Balibar - The Nation Form

Research Foundation of SUNY
The Nation Form: History and Ideology Author(s): Etienne Balibar Reviewed work(s): Source: Review (Fernand Braudel Center), Vol. 13, No. 3 (Summer, 1990), pp. 329-361 Published by: Research Foundation of SUNY for and on behalf of the Fernand Braudel Center Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40241159 . Accessed: 21/11/2012 04:03
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Research Foundation of SUNY and Fernand Braudel Center are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Review (Fernand Braudel Center).
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.227 on Wed, 21 Nov 2012 04:03:46 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Nation Form

Historyand Ideology*
Etienne Balibar
a "past" that has never been present, and which will never be (Jacques Derrida, 1982: 21). PART I: TERMINOLOGY ofthe nationwillbe discussedhere not foritsown sake, theory anotherquestion,thatofthecauses and "deep"strucbut to clarify racism. Thinking about racism led us back to tures of contemporary to uncertaintyabout the historicalrenationalism and nationalism, alities and categorizationof the nation. is of course the resultof modern historiography This uncertainty because its designation of its "objects" of study, its temporal periodizations and choice of spatial boundaries has constitutedthe basis of the dominant discourse about the nation- of certain nations in particular. In the strongversion, it considers that nations alone have a thatcan be given thatis have had processesor transformations history, - nations,or other"particularities" thatmay be constructed a "meaning" analogously. We could show that this remains true even when conor "positivbreakingwiththe "historicism" historiography, temporary ism" of earlier periods, opts to center its research on socio-economic whichhave the appearance ofbeing prior dure oflongue transformations
Translated by ImmanuelWallerstein (Part I) and ChrisTurner(Part II). PartII will Class(Lonfive in EtienneBalibar& Immanuel Wallerstein, Race,Nation, appearas chapter don: Verso, 1990). REVIEW, XIII, 3, SUMMER I99O, 329-61 329
330
Balibar Etienne
But thisis also truewhenit pre(ende)to nationaldifferentiations. or thestudy of"mentalfers to concentrate on "cultural" phenomenon ities"whichhave the appearanceof goingbeyond(au del)themby thatare less tiedto "politcomplexes utilizing largeranthropological is the whose ideas aboutdeathor marical"boundaries. "West," (What of a specific we study, otherthanthe outerwrapping riagepatterns set of nations?) I shallcomein a moment totheparticular posedbyMarxproblems in isthistoriography, but it does not fundamentally changeanything the verybeginning thisregard, giventhe factthatit was builtfrom a critical what down. on itsturning each concept Still, reading upside it seemsto me, of our inherited historical discourseshouldsuggest, It is rather thatwe should is nottheUtopiaofa "non-national" history. in thefirst was constructed howtheobject"nation" beginto delineate and moin the circumstances discuss detail to start to with, place(and sciencecan historical dalitiesof its institutional thereby definition); beginthe analysisof its own nationalism. Twocontraofthestate. theconcept Let us begin- as wemust-with is said that themodit are asserted. the one "truths" On hand, dictory the other a national state. or On ern stateis a nation-state, hand, it and "state" matchbetween is said thatthereis a persistent imperfect In absent. but never in varying "nation," totally degreesto be sure, do notalways butthenations thestates tendtobecomenations, short, all their the not cover form or at least states do states, "sociological" aspects. ofthedegreeoffit It seemsclearthattheperception dependsupon the role a given the historical era, the social or politicalviewpoint, nation's construction arena,and so on. But playsin theinternational it seemsto bothtruths are alwaysvalid to some extent. They refer, was In to the same our modern me, crystallized usage (which reality. at the or labeledin theperiodofthebourgeois revolutions, beginning in is the rise of the nations end of the eighteenth history century), at state or of attempts as a succession of stateformations presented states that the "national" formation. it was Correlatively, bybecoming intowhatwe call the transformed moreor lesscompletely, themselves, itsjuridical modern with its and collective state, sovereignty; ideology social itsparticular modeofregulating and administrative rationality; of its class and conflicts, conflicts; objective man"strategic" especially
THE NATION FORM
331
resources and population to enhanceitseconomic agingitsterritorial It is thisvery and military correlation which thegerms contains power. in theconcept oftheambivalence which means thatits "nation-state," splitintotwoopposingaspects. unityis constantly in the nationsare societies whichtake end, the historical Thus, form of a statethatis "national." Eitherthe statescame the political intoexistence in tandem with "endogenously," seemingly autonomously, a processof nationalizing the statethatwas alreadylocatedin that came into via "nationalist" or existence libterritory, they (or "national national states that movements, bystruggling against already eration") or against existed orwerebeingcreated, "non-national" states sovereign which came to seemanachempires, thereby (such as "multinational" In of nations without a the idea ornations "before" state, ronistic). reality, in terms, because a statealwaysis the state,is thusa contradiction in of a national the historic framework formation implied (evenifnot within thelimits ofitsterritory). But thiscontradiction is necessarily whoseintegrity suffers maskedby the factthatnationalstates, from conflicts that threaten itssurvival and espeinternal conflicts, (regional beneath their existence class to a prepolitical project cially conflicts), or "popular" "ethnic" unity(intothe past,intothedepthsof existing such historical collectivities "civil" Or struggling againstnasociety). claimsto autonomy an ideal tratheir tionalstates bydrawing justify from a more or less mythical origin religious, jectory going (linguistic, an end considered to be the onlyhistorically cultural, racial) toward ofitsownnationalstatestructure. thecreation In normalpossibility, ofa nation-state no matter whether theconstruction "sucother words, or whether it is heldin check(fora period it"fails," ceeds"or whether to be a preestablished harthatmaybe quitelong),thereis asserted a and "modern" a "national" state and between society yetsimony of each of these.Furthermore, the relative autonomy multaneously thenation)can servetheother as theopposite each ofthese(thestate, which needs to overcome its own society antagonisms. poleoftheunity divisions the These symmetrical keep questionof ornecessarily came the nation that which that created the first, iginsunresolved, is, one or theother stateor thestatethatcreatedthenation.As though out ofthepast withits ofthesetwoconcepts, emerging miraculously ownidentity had tobe themodeland "German," "Algerian"), ("French," A other. dilemma in of the induceshistorians cause and which, turn,
