SvetozarStojanovi6
Institutefor Philosophyand SocialTheory
Belgrade,Yugoslavia
uDK342.l
Originalninaudnirad
NATION,NATIONALISMAND CITIZENISM
Abstract: From among ,,family resemblance" -based groups called nations
it is ltossible to isolate two opposite ,,ideal types" . One is the statc-tcffitorial l)/re,
the ot her the crtltural-ethnic r1,;;e.
The meaning of ,,ruttionalism" can best be seen in situation of conflici of
national claims . Thus I define nationalism as lavoring onc nation ovcr anothcr in
such a conflicl Depending on whether rftls favoring takes place ( I ) when both
nations are cqually cntitled to their claims or (2) when the former is lcss entitled rcr
its claim than the latter, two kintls of nationalism should he clearly distinguished. It
is only the second sense that oug,ht to be evaluated ncgativcly. It is typicalJbr
nationalists in the negative sense to apply doublc standards and thcrcby violate thc
ethical requircment of universalization.
DistingtLishing behpeen two kinds of nationalism in a nation vis-i-vis othcr
nation(s) context should be extended within nations themselves. There, positive
nationalism becomes negative when co-national.t are required to subordinate all o|
their identitie.s, interests, rights,vaLues, goals, ideals, and standards to those ofthe
nation, and in the extreme case are called upon to completely suhmerge themselves
into the nation. Instead of being open, inclttsive, voluntary,flexible, dynam.ic, and
complex, such a national identity is closed, exclusive, compulsive, rigitl, stutic, and
simple.
infte statc-tcrritorial concept oJ nation may also be termed citizenist (or
civic), since it encompassesall citizens oJ a country. Because massive cultural-othnic
nationelisms acted as an important generator of the tragecly of SFRY and FRY,
some critics mistakenly believe that a citizenist (or civic) attitude and practice isby
dcllnition immune to the negative nationalist temptation. Such a naivetd prompted
me some years ago to coin the term ,,citizenism" . A democratic state is obliged to
treat all ofits citiz.en.sequally regardless of their cultural-ethnic nationality. Undoubtedly, the citizenist (civic) principle of ,,one citiz.en-one vote" stands as an
immense achievement of modern civiliiation-indeed,
without it denocracy is not
ltossible. Yet realization of this principle is not in itselJ'a sfficient warrant against
the dominution of one culturul-ethnic nution over other such nutions or its neglect
ancl even discrimination against it. When this lnppens, tlrc principle of citizenship
in the positive sense tltrns into its opltosite, citizcnist nationalism (nationalist citizenism).
Shallow cartography and cartoanalysis is most oJien motivated by the citizenist viewpoinl" the practice and imageology (my coinage definetl in the text) tfutt
neglects,forgets, sL.ppresses,and conceals cultural-cthnic national divisions . I plead
for a netv, in-dcpth cartography and cartoanalysis. Multi-layered maps shoultl be
X
F
a
l
(r
o
TL
N
J
u
IJ
genocid'
made, reflecling linguistic' ethnic' religior'ts,cttltural' economic' military'
reasons politics
a\... .setJiments. Shallow cattography ctntl cartoanalysis is one of the
tentls to be rettctive ruthcr than prevenltve'
Key words: Nation, nationalism, citizen, citizenism' religi'tn' imugeology'
Yttsosl(lvia, Tito, tlSA' Germany, NATO '
l.What is nation?
and sfficient idenattemptsto establishnecessary
Persistent
(,,genusproxgroups
tffiers(,differentiaspecifica")for largesocial
was
arguedthat
imum") calleclnationshavefailed. Most often it
nationsare distinguishedfrom each other by language,religion,
ethnic descent,state,territory, history, tradition,custom,values'
symbols....It is easyto comeup with examplesthat discreditsuch
attempts.Serbs,CroatsandBosniaandHerzegovinaMuslims,for
example,are three separatenationsdespitesharedlanguageand
commonSlavicdescent.Russians,Bulgarians,Greeks,Romanians,
areEasternOrthodoxChristians
Armenians.Serbs,Macedonians...
(exceptfor the atheistsand reiigious agnostics),yet they are undoubtedlydifferent nations.For centuries,Jews had no stateof
their own, yet hardly anyonedisputedtheir nationaldistinctness.
After all, eventoday, an overwhelmingmajority of nationalgroups
do not have their own state.Finally, nations thatrcoincidewith
citizenship,such as the U.S., are to be found orily in a smaller
portionof the world.
I believethat in the category,,nation"we can includeonly
such large social groupsthat share,to borrow a Wittgensteinian
ratherthanthosethat share"necessary
term,,,familyresemblance"
and sufficient identifiers". Self identificationas membersof the
group-throughthe feeling of belonging and attachmentto that hlsits own name andexperienceas a
=
.
r) torically continuousgroupwith
z
(but not sufficient)idencommunity-isthe only necessary
separate
o
tifier.
ts
a
groupsit is
From amongthese,,familyresemblance"-based
E
possibleto isolatetwo opposite,,idealtypes". One would be the
o
F
itete-territoriattype,the other the cultural-ethnictype. Reality,of
LU
a
course,doesnot coincidewholly with thesetypes.Thus,for example,
even two very different notions of nation, American (stateoverlapto somedegree.
tenitorial) andGerman(cultural-ethnic),
N
l4
Languageas a typical identifierof the cultural-ethnicnation
one too. In order
servesan importantfunctionin the state-territorial
for immigrantsto becomeUnited Statescitizens,and thus Americans,they mustdemonstrateat leastelementaryknowledgeof the
English language.In addition to language,similar nationalintegrativefunction is performedby socializationand education
basedon U.S. history, its traditions,customs,values,symbols.
Another similarity with the cultural-ethnictype of nation is the
growing tendencyof Americans to stresstheir specificities as
African-American,Mexican-American,Polish-American,JapaneItalian-American,etc.
se-American,
Germans(and the nationsof Central,East and South-East
Europeunder their considerableinfluence)developeda cultural-'
ethnicconceptof nation. This doesnot mean,however,that they
do not recognizethat the territorial statehas a great, sometimes
evendecisive,role in constitutingandpreservingnationalidentity
andcontinuity.
I saycultur a/-ethnic nationratherthan ethnic- clltural nation
becausecommonethnic descentis much more of a fiction than is
sharedculture.Indeed,what is the likelihood that a nation (unless
it haslong existedin complete,uninterruptedisolationfrom other
nations) is actually descendedfrom the same ancestorseven a
dozengenerations
back,let alonelonger?How much ,,shared
blood,,
do ordinary Germanshave with their former monarchsand nobles?
Isn't this skepticismregardingcommonethnic genealogyjustified
alsoin the caseof the Serbsandtheir dynasties?(After all, petarII
Karadjordjevicand his two brotherswere born of a Romanian
mother.)
Both describedconceptsof nation,the state-territorialand
the cultural-ethnicones,are sociogenetic,historical and realistic.
