The formation of group identity:

Ethnicity and nationalism – appreciating

particularities and appeasing collectives

Lecture for the MA course:

“Ethnic Challenges to the Nation-State:
Studying State Responses from a Human Rights Perspective”
Kjetil Tronvoll, NCHR, 22 August 2005

Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

1
What is a collective identity?
 A collective is not a given ‘pre-existing’ category
 It is a symbolic representation of ‘commonness’ among a group of
people, in contrast to other collectives
 The boundaries are flexible and constantly reproduced through social
interaction
 Since they are symbolic representations, their appearance are
multivocal
 They are generated through perceived aspects of shared knowledge and
recognised social routines (‘common’ behaviour and institutions)
 They appear self-ascribed or ascribed by others
 It is a relevant and meaningful category for its members
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

2
Collective identities: primordial or instrumental?
 Are ethnicity and nationalism (collective identities) an
intrinsic, primordial aspect of human existence and self-
consciousness? Are identities somehow clearly definable and
demarcated? Are they basically unchanging and unchangeable
in the fundamental demands they make on individuals and in
the bonds they create and sustain between the individual and
his/her group?
 Or are ethnicity and nationalism to whatever extent defined
situationally and contextual? Being strategically and tactically
manipulative? Do they have the quality of being capable of
change at both the individual and collective level?
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

3
 Primordialist vs. instrumentalist/constructivist
 Primordialist: identity as something intrinsic and inherent (importance of
blood and descent, religion and language, custom and culture) → static,
non-changing perception of identity
 Neo-primordialism: ethnic consciousness is only realised when the group is
threatened (culturally, politically, socially) by external forces (the fundament of
right to self-determination?) (Comaroff 1996)

 Instrumentalist/constructivist: identity as a created sentiment, based on

social, political and cultural resources → flexible, manipulative, processual,
multivocal, ever-changing perception of identity
 Realist perspective: ‘objective’ interest underpin collective identities
 Cultural constructionism: formation of groups as a function of shared ‘culture’
 Political constructionism: elite-driven hegemonic production of ‘culture’
(Comaroff 1996)
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

4
What is ethnicity?

 “Ethnicity is an aspect of social relationship between agents

who consider themselves as culturally distinctive from
members of other groups with whom they have a minimum
of regular interaction” (Eriksen, 2002: 12)
 I.e.:
 it is an aspect of social relationship, not a cultural
‘entity’ in itself;
 it is relational;
 it makes cultural differences relevant in communication;
 it requires social interaction with ‘others’
 it is contextually influenced
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

5
Understanding ethnic boundaries
 Fredrik Barth’ seminal work Ethnic group and boundaries
(1969)
 Ethnicity as a form of social organisation, not an aspect of
culture
 Focus on boundary mechanism which upholds the ethnic
group, not the ‘cultural stuff it encloses’
 Allows for self-ascription of identity and ascription by
others
 Shifting from a static to an relational and processual
approach
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

6
Ethnic boundary ‘maintenance’
 The ethnic boundary markers define the difference between
groups (customs, traits, language, political ideas)
 The boundary markers may change through time and
according to context (some markers emphasised vs. one
group, different markers emphasised vs. another): what is
made relevant? (Barth)
 Who defines culture/markers, for which purpose (power)?
 The groups ‘culture’ and social organisation may change
without removing/changing the ethnic boundary markers
 Cultural differences relate to ethnicity if, and only if, such
differences are made relevant in social interaction (Eriksen)
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

7
Ethnic boundary transcendence
 Ethnic boundaries are not necessary territorial boundaries,
but social ones
 There is a continuous flow of information, interaction,
exchange and even people across them
 People may change ethnic identity, individually or
collectively (intermarriage/cultural adoption,
economic/production strategies, escape social stigma,
political pragmatism, etc)
 Boundaries connect, as well as distinguishes

Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

8
Ethnicity as political organisation
 “Ethnicity is fundamentally a political phenomenon, as the symbols of
the traditional culture are used as mechanisms for the articulation of
political alignments” (A. Cohen, 1974)
 Dual capacity of ethnicity:
 Manipulated from the outside to create ethnic antagonism and
schism
 May also serve as a residual category for people to mobilise behind
from within
 Ethnicity is a social organisation which might be used as mobilising
force, since it simultaneously may serve political ends and satisfy
psychological needs for belongingness
 The ethnic group as a political actor is a product of the situation, not of
history → concerns for future prospects, not past grievances.
 A political strategy to achieve collectively what one cannot obtain
individually Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

9
Ethnic mobilisation
 A political issue, conflict or race for natural resources, does
not in itself produce ‘ethnicity’
 An idea of common identity is inspired by and rooted in
several factors, invented or real:
 The appropriation of shared history (Tonkin)