332
Etienne Balibar
to intrude otherconcepts: forexample, thenationalidea sociologists extreme the or ideology, or culture), or at theother (or consciousness, nationaleconomy or division of or devellabor, unequal (or market, It is remarkable how such quite concepts maybe used to opments). to either one of the two standard support responses the questionof to The statecreates thenationout ofan idea, or in response origins: economicconstraints, or thenationbuildsthestateas a wayoffulfilitsmateror ofpursuing consciousness, lingtheneedsofitscollective ial interests, in each case one of these"reflecting" the other. In thisregard in a difficult itself Marxist has found historiography a of thiscircle We have find out it could paradox. expected way might the"origins" ofthenationin the gameoflocating (theback-and-forth stateand vice versa)forat least tworeasons: variableofMarxismis theclass struggle, (1) The keyexplanatory whichis a typeofhistorical to theidea ofnational conflict orthogonal in one it is not difficult to see, is always, unity(and whosefunction, if not of class conflict, to relativize the importance way or another, to denyits veryexistence); is to reconstruct the genesisof political project (2) Its theoretical forms on thebasisoftheir in thefinal material located causes, analysis in the dynamic of the relations of production. In fact, theend result has been to reofclassicalMarxistanalyses alternatives of"bourgeois" producein different languagethestandard a oscillate between functionalist historiography. They argument (the nationas the expression of the capitalist divisionof labor,a specific ofproductive an instrument ofbourforces, stagein thedevelopment and a historicist as an anthropogeoishegemony) argument (thenation whose has the effect of the logicalunity very stability overdetermining classstruggle, for ita "natural" framework or,on theconbyproviding into it the of these trary, by adding impact disturbing "survivals"). Undertheconstant ofimmediate able and rarely events, pressure to taketimeforobjective Marxist about the nation debates analysis, have repeatedly come to thelogicalimpasseofall or nothing. Sometimestheyreintroduced thehistorical of or phenomenon nationality as the"real"substratum of capitalforwhichthecategories ethnicity ism or socialismwouldhave substituted abstractions (but this"read" was thendefined in themosttraditional ofways).And sometimes they to these within the of sought encompass phenomena concept "ideology,"
THE NATION FORM
333
status ofa discourse, but at thepriceofreducing themto thefleeting with a form evenan illusion. ofconsciousness, Similarly, theexception brief in Marxofsomeremarkable discussions, particular byGramsci, between twoequallyabstract on therelaistshave wavered positions national construction and the class Either between struggle. tionship theroleof"natural" national-builder to a class,endowed attributed they historical the more withan autonomous identity (usually bourgeoisie, naor eventheproletariat); or theydescribed thepeasantry recently as the historical form within tionalconstruction which,figuratively ofa "whole fadesawayin theconstitution or literally, theclassstruggle wins over of interests and culture out its social whose unity people," thesealternatives able to go beyond divisions.1 Rarelywastheanalysis in an fact divided because national as historical and study reality unity or evenas thelong-term class strategies, ofantagonistic consequence and the unstable of "class"identities of a continuous transformation between opposinginterests. equilibriaestablished ofseveral reasonswhythisepistemological No doubtwe can think The foremost reasonwas that shouldhavebeen so persistent. obstacle - thatofthefirst halfofthe in a political situation Marxismemerged rendered acuteby in which the"socialquestion," nineteenth centuryin was terms of two debated theindustrial revolution, opposite directly one theheirofrevolutionary ofuniversal cosmopolhistory, concepts and naconservatism a synthesis of sociological italism and theother wereputforward as competing "class" and "nation" suchthat tionalism, one was and candidatesforthe postof "historical required subject," thestrugwasthefact that there between them. tochoose Furthermore, and thedominant an organized revolutionary proletariat gle between in theform had nowbecomeconstituted a statethat classescontrolling ofnation historical confusion the statevirtually ofa national required theprosMarxism had no choicebutto identify and state. Thereupon, "end" of the statetout state with the of the national of the "end" pect itself for the"return"setwithin wasunknowingly Thus thestage court. ofthestateand thenation,always and politicallyboththeoretically the category of the nation linked.Having first rejected indissolubly in the of "social formations" and if was latent it analyses always (even it thenwas forced to reorganize in itsrevolutionary it, in programs), as a so-called a noncritical unbudgeable "reality," bynationalizing way, the party, and the socialiststate. the proletariat, successively
334
Balibar Etienne