Thepurely ethnicconceptof natiogenesis,
on the contrary,has a
biogenetic,ahistoricaland mythical character(this illusion of the
nationasa,,communityof bloodandsoil" hasoftenled to genocide).
So, is nation a constructor is it a Riven?At one end are
thosewho deconstructnation,claimingit is merely an ,,imagined,,
or even ,,artificial"community.Othersdeterministicallyproclaim
it to be a communityfully givenby nature,fate,history (andsometimesevenGod).My positionis somewhatcloserto constructivism.
Fortunately,this is a false dilemma, for nations are historically
constructedandbuilt, not in an entirelyarbitrarvmanner.and cer-
X
F
*t
l
(I
o
uN
Lr
l5
genocid'
made, reflecling linguistic' ethnic' religior'ts,cttltural' economic' military'
reasons politics
a\... .setJiments. Shallow cattography ctntl cartoanalysis is one of the
tentls to be rettctive ruthcr than prevenltve'
Key words: Nation, nationalism, citizen, citizenism' religi'tn' imugeology'
Yttsosl(lvia, Tito, tlSA' Germany, NATO '
l.What is nation?
and sfficient idenattemptsto establishnecessary
Persistent
(,,genusproxgroups
tffiers(,differentiaspecifica")for largesocial
was
arguedthat
imum") calleclnationshavefailed. Most often it
nationsare distinguishedfrom each other by language,religion,
ethnic descent,state,territory, history, tradition,custom,values'
symbols....It is easyto comeup with examplesthat discreditsuch
attempts.Serbs,CroatsandBosniaandHerzegovinaMuslims,for
example,are three separatenationsdespitesharedlanguageand
commonSlavicdescent.Russians,Bulgarians,Greeks,Romanians,
areEasternOrthodoxChristians
Armenians.Serbs,Macedonians...
(exceptfor the atheistsand reiigious agnostics),yet they are undoubtedlydifferent nations.For centuries,Jews had no stateof
their own, yet hardly anyonedisputedtheir nationaldistinctness.
After all, eventoday, an overwhelmingmajority of nationalgroups
do not have their own state.Finally, nations thatrcoincidewith
citizenship,such as the U.S., are to be found orily in a smaller
portionof the world.
I believethat in the category,,nation"we can includeonly
such large social groupsthat share,to borrow a Wittgensteinian
ratherthanthosethat share"necessary
term,,,familyresemblance"
and sufficient identifiers". Self identificationas membersof the
group-throughthe feeling of belonging and attachmentto that hlsits own name andexperienceas a
=
.
r) torically continuousgroupwith
z
(but not sufficient)idencommunity-isthe only necessary
separate
o
tifier.
ts
a
groupsit is
From amongthese,,familyresemblance"-based
E
possibleto isolatetwo opposite,,idealtypes". One would be the
o
F
itete-territoriattype,the other the cultural-ethnictype. Reality,of
LU
a
course,doesnot coincidewholly with thesetypes.Thus,for example,
even two very different notions of nation, American (stateoverlapto somedegree.
tenitorial) andGerman(cultural-ethnic),
N
l4
Languageas a typical identifierof the cultural-ethnicnation
one too. In order
servesan importantfunctionin the state-territorial
for immigrantsto becomeUnited Statescitizens,and thus Americans,they mustdemonstrateat leastelementaryknowledgeof the
English language.In addition to language,similar nationalintegrativefunction is performedby socializationand education
basedon U.S. history, its traditions,customs,values,symbols.
Another similarity with the cultural-ethnictype of nation is the
growing tendencyof Americans to stresstheir specificities as
African-American,Mexican-American,Polish-American,JapaneItalian-American,etc.
se-American,
Germans(and the nationsof Central,East and South-East
Europeunder their considerableinfluence)developeda cultural-'
ethnicconceptof nation. This doesnot mean,however,that they
do not recognizethat the territorial statehas a great, sometimes
evendecisive,role in constitutingandpreservingnationalidentity
andcontinuity.
I saycultur a/-ethnic nationratherthan ethnic- clltural nation
becausecommonethnic descentis much more of a fiction than is
sharedculture.Indeed,what is the likelihood that a nation (unless
it haslong existedin complete,uninterruptedisolationfrom other
nations) is actually descendedfrom the same ancestorseven a
dozengenerations
back,let alonelonger?How much ,,shared
blood,,
do ordinary Germanshave with their former monarchsand nobles?
Isn't this skepticismregardingcommonethnic genealogyjustified
alsoin the caseof the Serbsandtheir dynasties?(After all, petarII
Karadjordjevicand his two brotherswere born of a Romanian
mother.)
Both describedconceptsof nation,the state-territorialand
the cultural-ethnicones,are sociogenetic,historical and realistic.
Thepurely ethnicconceptof natiogenesis,
on the contrary,has a
biogenetic,ahistoricaland mythical character(this illusion of the
nationasa,,communityof bloodandsoil" hasoftenled to genocide).
So, is nation a constructor is it a Riven?At one end are
thosewho deconstructnation,claimingit is merely an ,,imagined,,
or even ,,artificial"community.Othersdeterministicallyproclaim
it to be a communityfully givenby nature,fate,history (andsometimesevenGod).My positionis somewhatcloserto constructivism.
Fortunately,this is a false dilemma, for nations are historically
constructedandbuilt, not in an entirelyarbitrarvmanner.and cer-
X
F
*t
l
(I
o
uN
Lr
l5
tainly notex nihitobat ratherfrom given materialsthat havegrown
overtime into their specificfeatures.To use,mutatismt'fiandis,
Marx's insight about history from the l8' Brumaire of Louis
Bonaparte'.Peoplemake their own nation,but not after their own
of their own choosing,but rather
will and not in the circumstances
they happento find that are given
in the immediatecircumstances
and inherited.From the fact that somebodywas accidentallyborn
to his/herparticularfamily and not someother-and consequently
into a particular nationalmilieu-in no way follows that he/she
will relateto it casually.Schooland the wider socialenvironment
will still further socialize,educateand culturatehim/her into his
nation. Only as an adult will a personperhapsbe in a position
critically to evaluate(or re-evaluate)and define (or redefine)his/her
givennationalframework.
