Conceptual framework Diagram for national stability.
[Ethno-symbolism suggest that it is possible for a Nation to reach back to the myths,structures and memories of a pre-modern era[ethnic nations] in order to (re)construct, (re)invigorate, or transform this communities into the modern phenomenon of the nation.-Using diversity & ethnicity as a tool of nation building by harnessing its enduring power.]
Recent general theory has looked at underlying issues, and above all the question of which came first, Nation(states) or Ethnic Nations(ethnic nationalism). Nationalist(ethnic) activists see themselves as representing a pre-existing nation, and “Primordialism” theory of nationalism agrees. It sees nations, or at least ethnic groups, as a social reality dating back twenty thousand years.The modernist theories imply that until around 1800, almost no-one had more than local loyalties.
National identity and unity were originally imposed from above, by European states, because they were necessary to modernization economy and society. In this theory, nationalist conflicts are an unintended side-effect. For example, Ernest Gellner argued that nations are a by-product of Industrialization. Modernization theorists see such things as the printing press and capitalism as necessary conditions for nationalism. Unfortunately, this theory falls short of addressing all nationalist efforts, including the Flemings repulsion of the French in the 14th century, or any nationalist efforts against empires before 1800.Anthony D. Smith, typically following the Hegelian dialectic of thesis/antithesis/synthesis, proposed a synthesis of primordialist and modernist views, now commonly referred to as an ethno-symbolist approach.
According to Smith, the preconditions for the formation of a nation are as follows:A fixed homeland (current or historical),High autonomy,Hostile surroundings,Memories of battles,Sacred centers,Languages and scripts,Special customs,Historical records and thinking Those preconditions may create powerful common mythology Therefore, the mythic homeland is in reality more important for the national identity than the actual territory occupied by the nation.Smith also posits that nations are formed through the inclusion of the whole populace (not just elites), constitution of legal and political institutions, nationalist ideology, international recognition and drawing up of borders. Ethno-symbolism suggest that some nations reach back to the myths and memories of a pre-modern era in order to (re)construct, (re)invigorate, or transform this community into the modern phenomenon of the nation. Other nations, competing for legitimacy and prestige with these ‘pre-modern’ nations may seek to demonstrate their claims of political, social, cultural, etc.legitimacy and authenticity through a process that requires extensive processes of
In order to complete their transformation into a nation. The repertoire of this shared ethnic past can stem from the ethnic group or ethnie.An ethnie is defined as ‘a named human population with shared ancestry, myths, histories and culture, having an association with a specific territory and a sense of solidarity.In this argument, the core of ethnicity –the ‘myth-symbol complex’ and the mythomoteur –diffuses the myths, memories and symbols of the group contemporarily through the ethnic group and across generations,preserving and maintaining the form of the group, and the content of its identity over the longue-durée – i.e. those myths, symbols, values and memories that make the ethnie distinct and separate.
This begs the question: does antiquity vs. modern elite (re) creation have any bearing on the everyday character of the nation’s existence or its subsequent impact on identity and political behaviour? At first glance the variety of deeply felt ‘modern’and ‘pre-modern’ identities suggests that actual legitimacy of historical pedigree has little to do with the way that nations are ‘performed’ in everyday life, and that such distinctions have little or no impact on their potential as bases for political behaviour.While national myths, memories and symbols may potentially persist, this does not denote an historical or factual continuity in the content of the myths, memories and symbols of the nation. Despite the myriad of explanations of the nation and nationalism, the unifying factor of all explanations of nationalism lies in its popular resonance and what is popularly perceived as the nation’s salience in decoding everyday life. Decoding is not least a function of familiarity. Myths, memories and symbols of the nation must constitute a resonant and familiar repertoire. Repertoires are the ensemble forms of political action which constitute the means of agitation for a social movement, such as the creation of special-purpose associations andcoalitions, public meetings, processions, rallies, demonstrations, pamphleteering, etc. Such repertoires ‘convey the idea that participants in public claim-making adopt scripts they have performed, or at least observed before.’The ‘repertoires’ of a nation’s myths, memories and symbols are held, performed and understood to varying degrees by members of the nation.
The everyday practice of nation depends on the popular performance of trust and interdependence between co-nationals[co-nationals being different ethnic groups].This is apparent in examples such as the creation of publicly recognised associations, pursuit of friendship, kinship and shared beliefs, the securing of high risk enterprises in these sorts of relationships and associations, seeking and trusting government registration of vital events, and purchasing of government securities with funds otherwise committed to maintain interpersonal ties, etc. All of which require an anchoring of the atomised citizen withinthe rhetoric of the collective, and these are all found in the social transactions of co-nationals.