of Marxismin itsconfronamid the misadventures Nonetheless, of social tationwiththe "nationalquestion" overtwolong centuries to the which to nationalism Marxism succumbed point history, during of transforming itself intoits oppositeas the efficacious languageof thereexiststhe extraordinary nationalism, possibility revolutionary This mustbe a critical of rethinking our historiographie categories. theconwhichimplies thatwe mustdeconstruct radically rethinking oftheclassstruggle nationalism"2 as thedenigration ceptof"historical as wellas theconas instance of such the prime denigration) (indeed to in its reduction of social relations materialism" cept of "historical direcThis is the an abstract of economic antagonisms. representation on whathas been tionin whichI intend to go,concentrating analysis the blind spotof theirconfrontation. Nation Social States Formation, Form, System - seemindispensThreegeneral abstractions concepts provisional In thelanguage able as a starting is socialformation. point.The first ofsothe a twin of inherited from this is but Marx, concept scholarly thenatureofthepoor ofcivilsociety. That is to say,it ignores ciety, on them the derivedstatus liticalinstitutions, thereupon conferring ofa superstructure. It remains impregnated bythedualismofliberal social and the who contrast the theoreticians, political.And beyond but thatof historical Marx, it containsanother specificity, meaning, at thepriceofaccepting the ideal entities and proposed purely simply or by stateideologies.When one speaksof a "Russian"or "French" in what socialformation were "Chinese" as though they given nature, the postuthatmeansis thatone has straightforwardly incorporated late of thetranshistorical them intothe existence ofnations, turning framework within which ofthemodesofproduction. occurs thehistory whose We ought a construction to use socialformation to meanrather socialclasses remains a configuration ofantagonistic unity problematic, in its thatis notentirely autonomous, specific onlybecoming relatively interto others and via thepowerstruggles, theconflicting opposition est groupsand ideologies dure whichare developed overthelongue by thisveryantagonism. The problemposed by the existence is not of social formations thatoftheir or their thatoftheir end,butprimarily merely beginning thatis, the conditions underwhichtheycan maintain reproduction,
THE NATION FORM
335
overlonghistorical which creates their thisconflictual unity autonomy oftheconditions underwhich, despite periods.It is also thequestion and of the incessant displacement "denaturing" the class structures, suchthatwe can continue remain boundedby"frontiers" suchentities an "idenand therefore claimfor them the same to call them name, by In Now suchnames("France," "Germany," "U.S.A.")are political. tity." wouldnotlead to a fetishthiscase, theconceptof socialformations sinceit wouldhave us ask izationofthestateor of nationalidentity, namesofstates theproper what within and boundaries, space-time why, is one gigantic witha social identity. wereinvested cemetery History orwhich which never attained and nations ofnamesofstates autonomy, ofthe us to analyzethe"centrality" lostit. But thisapproachrequires thetransforthatis, to consider ofsocialrelations, statein thehistory but as the"distillation" mationofthestatenot as an epiphenomenon of all the varioussocial antagonisms. "national" social formation Is thenevery as, once again,previous to think? lead one Obviouslynot. Firstof might conceptualizations the old questionof "stateless all because, quite aside from societies," sucexisted forms it seemsclearthatnumerous historically, political theform ofthenabefore with each other, or in competition cessively which to the one from and tionalstate other, entity crystallized spread collecor "subnationalist" of"nationalist" to theemergence led in turn or at least until to And thenbecause,right tivemovements. up today of thenationalstatewas not theonlyone in the form veryrecently, neither Unless we keep thatin mind,we can comprehend existence. the fact,we recordby saying its unequal development (which,after in more"backward" and others thatsomestatesare more"advanced" and the all the resistances norabove extraordinarily nation-building) and suchnation-building. thatsurround conflicts violent (Colonization but are or suchconflicts, provoke constitute decolonization them, they unusualvisibility.) not the onlysuch instances, Finally, despitetheir our under that of the it is by no meansout veryeyes, today, question whose socialformations of"postnational" thecreation we areobserving whose forms and topredict weare seeking future supra(transnational? to are we trying identify. national?) idea of socialformation, theverygeneral To makemoreconcrete We needto ponder thatofthenationform. we needa secondconcept, in its "place" form of the nation the progressive history: emergence
336
Etienne Balibar
and the conditions under which it emerges, the causes of its spread and of its variations.As alwaysin questions of historicalcategorizing, we are navigatinghere between the shoals of essentialismand formalism. The nation formcertainlydid not appear out of nowhere,perfectlyformed(even if there were in some sense prototypes,some of which played the decisive role of givingit its name). But neitherwas it infinitely plastic (even if, aftera certain point in time- a relatively recentone the rapport in the worldbecame such that a model deforces of"international relations"took over and required the universalization of state-construction and the autonomization of social formations).I believe that a reasonable middle way between these shoals will have been found if the idea of the "nation form"lets us articulate: (1) analyses of domination understandingwhy certain political formshave come to dominate others,eliminate them or make them subject to their own reproduction; (2) analysis of the trends in transformation understandingwhy thehistorical identities ofmodernsocial formations, althoughtheyhave moved in the directionof resemblingeach other,have not converged intoa singlehomogeneous"world" space, even thoughthe main entirely thrustof the capitalist economy,the principal forcein destructuring existingsocial relations,has been to organize itselfas a transnational economy; - by which I mean (to be discussed be(3) analyses of transition low) the need to understand not only in what way the nation form has "stabilized"certainsocial changes (which explains the aura of permanence, partiallyillusory,that it conferson the historyof human collectivities)but also in what way it ensures the passage fromone historicalworldto another,fromthe worldbeforenations to the world afterthem,while not trying to impose upon this evolutionsome preestablished model. When I speak of the nation formbeing the dominant formof the and of its being a form so-called "modernization" of social formations, of historicaltransition, of a set of charonce again I am not thinking acteristicsof the nation formbut ratherof the questions we need to answer to give theoreticalconsistency to this concept. But these questions are linked to a thirdconcept, that of the states system,or to be more exact the systemof competing states, which is an unstable relationship of conflictualequilibrium.