2. Some thoughts on the relation between nation
and monotheistic r eli gions
il
z
o
a
(E
N
o
tll
a
16
OftentimesJudaism,Christianityand Islam aremajor componentsof nationalidentities.As such,they offer not only adirect
guqrenteeof individualimmortalitybut alsostrengthiranscendent
en that guaranteeforthosewho belongto nationalcommunities'
The conversion(real or self-styled)of qqitq a number of
communistatheistsand agnosticsinto self-declaredreligiousbelievers,and communistinternationalistsinto ardentadherentsof
their particularnationsis intriguing.
havecomparedthe communismof the
Many commentators
revolutionarystagewith early Christianity,evenclassifiedit as a
form of religiosity.The role of God, of course,was supplantedby
a perfectFuture,for which many lives were sacrificed.The early
communistshad no illusion that they themselveswould live to see
the classlesssociety,but they believedthey would still be part of it
in somemoral and spiritualfashion.The similarity with christian
Unlike Christianity,however,
faith in this regardis unmistakable.
refcommunismdid not havea genuinemetaphysical-transcendent
one
than
more
to
erencepoint, thereforeit could not be transmitted
communism
sustain
The efforts to
or two successivegenerations.
as a sort of quasi-religionby sanctifyingthe embalmedbodiesof
did not carryoverto new genercommunistleadersin mausoleums
ations.
in the life of JosipBroz Tito are also
Somemetamorphoses
instructive.As he aged and was intimately faced with the inevreligiousand nationallayers
itability of death,some,,undesirable"
protrudedfrom the depthsof his youth.In 1953,after the burial of
Boris Kidric, one of their Politbureaucomrades,Milovan Diilas
complainedto Tito that ,,Afterdeaththereis nothing...Tito snapped
back:,,How do you know thereis nothing!" Wasn't this an agnosdc-even a believer-suddenlybreakingthroughandspeakingfrom
the mouth of a pronouncedatheist?Was this the reasonwhy Tito
orderedthathis gravestonenot be adornedwith the usualcommunistatheistsymbols?Could this possiblyhad somethingto do with
Tito's nationalself-identificationas a croat in 1964,after calline
himselfa Yugoslavfor at leasttheprevioustwentyyears?Drawin!
closeto the end of his life he publicly boastedthat he neversisned
a singledeathsentence.
The real truth,of course,was the oppo"site:
not only did he order individual deathsentences,
he broueht into
beingan entiresystemof massexecutionsduring WWII uid
"u"n
moreaftertakingpower.True, he madeotherssign the deathwar_
rants,asif he wantedto deceiveGod!
3. What is nationalism?
The meaningof ,,nationalism..
can bestbe seenin situation
of conflictof nationalclaims.ThusI definenationalismasfavoring
'ne nation over enotherin sucha conflict.Dependingonwtrethei
this.fa.voringtakesplace (1) when both nations areequalry entitred
to their claimsor (2) when the formeris lessentitleclor not entitled
at all to its claim than the ratter,two kinds of nationalismshould
be clearlydistinguished.
I believeit is only the secondsensethatoughtto be evaluated X
rtegatively.Nationalismin the first senseis almoit universal,
com- {tF
mon.sense,benigngroup partiality from which, presumably,
any
o
realistic social practiceand conception-even one that
is moral
and ethical-must start.After all, what would self-iclentfficatirm,
a
bektnging,attachmentanel loyaltytoa nationmeanat all
if not this o
minimum predilection?No one can persuasivelydisqualify
such
biasas ,,nationalegotism.,,
Thosepeoplewho evenin theposition of equallyvctliclenti_
1,
Itemenrc
are not concernedwith the interestsof their own nation
t
N
J
TL
lt
tainly notex nihitobat ratherfrom given materialsthat havegrown
overtime into their specificfeatures.To use,mutatismt'fiandis,
Marx's insight about history from the l8' Brumaire of Louis
Bonaparte'.Peoplemake their own nation,but not after their own
of their own choosing,but rather
will and not in the circumstances
they happento find that are given
in the immediatecircumstances
and inherited.From the fact that somebodywas accidentallyborn
to his/herparticularfamily and not someother-and consequently
into a particular nationalmilieu-in no way follows that he/she
will relateto it casually.Schooland the wider socialenvironment
will still further socialize,educateand culturatehim/her into his
nation. Only as an adult will a personperhapsbe in a position
critically to evaluate(or re-evaluate)and define (or redefine)his/her
givennationalframework.
2. Some thoughts on the relation between nation
and monotheistic r eli gions
il
z
o
a
(E
N
o
tll
a
16
OftentimesJudaism,Christianityand Islam aremajor componentsof nationalidentities.As such,they offer not only adirect
guqrenteeof individualimmortalitybut alsostrengthiranscendent
en that guaranteeforthosewho belongto nationalcommunities'
The conversion(real or self-styled)of qqitq a number of
communistatheistsand agnosticsinto self-declaredreligiousbelievers,and communistinternationalistsinto ardentadherentsof
their particularnationsis intriguing.
havecomparedthe communismof the
Many commentators
revolutionarystagewith early Christianity,evenclassifiedit as a
form of religiosity.The role of God, of course,was supplantedby
a perfectFuture,for which many lives were sacrificed.The early
communistshad no illusion that they themselveswould live to see
the classlesssociety,but they believedthey would still be part of it
in somemoral and spiritualfashion.The similarity with christian
Unlike Christianity,however,
faith in this regardis unmistakable.
refcommunismdid not havea genuinemetaphysical-transcendent
one
than
more
to
erencepoint, thereforeit could not be transmitted
communism
sustain
The efforts to
or two successivegenerations.
as a sort of quasi-religionby sanctifyingthe embalmedbodiesof
did not carryoverto new genercommunistleadersin mausoleums
ations.
in the life of JosipBroz Tito are also
Somemetamorphoses
instructive.As he aged and was intimately faced with the inevreligiousand nationallayers
itability of death,some,,undesirable"
protrudedfrom the depthsof his youth.In 1953,after the burial of
Boris Kidric, one of their Politbureaucomrades,Milovan Diilas
complainedto Tito that ,,Afterdeaththereis nothing...Tito snapped
back:,,How do you know thereis nothing!" Wasn't this an agnosdc-even a believer-suddenlybreakingthroughandspeakingfrom
the mouth of a pronouncedatheist?Was this the reasonwhy Tito
orderedthathis gravestonenot be adornedwith the usualcommunistatheistsymbols?Could this possiblyhad somethingto do with
Tito's nationalself-identificationas a croat in 1964,after calline
himselfa Yugoslavfor at leasttheprevioustwentyyears?Drawin!
closeto the end of his life he publicly boastedthat he neversisned
a singledeathsentence.
The real truth,of course,was the oppo"site:
not only did he order individual deathsentences,
he broueht into
beingan entiresystemof massexecutionsduring WWII uid
"u"n
moreaftertakingpower.True, he madeotherssign the deathwar_
rants,asif he wantedto deceiveGod!
3. What is nationalism?
The meaningof ,,nationalism..
can bestbe seenin situation
of conflictof nationalclaims.ThusI definenationalismasfavoring
'ne nation over enotherin sucha conflict.Dependingonwtrethei
this.fa.voringtakesplace (1) when both nations areequalry entitred
to their claimsor (2) when the formeris lessentitleclor not entitled
at all to its claim than the ratter,two kinds of nationalismshould
be clearlydistinguished.