 Creation of common myths of origin (Hoskins)

 Idea of a chosen people (Smith)

 Nurturing the image of ‘historical’ enemies

Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

10
Ethnicity and the state
 “The concept of ethnicity … is most useful when used as a label
for a dimension of the identity formation process in a single
political unit, most specifically the nation-sate” (Williams, 1989)
 Ethnicity is a product of state formation, not the other way around,
i.e. heterogeneity precedes homogeneity (Wilmsen)
 Ethnicity as a response to state intervention/imposition; strategy to
achieve collectively what one could not achieve individually
 It is in contexts of imposed assimilation and simultaneous
discrimination followed by a process of mobilisation, that an
ethnic discourse, and a leadership, emerges
 A minority group does not exist without a state
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

11
Ethnicity from below, and above
1) Ethnic boundaries of identity have referents to personal
consciousness, social interaction and cultural symbolism: i.e. they are
contestable and multivocal (Anthony Cohen, 1994)
2) Ethnicity is also a collective expression of identify formation related
to a hierarchical political system/state. Ethnicity has its origin in
inequality (Comaroff, 1996)
3) Ethnicity is constructed in routine, everyday social interaction where
relevant cultural differences are communicated (Barth and Comaroff)
4) Once ethnic identities/boundaries are constructed and objectified, their
manifestations have a salient impact on the members of the group
(Comaroff)
5) The conditions that give rise to ethnogenesis, are not necessarily the
same as those that sustain it (Comaroff)
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

12
Nationalism: in defence of the state
 Globalisation challenges the politico-ideological foundation of
nationalism (Comaroff 1996; Keating/McGarry 2001)
 Growth of trans-national institutions, movements and diasporas
 Weakening of the nation-state
 Rise of a new politics of identity and difference

 What is nationalism?
 Ethnicity writ large and adapted to the state: “Nationalism is a theory
of political legitimacy, which requires that ethnic boundaries should
not cut across political ones” (Gellner 1983); or
 Nationalism/nation: is an imagined political community and
imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign” (Anderson 1991)
 A process to establish the ideological justification of the state
(Eriksen 1993/2002)
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

13
Nationalism in practice

 Try to make ethnicity and other sub- and supra national

identities irrelevant (regionalism, religion, etc)
 Establish/re-establish the state’s hegemony and authority
over its citizenry (political and territorial control, etc)
 The state must be relevant to its citizens (service delivery,
sentimental attachment → “imagined community”, etc)
 Manifestation of its geographical borders
 Be prepared to use violence to defend the “nation”

Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

14
 Two types of contemporary nationalism (Comaroff)
1) Ethno-nationalism: the ideology of uniting an ethno-cultural group
with territory by way of genealogy. I.e. one dominating ethnic group
defines the national content (Smith 1991). Emphasis on cultural
particularism; membership by ascription; ‘trans-national’ character.
2) Euronationalism: an ideology that promotes a secular state founded on
universalist principles of citizenship and social contract. Emphasis on
heroic origin, historical continuity, not ethnic basis, politico-territorial
community.

“From the perspective of Euronationalism, all ethninationalism appear

primitive, irrational, magical, and above all, threatening; in the eyes of
ethnonationalism – which appears perfectly rational from within –
Euronationalism remains inherently colonising, lacking in humanity, and bereft
of social conscience” (Comaroff 1996) Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

15
 … and the third

 Heteronationalism: a synthesis that seeks to integrate ethno-

national identity politics within a euronationalist
understanding of political community.
 “Its objective is to accommodate cultural diversity within a
civil society composed of autonomous citizens … equal and
undifferentiated before the law.” It promotes the rights to
difference, understood as multiculturalism (Comaroff 1996)

Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

16
Positioning the 3 theories of nationalism
 Ethno-nationalism: primordial attachments gives validity
and justifies claims to ethnic self-determination
 Heteronationalism: also based on primordial group
sentiments but recognises individual rights -
multiculturalism; rationalised and explained by
neoprimordial instrumentalism; self-determination
 Euronationalism: relies on heroic human agency, justified
by constructionism: emphasises individual rights and equal
citizenship privileges

Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

17
Understanding collectives
 Boundaries both distinguish and connect collectives
 Must distinguish between the cognitive premises that construct the
boundary – by what might be called acts of imposition – and the
sociology of people living and acting around that boundary and
thereby shaping an outcome (Barth 2000)
 Boundaries are multivocal symbolic expressions, thus individually
perceived based on personal experience and cognition
(Barth/Anthony Cohen 200)
 Whose boundaries?
 Boundaries of identity are amorphous and ambiguous
 Thus must be infused with symbolic content to create collective
distinctions
Kjetil Tronvoll
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights
University of Oslo

18