THE NATION FORM
337
If we need proofof the inescapable impact of this system,we find it in the formof warfarethathas become typicalin the era of national wars and in termsof economic and states,both in termsof territorial culturalwars,thatis as "total"wars in whichall the materialand moral resourcesup to and including the whole of the population are comwithitsreboundeffect mitted, upon thecreationofpoliticalunity.This kind of warfarewas unknown not only in the cities of Antiquitybut unifiedby "universalisreligions in the empiresor the politicalentities in the Middle Ages (lineage wars,dynasticwars,holywars). This form ofwarfareis probablyreachingitshistoricallimitstoday,but not without endless "survivals"(Balibar, 1983). of all that the nation formis What this permitsus to see is first realized only withina pluralityof nations. And then that the correspondence between the nation formand all other phenomena toward which it tends has as its prerequisitea complete (no "omissions")and and populations nonoverlappingdivisioning of the world's territory the therefore politicalentities,such thatno soresources)among (and materialor in the realm ofideas - can escape national cial "property"To each innor can any be nationallyoverdetermined. determination dividual a nation, and to each nation its "nationals."The principleof was already a step in this direction,to be replaced eiusregio cuiusregio by the "principleof nationalities"based on the ideal correspondence and so on. Finally,it was the of peoples, states,languages, currency, - because was historically factthatsuch a precisedivisioning impossible oflinguisticfrontiers, ofthe interweaving migrations, dynasticclaims, over colonies, revolutions,wars of religion,and so on - that conflicts the general formof the historyof national states has been the instawith its direct imand theirconstant"redefinition," bilityof frontiers In "national of and internal external on the identity." perception pact wereunchangeable."Colonization"was frontiers the citiesofAntiquity, carried out by creatinga new city.And in the ancient empireswhich, quite the opposite, extended theirhegemonyover heterogeneousterremained fundamenritoriesand populations, the idea of a frontier tally imprecise,linked to a continuum of degrees of allegiance and tribute,repeatedlyundone and reconstituted along totallynew lines, sometimesover centuries,sometimesin a day. (In this way Egypt, afof its own empire, could pass fromthe hand of the ter the destruction the Greeksto the Romans, the Arabs, Persiansto the Greeks,and from
338
Balibar Etienne
their ownimperialism) and theTurks.) The era ofnational states (with centers of theworldamongcompeting was the era of the"partition" in ofthe"nationalization" of individuals of society the them) (thatis, of the workforce whichweresimultaneously centers of exploitation werelaThe frontiers of social relations. and the "commodification" frontiers beled "natural" 1982;Joxe, 1979). (Bazin & Terray, havebeen meantto setthe All theseterminological considerations we moreprecisepropositions, To formulate stageforthediscussion. of the nationform. have to turnto the history PART II: HISTORY withour own,is always The history ofnations, already beginning to these whichattributes to us in the form of a narrative presented ofthenationthus of a subject.The formation entities thecontinuity in overcenturies, a of "project" stretching appearsas the fulfillment which thereare different stages and momentsof comingto selfwillportray whichtheprejudices ofthevarioushistorians awareness, ofFrance? theorigins as moreor lessdecisive (whereare we to situate therevolution withour ancestors theGauls? theCapetianmonarchy? that in anycase, all fit intoan identical of 1789?)but which, pattern: Such a represenofthenationalpersonality. oftheself-manifestation but it also expresses a retrospective tationclearly constitutes illusion, It consists is twofold. realities. The illusion institutional constraining overcenin believing which succeedone another thatthegenerations underan approximately stableterritory, turieson an approximately have handed downto each otheran invariant univocaldesignation, ofdevelopment in believing thattheprocess substance. And itconsists as so as to see ourselves from whichwe selectaspectsretrospectively, thatit repwas theonlyone possible, ofthatprocess, theculmination are thetwosymmetrical a destiny. and destiny resented figures Project in three of 1988 one The "French" oftheillusion ofnational identity. of whomhas at least one "foreign" (see Noiriel,1988) ancestor-are ofKing Louis XIV (notto speak connected to the subjects collectively events thecauses of ofcontingent oftheGauls) onlyby a succession theprojof"France," which to do either withthedestiny havenothing of"itspeople." ect of "itskings" or the aspirations our perbe allowedto prevent This critique shouldnot,however,
THE NATION FORM
339
- of myths as feltin the present of national orceivingthe effectivityA conclusive of this would be the French igins. singleperfectly example the fact of the to which Revolution, by very contradictory appropriations it is continuallysubjected. It is possible to suggest(with Hegel and Marx) that, in the historyof everymodern nation, whereverthe argumentcan apply,thereis never more than one single foundingrevolutionaryevent(whichwould explain both the permanenttemptation to imitateitsepisodes and characters, to repeatitsforms, and the tempto tationfoundamong the"extreme" either parties suppressit, by proving that national identityderives frombefore the revolutionor by awaiting the realization of that identityfroma newrevolutionwhich The mythoforiginsand national would completetheworkofthefirst). we can see which easily being set in place in the contemcontinuity, poraryhistoryof the "young"nations which emerged with the end of colonialism (like India or Algeria), but which we have a tendencyto forgethas also been created over recent centuriesin the case of the an effective "old" nations, is therefore ideological formin which the of national formationsis constructeddaily by imaginarysingularity the back from present into the past. moving
Stateto theNation-State From the "Prenational"
ofthe intoaccount? The "origins" How are we to take thisdistortion of institutions a back to national formation multiplicity datingfrom go of periods. Some are in factveryold: The institution widelydiffering the sacred languages ofthe both from statelanguages thatweredistinct forpurelyadministrative "local"idioms- initially purclergyand from in back aristocratic as but Europe languages goes subsequently poses, to theearlyMiddle Ages. It is connectedwiththeprocessby whichmotheprogresnarchicalpowerbecame autonomousand sacred. Similarly, of ofabsolutemonarchy siveformation broughtwithiteffects monetary and fiscal administrative centralization,and a relativedemonopoly, of the legal systemand internal"pacification." gree of standardization The ofthefrontier and the territory. the institutions It thusrevolutionized from a transition Reformation and CounterReformation precipitated betweentheeca situationin whichchurchand statecompeted(rivalry in which were to one the two and the clesiastical complemenlay state) case in a state extreme the tary(in religion). to us as prenational, beAll these structures appear retrospectively