I believeit is only the secondsensethatoughtto be evaluated X
rtegatively.Nationalismin the first senseis almoit universal,
com- {tF
mon.sense,benigngroup partiality from which, presumably,
any
o
realistic social practiceand conception-even one that
is moral
and ethical-must start.After all, what would self-iclentfficatirm,
a
bektnging,attachmentanel loyaltytoa nationmeanat all
if not this o
minimum predilection?No one can persuasivelydisqualify
such
biasas ,,nationalegotism.,,
Thosepeoplewho evenin theposition of equallyvctliclenti_
1,
Itemenrc
are not concernedwith the interestsof their own nation
t
N
J
TL
lt
12
z
o
F
more thanthoseof othernationsusuallyplay into the handsof bad
nationalistsin their midst. (After all, the world is nowadaysconanimaland plant specernedevenwith the survivalof endangered
cies.) If they do it exclusivelyto their personaldetrimentrather
than to the detrimentof their nationthey shouldbe callednational
altruists.National masochistsare very different: they favor other
nationsat both personalandnationalexpense.And yet quitedifferent
from both areanti-natittnctlegoists,let alone nationalprofiteers
who derivepersonalgainsfrom their ,,nationalgenerosity"'Behind
that takes
their rejectionof nationalismtherelies utter selfishness
of all things.
personalinterestsasthe measuring-rod
Naturally,thereis no moral duty to live a life of an extreme
altruist.Even lesscan we expectfor suchan attitudeto governthe
conductof nations.Genuineinternationalistprincipledoesnot reRather,
quirenationalself-denial
, whetheraltruisticor masochistic.
ii only demandsthat nationsdo not favor themselvesover those
who aremoreentitledto their claims.
Many Serbsobsessively,,fight"Serbiannationalism.Some
of them used to do it already under communism,while others
As if nationalismwere
beganimitatingthem in post-communism.'
noi a specific responseto challengesand conflicts, and as if it
could be limited and controlledeffectively by denunciation,instead
andsolutions'
of realisticresponses
into nationalNationalismin the positivesensedegeneralOs
loyalty to
and
ism in the negativesensewhen self-identification
of
considerations
one's own nation becomesmore important than
forms
quite
malign
justice and morality. Nationalismcan assume
suchaschauvinismandnazismwhenthe principlethatn%tionationi
Iupusest startsto reign supreme'
In orderfor one's attitudeto be rightly criticizedasnationalist
one doesnot necessarilyhaveto belongto the nation in question.
It would hardly be a reliable definition of an important concept,if
a person'sattitudecould not be judged as ,,nationalistic"until one
learnedabouthis/hernationaliry.Of course,the likelihood of some-
ft
N
F
t.lJ
o
18
1 In the 1980s.the remainsoI the Scrbsthrownalive into karstsinkholcs
by the ustashi-Nazisduring world war II wcre disintcrredand givcn a propcr
Easternorthodox rcligiousburial.In somcSerbiancirclcs,howcvcr,this practicc
thercby
wasindiscriminatelyand insensiblyattackcdas nationalisticmanipulation,
of thosevictims had ccrtainly fclt remorsctbr not having
offcnding the descendants
paid due respectto their relativcsmuch carlicr'
temptationis incompaone'sgivingin to thenegativenationalistic
rably greaterwhenhis/herown nationis at issue.
It is typical for nationalistsin the negativesenseto apply
cktublestundartlsurtd therelryviolute the ethical requirementof
For example,Croatiannationalistssupporta dis_
universaliz.atiort.
entity" of Croatsin BosniaandHerzesovtinct ,,political-territorial
or even their full secession,and at the Jame
ina (Herzeg-Bosnia)
time derrythat right to the Serbsin Bosnia and Herzegovina,let
alonein Croatia(Krajina).Serbiannationalists,on the other hand,
supportthoserights of Serbs,but they deny it to Albaniansin
Kosovo.As for Albaniannationalists,they supportAlbanianrights
in Kosovo,but deny it to Serbsin Croatiaand Bosnia
to secession
Nationalists
(meta-nationalists)
andHerzegovina.
in the U.S. sup_
port suchAlbanianposition.on the otherhand,secessionist
aspiritions of the Kurds in Turkey receiveno supportfrom thosesame
U,S. circles,althoughKurds haveno stateof their own, whereas
Albaniansdo (Albania).As a justificationfor the applicationof
oppositec:riteriato two essentiallyidenticalcasesU.S. nationalists
usuallysaythatTurkeyis, asa memberof NATO, of vital imDortance
for u.s. nationalinterests.This is (meta-)nationalism
of double
par excellence.
standards
The dictum ,,Put your own house in ordery'rsf, is often
misinterpreted
and misused.It doesnot imply a moral duty to be
critical exclusivelytoward the nationalismof one's own nation.
Indeed,thosewho displayindifference(or evenscorn)towardtheir
own,,nationalhouse"haveno right to appealto this dictum. What
is more,they shouldexplainin which senieit istheir houseat all!
Unfortunately,,,Yugoslavism,.
turnedout to be an incompa_
rably weakerconstructthan that of cultural-ethnicnationswitiin
Yugoslavia.Anti-Serbiannationalistshaveinvariablydisqualified
X
it as a covert form of Serbianhegemonismand unitarianism.
Be
thatasit may,thosewho continueidentifyingnationallyas
,,yugo- F
slavs" haveto try as much as possibleto put in order all national al
housesof the former Yugoslavia,and not only the Serbian.
Of
course,thosewho identifyas ,,a-national
cosmopolitans,,,
should -;
l-L
considerall nationsof the world as their own houseto
be put in
N
order.
=
Distinguishingbetweentwo kindsof nationaris
m in a natirn r
v.ts-(l-vis
,ther nation(s)contextshouldbe extendedwithin nations
themselves.
There,positivenationalismbecomesnegativewhen
19
12
z
o
F
more thanthoseof othernationsusuallyplay into the handsof bad
nationalistsin their midst. (After all, the world is nowadaysconanimaland plant specernedevenwith the survivalof endangered
cies.) If they do it exclusivelyto their personaldetrimentrather
than to the detrimentof their nationthey shouldbe callednational
altruists.National masochistsare very different: they favor other
nationsat both personalandnationalexpense.And yet quitedifferent
from both areanti-natittnctlegoists,let alone nationalprofiteers
who derivepersonalgainsfrom their ,,nationalgenerosity"'Behind
that takes
their rejectionof nationalismtherelies utter selfishness
of all things.
personalinterestsasthe measuring-rod
Naturally,thereis no moral duty to live a life of an extreme
altruist.Even lesscan we expectfor suchan attitudeto governthe
conductof nations.Genuineinternationalistprincipledoesnot reRather,
quirenationalself-denial
, whetheraltruisticor masochistic.
ii only demandsthat nationsdo not favor themselvesover those
who aremoreentitledto their claims.
