to figure out which one can offer a better and deeper understanding; alluding to nationalist theories having different utilities in separate situations. However, when discussions of nationalism mix primordialist ideas of instinctual loyalty, situationalist ideas of rational interest and constructivist ideas

Arguably neither are satisfactory in providing a complete explanation so it is necessary to combine both approaches for increased explanatory power. Conner (1994) offers a primordialist view of identity as evolving from history and myth of a common homeland, or ‘a group of people who believe they are ancestrally related” (cite) This belief arises from psychological and emotional attachments developed through a mutual culture, language or religion. This idea that identity is manifested from a group that believe they are ancestrally related arises from the inability of many primordialist claims to depict an actual origin or trace back their roots with certainty. This leads to the rise of myths of common ancestry or homeland. Other primordialists believe that identity is innate, or a ‘given’, prescribed by birth through blood ties or kinship bonds, while it can also be attained though mutual culture, religion, and language. (cite) This biological and psychological attachment form the ethnic core and is the basis of nation identity These views of identity through the primordialist lens is that it is fixed once given, which also acts to strengthen the primordial bond between the organic community. This also suggests that ethnic identity forms the core for national identity, and cannot be separated. This means that