340
Etienne Balibar
causethey intowhich madepossible certain features ofthenation-state, ofmodwereultimately to be incorporated with they degrees varying national forification. We can therefore the fact that the acknowledge thisprehistory mationis theproduct ofa long"prehistory." However, differs in essential of features from thenationalist myth a lineardesevents of qualitatively distinct it consists of a multiplicity First, tiny. event. out over none of which time, spread impliesany subsequent of theseevents do notoftheir naturebelongto thehistory Secondly, of theframework one determinate within nation.They have occurred with other unitsfrom thosewhichseemto us todayendowed political an original as in the twentieth ethicalpersonality century (thus,just in the wereprefigured the stateapparatuses of the "youngnations" ofthecolonialperiod,so theEuropeanMiddle Agessaw apparatuses of"Sictheoutlines within theframework ofthemodern stateemerge not even or And do "Catalonia," belongbynaily," they "Burgundy"). rival forms ture tothehistory ofthenation-state, buttoother example (for a series but evolution the"imperial" It is not a line of necessary form). into event after the ofconjunctural which has inscribed them relations of feature the prehistory of the nationform.It is the characteristic as institute states ofall types torepresent theorder eternal, though they case. is the shows that more or less the opposite practice thattheybe The factremains thatall theseevents, on condition have effectively intonew politicalstructures, repeatedor integrated This has precisely a role in national formations. the of played genesis cause thefact that todo with their institutional character and with they moin theform thestateto intervene which itassumedat a particular ment.In otherwords,non-national stateapparatusesaimingat quite other(forexample,dynastic) have progressively produced objectives havebeen intheelements ofthenation-state, or,ifone prefers, they "nationalized" and havebegunto nationalize society-the voluntarily of resurrection of Roman law,mercantilism, and the domestication we come thefeudal aristocracies are all examples ofthis.Andthecloser to the modernperiod,the greater theconstraint imposedby the accumulation of theseelements seemsto be. Whichraisesthe crucial of irreversibility. questionof the threshold been At what momentand forwhat reasonshas thisthreshold ofa system on theone hand,caused theconfiguration crossed, which, ofsovereign the states to emerge on the and, other, imposed progrs-
THE NATION FORM
341
sive diffusion of the nation formto almost all human societies over two centuriesof violent conflict?I admit that this threshold(which with a single date3) corresponds it is obviouslyimpossible to identify to the developmentofthe marketstructures and class relationsspecific the proletarianization of the labor to moderncapitalism(in particular, force,a processwhich graduallyextractsits membersfromfeudal and corporatistrelations). However,this commonlyaccepted thesisneeds qualifyingin several ways. It is quite impossible to "deduce" the nation formfromcapitalist relationsof production.Monetary circulationand the exploitationof wage labor do not logicallyentail onedeterminateformof state. More- theworld over,therealizationspace whichis impliedby accumulation - has withinit an intrinsic tendencyto transcendany capitalistmarket national limitationsthat mightbe instituted by determinatefractions means. May we, in of social capital or imposed by "extra-economic" continueto see the formation ofthe nation as a "bourtheseconditions, - taken over by that this formulation It seems likely geois project"? in its turn Marxism fromliberal philosophiesof history- constitutes a historical myth. However, it seems that we might overcome the if we take up the point of view of Braudel and Wallerstein difficulty of nations as being bound up not withthe which sees thisconstitution but withitsconcretehistorical form: ofthecapitalist abstraction market, whichis alwaysalready organized and hierthatof a "world-economy" and a "periphery," each ofwhichhave different archized into a "center" methodsofaccumulation and exploitationoflabor powerand between which relationsof unequal exchange and domination are established (Braudel, 1982; 1984; Wallerstein,1974; 1980). Beginning fromthe center,national units formout of the overall as a functionof the role theyplay in of the world-economy structure in a given period. More exactly,theyformagainst one that structure in the service of the center'sdomanother as competinginstruments This first inationofthe periphery. qualificationis a crucial one because of for the "ideal" capitalism of Marx and, particularly, it substitutes the Marxist economists,an "historicalcapitalism"in which a decisive role is played by the precocious phenomena of imperialism and the articulationof wars with colonization. In a sense, everymodern nation is a product of colonization: it has always been to some degree colonized or colonizing, and sometimesboth at the same time.
342
Etienne Balibar
However,a second qualificationis necessary.One of the most imconsistsin theirhavcontributions portantofBraudel and Wallerstein's than the nation other state shown in the of that, forms ing history capitalism, in comhave and have fora certaintimemaintained themselves emerged or instrumentalized: with before it, ultimately being repressed petition that of the transnational The formof empire and, most importantly, or several cities one centered (Brauupon politico-commercial complex, del, 1984; Wallerstein,1974). This formshows us that there was not but several a singleinherently "bourgeois"politicalform, (we mighttake oftheUnited thehistory the Hanseatic League as an example; however, is determined Provinces in the seventeenth by this alcentury closely ternativewhich echoes throughthe whole of its social life,including religious and intellectuallife). In other words, the nascent capitalist dependingupon circumstances bourgeoisieseemsto have "hesitated"between several formsof hegemony.Or let us rather say that there sectorsof exploieach connectedto different existeddifferent bourgeoisies, If the "national bourtation of the resources of the world-economy. won out, even beforethe industrialrevolution (though geoisies"finally of fusions and therefore at the cost of "time-lags"and "compromises" withotherdominantclasses), thisis probablybothbecause theyneeded and internally, to use the armed forcesof the existingstatesexternally new economic to the and because they had to subject the peasantry to turntheminto marketswhere order and penetratethe countrysides there were consumers of manufacturedgoods and reservesof "free" the concrete configulabor power. In the last analysis it is therefore not economic rations of the class struggleand logic which ex"pure" and of nation-states, each with its own history, plain the constitution of social formationsinto national the correspondingtransformation formations.