Many Serbsobsessively,,fight"Serbiannationalism.Some
of them used to do it already under communism,while others
As if nationalismwere
beganimitatingthem in post-communism.'
noi a specific responseto challengesand conflicts, and as if it
could be limited and controlledeffectively by denunciation,instead
andsolutions'
of realisticresponses
into nationalNationalismin the positivesensedegeneralOs
loyalty to
and
ism in the negativesensewhen self-identification
of
considerations
one's own nation becomesmore important than
forms
quite
malign
justice and morality. Nationalismcan assume
suchaschauvinismandnazismwhenthe principlethatn%tionationi
Iupusest startsto reign supreme'
In orderfor one's attitudeto be rightly criticizedasnationalist
one doesnot necessarilyhaveto belongto the nation in question.
It would hardly be a reliable definition of an important concept,if
a person'sattitudecould not be judged as ,,nationalistic"until one
learnedabouthis/hernationaliry.Of course,the likelihood of some-
ft
N
F
t.lJ
o
18
1 In the 1980s.the remainsoI the Scrbsthrownalive into karstsinkholcs
by the ustashi-Nazisduring world war II wcre disintcrredand givcn a propcr
Easternorthodox rcligiousburial.In somcSerbiancirclcs,howcvcr,this practicc
thercby
wasindiscriminatelyand insensiblyattackcdas nationalisticmanipulation,
of thosevictims had ccrtainly fclt remorsctbr not having
offcnding the descendants
paid due respectto their relativcsmuch carlicr'
temptationis incompaone'sgivingin to thenegativenationalistic
rably greaterwhenhis/herown nationis at issue.
It is typical for nationalistsin the negativesenseto apply
cktublestundartlsurtd therelryviolute the ethical requirementof
For example,Croatiannationalistssupporta dis_
universaliz.atiort.
entity" of Croatsin BosniaandHerzesovtinct ,,political-territorial
or even their full secession,and at the Jame
ina (Herzeg-Bosnia)
time derrythat right to the Serbsin Bosnia and Herzegovina,let
alonein Croatia(Krajina).Serbiannationalists,on the other hand,
supportthoserights of Serbs,but they deny it to Albaniansin
Kosovo.As for Albaniannationalists,they supportAlbanianrights
in Kosovo,but deny it to Serbsin Croatiaand Bosnia
to secession
Nationalists
(meta-nationalists)
andHerzegovina.
in the U.S. sup_
port suchAlbanianposition.on the otherhand,secessionist
aspiritions of the Kurds in Turkey receiveno supportfrom thosesame
U,S. circles,althoughKurds haveno stateof their own, whereas
Albaniansdo (Albania).As a justificationfor the applicationof
oppositec:riteriato two essentiallyidenticalcasesU.S. nationalists
usuallysaythatTurkeyis, asa memberof NATO, of vital imDortance
for u.s. nationalinterests.This is (meta-)nationalism
of double
par excellence.
standards
The dictum ,,Put your own house in ordery'rsf, is often
misinterpreted
and misused.It doesnot imply a moral duty to be
critical exclusivelytoward the nationalismof one's own nation.
Indeed,thosewho displayindifference(or evenscorn)towardtheir
own,,nationalhouse"haveno right to appealto this dictum. What
is more,they shouldexplainin which senieit istheir houseat all!
Unfortunately,,,Yugoslavism,.
turnedout to be an incompa_
rably weakerconstructthan that of cultural-ethnicnationswitiin
Yugoslavia.Anti-Serbiannationalistshaveinvariablydisqualified
X
it as a covert form of Serbianhegemonismand unitarianism.
Be
thatasit may,thosewho continueidentifyingnationallyas
,,yugo- F
slavs" haveto try as much as possibleto put in order all national al
housesof the former Yugoslavia,and not only the Serbian.
Of
course,thosewho identifyas ,,a-national
cosmopolitans,,,
should -;
l-L
considerall nationsof the world as their own houseto
be put in
N
order.
=
Distinguishingbetweentwo kindsof nationaris
m in a natirn r
v.ts-(l-vis
,ther nation(s)contextshouldbe extendedwithin nations
themselves.
There,positivenationalismbecomesnegativewhen
19
co-nationalsarerequiredto subordinateall of their identities,interests,rights, values,goals,ideals,and standardsto thoseof the
nation,and in the extremecaseare calleduponto completelysubmergethemselves
into the nation.Sucha nationalistcollectivism
suppresses
andconcealsindividual,group,classandothercleavages,Insteadof beingopen,inclusive,voluntary,flexible,dynamic,
andcomplex,sucha nationalidentity is closed,exclusive,compulsive,rigid,static,andsimple.
4. What is citizenism?
!l
z
o
<t)
E.
N
tlJ
(t)
20
The state-territorialconceptof nation may also be termed
citizenist(civic),sinceit encompasses
all citizensof a country.
Becausemassiveculturel-ethnicnationalisms
actedasan important
generatorof thetragedyof SFRY andFRY, somecriticsmistakenly
believethat a citizenist(civic) attituders by definitionimmuneto
the negativenationalisttemptation.In reality, however,the latter
mayjust aseasilyslideinto negativenationalismasthe former.
Such a naivet6prompted me some years ago to coin the
term ,,citizenism".A democraticstateis obligedto treat all of its
citizensequallyregardlessof their cultural-ethnicnationality.Undoubtedly,the citizenist(civic) principleof ,,onecitizen-onevote"
standsas an immenseachievementof modernciyilization-indeed,
withoutit democracyis not possible.Yet realizationof thisprinciple
is not in itself a sufficient warrantagainstthe dominationof one
cultural-ethnicnation over other such nationsor its neglectand
evendiscriminationagainstit. When this happens,the principleof
citizenshipin the positive senseturns into its opposite,citizenist
nationalism(nationalistcitizenism). CuLturel-ethnlcinterests,
rights,values,institutions
. . . otherthanthoseof thecktminantgroup
areinsteadof determiningstateorganizationandlegitimationrelegatedto civil socieQonly. A Marxist analysisand critique of the
abstractcitizen(citoyen)could be, mutatismutandis,appliedhere,
with the differencethatnow the abstractness
hidesa cultural-ethnic
insteadof bourgeois
dominance.
Of the two most advancedhistoricalprecedentsof statesandtheU.S.,the latterhasbecomeso multi-cultural
natiorts,France
that it has been referredto as ..microcosmof
multi-ethnic
and
humanity".It indeedcomesascloseto theidealcaseof thecitizenist
(civic) conception of nation and state as one comes across in the
world today. U.S. imageological' and other domination of the world
justify focussing critique primarily on it.
Many Americans seetheir (state-tenitorial) concept of nation
as much more valid compared to the cultural-ethnic one. What is
more, they tend,by definition, to reduce the concept of nationalism
to the cultural-ethnic one. This is one of the reasonsthey tend to
reject offhand any possibility of U.S. nationalism.
As violence often plays a major role in the emergence of
statesand nations, U.S. citizenism was to a great degreeborn out
of suppressionand repression.U.S. state-nation was indeed forgecl
on the foundation of genocide and ethnocide against the indigenous
peoples. In addition, African slave labor was built into its original
economic foundations. And until very recently the descendantsof
those Africans were deprived of civil rights, and were thus virtually
excludedfrom U.S. citizenship.The hidden dimension of the U.S.
is the historic dominance of the Anglo-saxon protestantculturalethnic core (by now greatly diminished). put another way, the
currertrst at e-nat i o n has concealed the nat io n- srat e .
For many U.S. citizenists, stressingcultural-ethnic identities
in their country is a form of nationalist blasphemy. They are willing
to tolerate to some extent discourse on the multicultural but not on
the multinational characterof the United States.For them, it is a
priori unacceptablethat cuitural-ethnic specificities could be taken
out of the framework of the ,,civil society,, and potentially be used
to call into question the existing system. The principle of
,,one
citizen-one vote" may not be supplemented by the principle
,,one
nation-onevote." Under no circumstanceswould they asient to a
redesign of the U.s. constituent statesand states' lines baseclon
cultural-ethnic criteria.
><
o
-
I definc imageology as a sct o[ images that social groups usc at t/ze
4tpense ol truth, to justify thcir own actions and to cliscrcdit
those til thcir rivals,
opponents, and cnemics. This <:riticarc<'tnccptis modclccl
al'tcr my clcfinition of
t t l e o b g t a s a s c t o f i d c a s t h a t s o c i a l g r o u p sL t s c a t t h e e x p e n s e o f t r u t t t , t o . j u s t i f y
thcir own actions and t. discrcdit thosc of thcir
r i v a l s , o p p o n c n t s ,a n r rc n c m i c s .
[{owevcr, I havc noticcr] that phirosophcrs,social thcorists
anclgcncrally intcllcctuals
tcnd to continuc .ver-cmphasizing thc rolc <tl
itleus in image ,r"utio,, and cven
i, to thcm. Norhing can bc furrhcr lrom rhc rrurh in our rimcs dominarccl
by
::1:.:
t i - - m c d i a . M y . . i m a g c o l o g y , ,( a n r l , , i m a g c o l o g y c r i t i q u c , , ) i s a c o n c c i t
::li,
than ..idcology" land .,idcology cririquc.,), rhc larrcr bcing bur onc
kinct of
:J:,i.o.t
trrs Iorrncr, morcovcr onc cvcr morc
loosing in imporlancc.
F
{J)
l
(t
o
f
tL
N
o
=
L
21
co-nationalsarerequiredto subordinateall of their identities,interests,rights, values,goals,ideals,and standardsto thoseof the
nation,and in the extremecaseare calleduponto completelysubmergethemselves
into the nation.Sucha nationalistcollectivism
suppresses
andconcealsindividual,group,classandothercleavages,Insteadof beingopen,inclusive,voluntary,flexible,dynamic,
andcomplex,sucha nationalidentity is closed,exclusive,compulsive,rigid,static,andsimple.
4. What is citizenism?
!l
z
o
<t)
E.
N
tlJ
(t)
20
The state-territorialconceptof nation may also be termed
citizenist(civic),sinceit encompasses
all citizensof a country.
Becausemassiveculturel-ethnicnationalisms
actedasan important
generatorof thetragedyof SFRY andFRY, somecriticsmistakenly
believethat a citizenist(civic) attituders by definitionimmuneto
the negativenationalisttemptation.In reality, however,the latter
mayjust aseasilyslideinto negativenationalismasthe former.
Such a naivet6prompted me some years ago to coin the
term ,,citizenism".A democraticstateis obligedto treat all of its
citizensequallyregardlessof their cultural-ethnicnationality.Undoubtedly,the citizenist(civic) principleof ,,onecitizen-onevote"
standsas an immenseachievementof modernciyilization-indeed,
withoutit democracyis not possible.Yet realizationof thisprinciple
is not in itself a sufficient warrantagainstthe dominationof one
cultural-ethnicnation over other such nationsor its neglectand
evendiscriminationagainstit. When this happens,the principleof
citizenshipin the positive senseturns into its opposite,citizenist
nationalism(nationalistcitizenism). CuLturel-ethnlcinterests,
rights,values,institutions
. . . otherthanthoseof thecktminantgroup
areinsteadof determiningstateorganizationandlegitimationrelegatedto civil socieQonly. A Marxist analysisand critique of the
abstractcitizen(citoyen)could be, mutatismutandis,appliedhere,
with the differencethatnow the abstractness
hidesa cultural-ethnic
insteadof bourgeois
dominance.
Of the two most advancedhistoricalprecedentsof statesandtheU.S.,the latterhasbecomeso multi-cultural
natiorts,France
that it has been referredto as ..microcosmof
multi-ethnic
and
humanity".It indeedcomesascloseto theidealcaseof thecitizenist
(civic) conception of nation and state as one comes across in the
world today. U.S. imageological' and other domination of the world
justify focussing critique primarily on it.
Many Americans seetheir (state-tenitorial) concept of nation
as much more valid compared to the cultural-ethnic one. What is
more, they tend,by definition, to reduce the concept of nationalism
to the cultural-ethnic one. This is one of the reasonsthey tend to
reject offhand any possibility of U.S. nationalism.
As violence often plays a major role in the emergence of
statesand nations, U.S. citizenism was to a great degreeborn out
of suppressionand repression.U.S. state-nation was indeed forgecl
on the foundation of genocide and ethnocide against the indigenous
peoples. In addition, African slave labor was built into its original
economic foundations. And until very recently the descendantsof
those Africans were deprived of civil rights, and were thus virtually
excludedfrom U.S. citizenship.The hidden dimension of the U.S.
is the historic dominance of the Anglo-saxon protestantculturalethnic core (by now greatly diminished). put another way, the
currertrst at e-nat i o n has concealed the nat io n- srat e .
For many U.S. citizenists, stressingcultural-ethnic identities
in their country is a form of nationalist blasphemy. They are willing
to tolerate to some extent discourse on the multicultural but not on
the multinational characterof the United States.For them, it is a
priori unacceptablethat cuitural-ethnic specificities could be taken
out of the framework of the ,,civil society,, and potentially be used
to call into question the existing system. The principle of
,,one
citizen-one vote" may not be supplemented by the principle
,,one
nation-onevote." Under no circumstanceswould they asient to a
redesign of the U.s. constituent statesand states' lines baseclon
cultural-ethnic criteria.
><
o
-
I definc imageology as a sct o[ images that social groups usc at t/ze
4tpense ol truth, to justify thcir own actions and to cliscrcdit
those til thcir rivals,
opponents, and cnemics. This <:riticarc<'tnccptis modclccl
al'tcr my clcfinition of
t t l e o b g t a s a s c t o f i d c a s t h a t s o c i a l g r o u p sL t s c a t t h e e x p e n s e o f t r u t t t , t o . j u s t i f y
thcir own actions and t. discrcdit thosc of thcir
r i v a l s , o p p o n c n t s ,a n r rc n c m i c s .