The Nationalization of Society
The world-economy is not a self-regulating, globallyinvariantsyscan merelybe regarded as local effects: tem, whose social formations it is a systemof constraints,subject to the unforeseeabledialectic of its internalcontradictions.It is globally necessarythat controlof the capitals circulatingin the whole accumulation space should be exerover theform cised fromthe center;but therehas alwaysbeen struggle in which this concentrationhas been effected. The privilegedstatus
THE NATION FORM
343
from thefactthat,locally, thatform ofthenationform derives made for an entire historical for itpossible least between period) struggles (at classesto be controlled and not onlyfora "capitalist heterogeneous so-called to emerge from class"butalso for these bourgeoisies properly bothcapableofpolitical, and cultural hestate economic, bourgeoisies The dominant andproduced and bythat hegemony. bourgeoisie gemony in formed one another thebourgeois social formations reciprocally a a subject," the statein thenational without by restructuring "process thestatus ofall theother classes:This explains form and bymodifying and cosmopolitanism. the simultaneous genesisof nationalism this conHowever maybe, ithas one essential simplified hypothesis form: We have ofthenationas a historical sequencefortheanalysis schmasonce and forall, notonly lineardevelopmental to renounce ofpoare concerned, but also in respect wheremodesofproduction to prevent us from There is, then,nothing liticalforms. examining rivalstatestructures in a new phase of theworld-economy, whether, once again. In reto form are nottending to thatofthenation-state ofa necbetween theillusion connection is a closeimplicit there ality, uncritical formations and the of social evolution unilinear essary form" ofpolitical instias the"ultimate ofthenation-state acceptance to forever failed be to destined tution, giveway perpetuated (having "endof the State").4 to a hypothetical ofconstituoftheprocess out therelative To bring indeterminacy matters from letus approach ofthenation tionand development form, For whom of a consciously the perspective provocative question: today In otherwords,whichare the social formations is it toolate? which, and ofthesysoftheworld-economy in spiteoftheglobalconstraint effect to whichit has givenrise,can nolonger temof states completely into nations,exceptin a purely theirtransformation juridicalsense conflicts thatproduceno decisivereand at thecostof interminable imis doubtless a even and sult?An a priori answer, answer, general but it is obviousthatthequestionarisesnotonlyin respect possible, thetransnationalicreatedafter of the"newnations" decolonization, warofplanetary thecreation zationofcapitaland communications, whichare toof"oldnations" and so on, but also in respect machines phenomena. by thesame day affected be tempted to saythatit is too late forthoseindepenOne might in theinstitutions which areformally dentstates equal and represented
344
Etienne Balibar
all to become self-centered which are preciselystyled"international," nations, each withits national language(s) of culture,administration, itsprotected interand commerce,withitsindependentmilitary forces, nal market,its currency and its enterprises competingon a worldscale with its and, particularly, rulingbourgeoisie (whetherit be a private since in one way or ancapitalistbourgeoisie or a State nomenklatura), other everybourgeoisie is a state bourgeoisie. Yet one mightalso be temptedto say the opposite: The fieldof the reproductionof nations, of the deploymentof the nation formis no longer open today except in the old peripheriesand semiperipheries;so far as the old "center" is concerned, it has, to varyingdegrees, enteredthe phase of the dewhich were connectedwiththe old compositionof national structures formsof its domination,even ifthe outcome of such a decomposition ifone accepts is both distantand uncertain.It clearlyseems, however, this hypothesis,that the nations of the futurewill not be like those of the past. The fact that we are today seeing a general upsurge of nationalismeverywhere (northand south,east and west) does not enable us to resolve this kind of dilemma: it is part of the formaluniversality of the international system of states. Contemporary nationalism,whateverits language, tells us nothingof the real age of the nation formin relation to "world time." if we are to cast a littlemore lighton this question, we In reality, ofnational characteristic ofthehistory musttakeinto account a further nationalization formations.This is what I shall call the delayed ofsociety, and is so delayed which first of all concernsthe old nations themselves that it ultimatelyappears as an endless task. An historianlike Eugen Weber has shown (as have other subsequent studies) that in the case of customs and beof France, universalschoolingand the unification liefsby interregional serviceand the sublabor migrationand military to patrioticideology did ordinationof political and religiousconflicts not come about until the early years of the twentieth century(Weber, that the French His demonstration suggests peasantrywas only 1976). finally"nationalized" at the point when it was about to disappear as the majorityclass (though this disappearance, as we know,was itself of naretardedby the protectionism that is an essentialcharacteristic tional politics). The more recentwork of Grard Noiriel shows in its turn that since the end of the nineteenthcentury, "French identity" has continuallybeen dependent upon the capacity to integrateim-
THE NATION FORM
345
migrantpopulations. The question arises as to whetherthat capacity is today reachingits limitor whetherit can in factcontinue to be exercised in the same form(Noiriel, 1984; 1988). the reasons forthe relativestability In ordercompletely to identify it is not sufficient of the national formation, merelyto referto the initial thresholdof its emergence. We must also ask how the problems of unequal development of town and countryside,colonization and decolonization, wars and the revolutionswhich theyhave sometimes ofsupranationalblocs and so on have in pracsparked,theconstitution tice been surmounted,since these are all events and processes which involvedat least a riskofclass conflicts beyondthelimitswithin drifting which theyhad been more or less easily confinedby the "consensus" of the national state. We may say thatin France as, mutatismutandis what made it possible to resolve in the otherold bourgeois formations, the contradictions capitalism broughtwith it and to begin to remake the nation format a point when it was not even completed(or to preventit fromcoming apart beforeit was completed) was the institution in the veryrethat is, of a state"intervening" of the national-social state, of indiin formation the and of the particularly economy production ofpublic health,and, more the structures structures, viduals, in family This is a tendencythat life." of whole in the "private space generally, - a point to which was presentfromthe beginningof the nation form I shall returnbelow- but one whichhas become dominantduringthe nineteenthand twentieth centuries,the resultof which is entirelyto subordinatethe existenceofthe individualsof all classes to theirstatus that is, to the fact of theirbeing "naas citizens of the nation-state, tionals."5
thePeople Producing
A social formation only reproducesitselfas a nation to the extent that, througha networkof apparatuses and daily practices,the indifromcradle to grave,at the same nationalis as homo vidual is instituted
. . . time as he/she is instituted as homooeconomicus, politicus,religiosus.
an open ifit is henceforth That is whythe question ofthe nation form, one, is, at bottom,the question of knowingin what historicalcondisuch a thing:by virtueof what internal tions it is possible to institute - and also by virtue of what symbolic and externalrelationsof force material practices?Asking this question formsinvestedin elementary
346
Etienne Balibar
in civilizationthe nais anotherway of asking oneselfwhat transition tionalization of societies correspondsto, and what are the figuresof individualitybetween which nationalitymoves. The crucial point is this: what makes the nation a "community"? Or ratherin what way is the formof communityinstituted by the nation distinguishedspecifically fromother historicalcommunities? attached Let us dispenseright with the antitheses traditionally away to that notion, the first of which is the antithesisbetween the "read" socialcommunity and the "imaginary"community. bythe reproduced Every that is, it is based on the projection is imaginary, functioning ofinstitutions of individual existence into the weftof a collectivenarrative,on the and on traditionslived as the trace of recognitionof a common name an immemorialpast (even when theyhave been created and inculcated in the recentpast). But this comes down to accepting that,in certain
are real. communities conditions, onlyimaginary
In the case of national formations, the imaginarywhich inscribes itselfin the real in this way is that of the "people."It is that of a comofthe state, whichrecognizesitself in advance in the institution munity which recognizes that state as "its own" in opposition to other states, and, in particular,inscribesits political struggleswithinthe horizon of that state: For example by formulating its aspirations for reform of"itsnational and social revolutionas projectsforthe transformation state."Without this,there can be neither"monopolyof organized violence" (Max Weber), nor "national-popularwill"(Gramsci). But such cona people does not existnaturally, and even when it is tendentially it all time. No modern nation does not exist for stituted, possesses a basis, even when it arises out ofa national independence given"ethnic" struggle.And, moreover,no modern nation, however"egalitarian"it The funthe mode of the extinctionof class conflicts. may be, fulfills damental problem is therefore to produce the people. More exactly, it is to make the people produce ^^continually as national community. Or again, it is to produce the effect of unity by virtue of which the people will appear, in everyone's eyes,"as a people,"thatis, as the basis and origin of political power. Rousseau was the first to explicitly conceive the question in these terms:"What makes a people a people"? Deep down, this question is no different fromthe one which arose a moment ago: How are individuals nationalized,or in otherwords,socialized in thedominantform
THE NATION FORM
347
Whichenablesus to put aside from theoutset ofnational belonging? a collective artificial dilemma:it is not a questionof setting another All is individual identities. but there individual, identity against identity thatis nothistorical, is no individual conor,in other words, identity a field ofsocialvalues,norms ofbehavior, within and collecstructed Individualsneveridentify withone another tivesymbols. (not even of mass movements or the ofaffecin the"fusional" practices "intimacy" everacquirean isolated do they tiverelations), nor,however, identity, is how The read which is an intrinsically notion. question contradictory reference ofindividual thedominant points identity changeovertime environment. institutional and withthe changing of the people (or of To the questionof the historical production we cannotmerely be content to replywitha nationalindividuality) and administrative of conquests, movements, population description destined to perceive The individuals of "territorialization." practices toof a singlenationare either as themembers themselves gathered as in the nations from diverse origins, geographical externally gether formed mutually byimmigration (France,U.S.A.) or else are brought a historical whichcontained within frontier one another to recognize out ofvariouspopulations themall. The peopleis constituted subject in every a of their must model law.However, to a common case, unity ofunification The process thatconstitution: (theeffective"anticipate" in mobilization for collective can be measured, nessofwhich example, to confront deathcollectively) in wartime, thatis, thecapacity presupIt must at one and of a form. the constitution ideological specific poses ofindividand a phenomenon thesame timebe a massphenomenon as of individuals effect an it must uation; "interpellation subjects" (Althemere inculcation ofpolitical more than is much which potent thusser) thisinculcation intoa moreeleone thatintegrates valuesor rather oftheaffects wemayterm offixation "primary") process mentary (which That ideological form ofthe"self." ofloveand hate,and representation of communication between indimustbecomean a prioricondition socialgroups notbysuppressing and between viduals(the"citizens") themto themand subordinating but by relativizing all differences, difference between "ourselves" itis thesymbolic in sucha waythat itself In which wins out and which is lived as irreducible. and "foreigners" an to use theterminology other words, proposed by Fichtein his Rede "external frontiers" of the State have to the Nation of 1808, dieDeutsche
348
Etienne Balibar
become "internalfrontiers" orwhich amounts to the same thingexternalfrontiers have to be imagined constantly as a projectionand of an internal which collective each person carprotection personality, ries within him/herself and enables him/herto inhabit the space of the stateas a place where one has alwaysbeen - and whereone always will be - at "home." What mightthatideological formbe? Depending upon the particular circumstances,it will be called patriotismor nationalism: The events which promote its formationor which reveal its potencywill be recorded and its origin will be traced back to political methodsthe combinationof"force" and "education"(as Machiavelli and Gramsci put it)- whichenable the stateto some extentto create public consciousness. But this creation is merely an external aspect. To grasp the deepest reasons for its effectiveness, attentionwill turn then, as theattention ofpoliticalphilosophy and sociologyhave turnedforthree centuries,towardthe analogy of religion, making nationalism and pa- ofmoderntimes. triotism out to be a religion ifnotindeedthe religion Inevitably,thereis some truthin this response. Not only because, formally, religionsalso instituteformsof communityby startingout from"souls"and individual identities and because theyprescribea social "morality," but also because theologicaldiscoursehas