[{owevcr, I havc noticcr] that phirosophcrs,social thcorists
anclgcncrally intcllcctuals
tcnd to continuc .ver-cmphasizing thc rolc <tl
itleus in image ,r"utio,, and cven
i, to thcm. Norhing can bc furrhcr lrom rhc rrurh in our rimcs dominarccl
by
::1:.:
t i - - m c d i a . M y . . i m a g c o l o g y , ,( a n r l , , i m a g c o l o g y c r i t i q u c , , ) i s a c o n c c i t
::li,
than ..idcology" land .,idcology cririquc.,), rhc larrcr bcing bur onc
kinct of
:J:,i.o.t
trrs Iorrncr, morcovcr onc cvcr morc
loosing in imporlancc.
F
{J)
l
(t
o
f
tL
N
o
=
L
21
In the caseof Yugoslavia,thoseindividualsand political
partiesthat insistedon citizenshipas the onl1,principle of state
organization
andiegitimacyin thenew independent
states-.Croatia,
Bosnia-Herzegovina,
andMacedonia-would haveto haveinsisted
(but didn't) that the KosovoAlbaniansaccepttheunitariunorganizattonof Serbia(,,onecitizen--one vote")! That, however,would
be a repressivecitizenist-nationaiist
conceptandpractice.
It is not truethatpartieswith a purelycitizenist(civic) orientationoccupythecenterof thepoliticalspectrumof typicallymultinationalstates,suchas SFRY usedto be, anclas FRy, BosniaHerzegovina,
andMacedoniacontinueto be.In suchcircumstances,
the centristposition in the political constellationis kept by those
partiesthat combinethe citizenistandthe cultural-ethnicapproach
to the organizationandlegitimationof the state.
the dissolutionof suchstatesalong nationallines.The collapseof
USSR,SFRY, CSSR,and evenFRY is takenas a furtherproof of
a
thethesis,By the way: as far backas the early ,60s,I advocated
pluralism
into
ofparty
SFRY
because
I
feared
introduction
sradual
t'hutun abrupt,uncheckedintroductionof it would precipitatethe
country'sviolentdisintegrationalongnationallines.
My own view is, of course,thatno ,,ironlaw" of disintegration
exists,but only a strongtendencytoward it. Such a tendencyis
per
presentnot becauseof themulti-nationulcompositionof stcttes
territori(tl
of
the
concentraticttt
of
nations
within
because
but
.re,
capitalistmarketin U.S.,for example,successfully
thosestates.The
of recentimmigrantsfrom
uprootedimmigrantsand descendants
areaswheretheir cultural-ethniccompatriotstendedto concentrate
and dispersedthem throughoutthe country.On the other hand,in
countriesiike Canada,Belgium or GreatBritain this hasnot happened.
5. Shallow or deeppolitical cartography?
o
z
)
F
a
(I
N
ul
a
22
Fissures,rifts, erosions,undergroundstreams,eruptions,
- I think geologicalmetaphorsare quite appropriate
earthquakes
in analyzingthebreak-upanddisintegration
of SFRY. In my previously publishedcriticism of the prevailinggeo-politicalcartography,
I pointedout that it overlooksthe layersof divisionthat arehidden
below the official mapsof politicaldivisionsin fhb;world. Shaltow
cartographyand cartoanalysisis most often motivatedby the cilizenistviewpoint,thepracticeandimageologythatneglects,forgets,
suppresses,
andconcealscultural-ethnicnationaldivisions.I plead
for a new, in-depthcartogrctphyand crtrtoanalysis.Multi-layered
mapsshouldbe made,reflectinglinguistic,ethnic,religious,cultural, economic,military, genocidal...
sediments.
Shallowcartography
and cartoanalysis
is one of the reasonspolitics tendsto be reactive
ratherthan preventive.
The tendencytowardsthedissoluttonof multi-nationalstates
is gaining momentum.During his tenureas SecretaryGeneralof
the U.N", B. B. Ghalli expressed
his anxietythat in a coupleof
decades,if the currenttrend continues,therewill be about 500
independentstatesin the world.
Somephilosophersand socialscientistshaveexpressedskepticism regardingthe survival chancesof multi-national stalesas
democracies"
They seedictatorshipsasthe only obstaclespreventing
SvetozarStojanovi6
NACIJA, NACIONALIZAM
I GRADANIZAM
Rezime
Iz ,,srodnidki slidnih" grupa kojc zovemo nacijama mogudc.je izclvo.jiticlva
suprotna ,,idealna tipa". Jedan bi biodrZavno-teritori.jalni adr,,:,gikulturno-etniiki.
Zna(en.jc,,nacionalizma" moZcmo na.jboljc videti u sukobu nacionalnih
pretenzija.Zato Ea i dcllniSem kao davanje prednosti jedno.i naci.ii nad drugom u
takvom sukobu. Pritom valjajasno razlikovati dvc vrstc nacionalizma. prvi: kad se
prcdnost daic icdnoj naciji nad drugom iako obc imajt podiednako pravo na tt
pretcnziju. I drugi: kad se prcdnost daje naciji koja ima m.anjepravo ili tutpJte
nema pravo na nju. Smatram da iskljudivo nacionalizam u ovom drugom smislu
trcba vrcdnovari negativno. Tipidno je za nacionalistc u negativnom smislu da
ptimenjuiu dvostrukn merila i time krie etiiki
z.ahtev tmiverzalizaci.ie
Razlikovali smo dve vrstc nacionalizma u odnosu naci.je prema drugim
naciiama. Mcdutim, njih moZemo razlikovati i untftar nacije . Tu sc nacionalizam u
pozltlvnom smislu dcformisc u nacionalizam u ncgativnom
smislu oncla kad se od
pripadnika nacijc zahtcva cla svc svo.jciclcntitctc, intcrcsc, prava, vrcclnosti,
ciljcvc,
ideale, mcrila potdinc nacionalnim, a u ckstremnom sludaju i sasvim utope
u naciju.
umesto da bude otvoren, inkluzivan, clobrovol.jan,fleksibilan, clinamidan
i sloZen,
x
o
F
a
f
(r
:
=
l!
N
J
LL
LJ
In the caseof Yugoslavia,thoseindividualsand political
partiesthat insistedon citizenshipas the onl1,principle of state
organization
andiegitimacyin thenew independent
states-.Croatia,
Bosnia-Herzegovina,
andMacedonia-would haveto haveinsisted
(but didn't) that the KosovoAlbaniansaccepttheunitariunorganizattonof Serbia(,,onecitizen--one vote")! That, however,would
be a repressivecitizenist-nationaiist
conceptandpractice.
It is not truethatpartieswith a purelycitizenist(civic) orientationoccupythecenterof thepoliticalspectrumof typicallymultinationalstates,suchas SFRY usedto be, anclas FRy, BosniaHerzegovina,
andMacedoniacontinueto be.In suchcircumstances,
the centristposition in the political constellationis kept by those
partiesthat combinethe citizenistandthe cultural-ethnicapproach
to the organizationandlegitimationof the state.
the dissolutionof suchstatesalong nationallines.The collapseof
USSR,SFRY, CSSR,and evenFRY is takenas a furtherproof of
a
thethesis,By the way: as far backas the early ,60s,I advocated
pluralism
into
ofparty
SFRY
because
I
feared
introduction
sradual
t'hutun abrupt,uncheckedintroductionof it would precipitatethe
country'sviolentdisintegrationalongnationallines.
My own view is, of course,thatno ,,ironlaw" of disintegration
exists,but only a strongtendencytoward it. Such a tendencyis
per
presentnot becauseof themulti-nationulcompositionof stcttes
territori(tl
of
the
concentraticttt
of
nations
within
because
but
.re,
capitalistmarketin U.S.,for example,successfully
thosestates.The
of recentimmigrantsfrom
uprootedimmigrantsand descendants
areaswheretheir cultural-ethniccompatriotstendedto concentrate
and dispersedthem throughoutthe country.On the other hand,in
countriesiike Canada,Belgium or GreatBritain this hasnot happened.
5. Shallow or deeppolitical cartography?
o
z
)
F
a
(I
N
ul
a
22
Fissures,rifts, erosions,undergroundstreams,eruptions,
- I think geologicalmetaphorsare quite appropriate
earthquakes
in analyzingthebreak-upanddisintegration
of SFRY. In my previously publishedcriticism of the prevailinggeo-politicalcartography,
I pointedout that it overlooksthe layersof divisionthat arehidden
below the official mapsof politicaldivisionsin fhb;world. Shaltow
cartographyand cartoanalysisis most often motivatedby the cilizenistviewpoint,thepracticeandimageologythatneglects,forgets,
suppresses,
andconcealscultural-ethnicnationaldivisions.I plead
for a new, in-depthcartogrctphyand crtrtoanalysis.Multi-layered
mapsshouldbe made,reflectinglinguistic,ethnic,religious,cultural, economic,military, genocidal...
sediments.
Shallowcartography
and cartoanalysis
is one of the reasonspolitics tendsto be reactive
ratherthan preventive.
The tendencytowardsthedissoluttonof multi-nationalstates
is gaining momentum.During his tenureas SecretaryGeneralof
the U.N", B. B. Ghalli expressed
his anxietythat in a coupleof
decades,if the currenttrend continues,therewill be about 500
independentstatesin the world.
Somephilosophersand socialscientistshaveexpressedskepticism regardingthe survival chancesof multi-national stalesas
democracies"
They seedictatorshipsasthe only obstaclespreventing
SvetozarStojanovi6
NACIJA, NACIONALIZAM
I GRADANIZAM
Rezime
Iz ,,srodnidki slidnih" grupa kojc zovemo nacijama mogudc.je izclvo.jiticlva
suprotna ,,idealna tipa". Jedan bi biodrZavno-teritori.jalni adr,,:,gikulturno-etniiki.
Zna(en.jc,,nacionalizma" moZcmo na.jboljc videti u sukobu nacionalnih
pretenzija.Zato Ea i dcllniSem kao davanje prednosti jedno.i naci.ii nad drugom u
takvom sukobu. Pritom valjajasno razlikovati dvc vrstc nacionalizma. prvi: kad se
prcdnost daic icdnoj naciji nad drugom iako obc imajt podiednako pravo na tt
pretcnziju. I drugi: kad se prcdnost daje naciji koja ima m.anjepravo ili tutpJte
nema pravo na nju. Smatram da iskljudivo nacionalizam u ovom drugom smislu
trcba vrcdnovari negativno. Tipidno je za nacionalistc u negativnom smislu da
ptimenjuiu dvostrukn merila i time krie etiiki
z.ahtev tmiverzalizaci.ie
Razlikovali smo dve vrstc nacionalizma u odnosu naci.je prema drugim
naciiama. Mcdutim, njih moZemo razlikovati i untftar nacije . Tu sc nacionalizam u
pozltlvnom smislu dcformisc u nacionalizam u ncgativnom
smislu oncla kad se od
pripadnika nacijc zahtcva cla svc svo.jciclcntitctc, intcrcsc, prava, vrcclnosti,
ciljcvc,
ideale, mcrila potdinc nacionalnim, a u ckstremnom sludaju i sasvim utope
u naciju.
umesto da bude otvoren, inkluzivan, clobrovol.jan,fleksibilan, clinamidan
i sloZen,
x
o
F
a
f
(r
:
=
l!
N
J
LL
LJ
takav nacionalniidcntitctje .zatvoren,ckskluzivan,prinudan,rigidnan,statidan,
upro56en.
DrZavno-tcritori.lalnipdam naci.jcmoTemo nazvati i gradianistitkim
(civilnim.).jer
obuhvatasve grari.janc,
odnosnodrZavljancjcdnczemlje. Zbog masovnogkulturno-etniikognacionalizmakao gcncratoratragcdijcSFRJi SRJ,ncki
kritidari su pogre5nopoverovali da.icgradianistiiki (civilni) stavper deJinitionem
imun na negativnonacionalistidko
iskulcnjc.Rcaguiuiina tu naivnost,prc nckoliko
godinaskovaosampo.jam,,gradanizam".
Dcmokratskadriavajc duZnada podjcdnako tretira sve svoje graclancnezavisnood njihovc kulturno-ctnidkcnacionalnosti.
Ncma sumnjeda je graclanistiiko(civilno) nadelo,,Jedangraclanin- jcdan glas"
ogromno dostignuie modcrnecivilizacijc i da bcz njcga uop5tcnijc moguia
dcmokratija.Pa ipak, sprovodenjetog principa ne prcdstavljasamopo scbi dovoljno
jemstvoprotiv dominacijejcdnekultumo-ctnidkcnacijenaddrugim takvim nacijama,
ali ni protiv njenog zapostavlianjaili dak obespravljivania.Kad do toga dodc,
principgradanstva
gradjanisu pozitivnomsmislupreokcic sc u svoju suprotnost,
(nacionalistiikigradjanizam).
tidki nacionalizam
Plitka kartografija i kartoanaliz.anajie56e su motivisane gradanistiikim
stavom,praksomi imidZologijom(moja kovanicadcfinisanau tckstu)koja zancmaruje,zaboravlja,potiskujei skriva kulturno-etni i ke naci onalne p odeIe. ZalaLcm
se zanovu,dubinskukartografi.iui kartoanaliza.Trcbalo bi praviti viScslojnekartc
koje bi odslikavaleieziike, etniikc, vcrske,kulturne,privrcdnc,ralnc,genocidnc...
sedimentc.
Politikaje po pravilusklonareaktivnostia nc prcvcntivnostii zbogtoga
5topolazi od plitkc kartogralijei plitkc kartoanalize.
Kljuine reii.'Nacija, nacionalizam,gradjanin,gradjanizam,
rcligiia, imidZologi.la,
Jugoslavija,
Tito, SAD, Ncmadka,NATO.
!2
z
a
o
a
t
N
o
tU
a
24
KRIZA DEMOKRATIJEU SRBIJI
I POLITTCruANGAZMAN