providedmodels forthe idealization of the nation and the sacralization of the state, which make it possible for a bond of sacrificeto be created between and "law"to be conferred individuals,and forthe stampof"truth" upon the rules of the legal system.6Every national communitymust have been represented at some point or anotheras a "chosenpeople."However,the political philosophiesof the classical age had already recognized the inadequacy of this analogy, which is equally clearly demonstratedby the failureof attemptsmade to constitute"civil religions," by the factthatthe "statereligion"ultimately only constituted a transitory formofnational ideology(even when thistransition lasted fora long time and produced importanteffects by superimposingrebeligious upon national struggles),and by the interminableconflict tween theological universality and the universality of nationalism. In reality, the opposite argumentis correct:Incontestably, national involves ideal of and foremost the ideology signifiers very name (first the nation or "fatherland") on to which may be transferred the sense of the sacred and the affects of love, respect,sacrifice, and fearwhich
THE NATION FORM
349
transfer butthat havecemented communities, place onlytakes religious here. The is is involved of becauseanother analogy itself type community if it werenot, it would be impossible based on a deeperdifference; moreor lesscompletely national to understand identity, integratwhy ends to replaceit, and forms of the identity, up tending religious ing to become"nationalized." itself forcing
and Ideal Nation FictiveEthnicity
instituted I applytheterm "fictive to thecommunity by ethnicity" in which This is an intentionally thenation-state. expression complex in keeping with theterm above,mustnotbe taken fiction, myremarks historical in the sense of a pure and simpleillusionwithout effects, with the understood but on thecontrary persona jictaofthe by analogy a "creation." in the senseof an institutional effect, juridicaltradition but as socialformations an ethnic base naturally, No nationpossesses includedwithin the populations are nationalized, them,dividedup that are them or dominated them ethnicized, is,represented by among a naturalcommunity, as iftheyformed in the past or in the future which and interests an of itself of culture, identity origins, possessing and social conditions.7 individuals transcend withthe ideal identical is not purelyand simply Fictiveethnicity to it, but is notindispensable whichis theobjectofpatriotism, nation as an idea or it the nationwould appear precisely forwithout only to no be addressed abstraction: an arbitrary appeal would patriotism's it possibleforthe expression which makes one. It is fictive ethnicity to meato be seen in thestateand continually ofa preexisting unity in theservice ofthenation mission" surethestateagainstits"historic ofa universalethnic and, as a fictively unity againstthebackground one- and only to each individual which attributes isticrepresentation thusdivides and which one- ethnic up thewholeofhumanity identity to so many ethnic different between corresponding potentially groups the more than much does nationalideology nations, justify strategies demands inscribes their It to control the state populations. by employed of the term: in sense the double of a sense in advanceto belonging and also what thatis, bothwhatit is thatmakesone belongto oneself Which means that human fellow to other one makes beings. belong inthe name thecollectivity as an individual, one can be interpellated, of of and The naturalization one bears. whosenameprecisely belonging
350
Etienne Balibar
the sublimationofthe ideal nation are twoaspects ofthe same process. How can ethnicity be produced? And how can it be produced in such a way thatit preciselydoes not appear as fiction, but as the most natural of origins?History showsus thatthereare two greatcompetand race. Most oftenthetwooperatetogether, ing routesto this:language for only their complementarity makes it possible for the "people" to be representedas an absolutely autonomous unit. Both express the idea that the national character (which might also be called its soul a means of tranor its spirit)is imminentin the people. But both offer two scendingactual individualsand politicalrelations.They constitute diverin a of "nature" of historical fact ways rooting populations (the sity of languages and the diversityof races appearing predestined), but also two ways of giving a meaning to theircontinued existence, of transcendingits contingency. By force of circumstance,however, at times one or the other is dominant, fortheyare not based on the and do not appeal to the same developmentof that same institutions symbols or the same idealizations of the national identity The fact of these different articulationsof, on the one hand, a predominantly thatis predominantly an ethnicity and, on theother, linguistic ethnicity racial has obvious political consequences. For this reason, and forthe sake of clarityof analysis, we must begin by examining the two separately. The language communityseems the more abstractnotion,but in realityit is the more concrete since it connects individuals with an origin which may at any moment be actualized and which has as its contentthe common actof theirown exchanges,of theirdiscursivecomof spoken language and the whole munication,using the instruments mass of written and recorded texts. This is constantlyself-renewing not to say that the communityis an immediate one, withoutinternal belimits,any more than communicationis in reality"transparent" tween all individuals. But these limits are always relative: Even if it were the case that individuals whose social conditionswere verydistant fromone anotherwere never in directcommunication,theyare bound together chain of intermediate discourses. by an uninterrupted are not isolated eitherde jure or de facto. They However, we should certainlynot allow ourselves to believe that this situation is as old as the world itself.It is, on the contrary, reThe recent. old and the Ancien societies markably empires Rgime
THE NATION FORM
351
oflinguistically based on thejuxtaposition werestill separate populaof mutually tions,on the superimposition incompatible "languages" and forthesacredand profane and thedominated, forthedominant oftranslations.8 there had tobe a wholesystem Between these spheres. are writers, formations thetranslators In modern national journalists, social actorswho speakthelanguageofthe"people" and politicians, in a waythatseemsall the morenaturalfortheverydegreeof dishas become tinction process bringto it. The translation they thereby oflandifferent "levels of translation between one internal primarily as different areexpressed and relativized Socialdifferences ways guage." a common code which and ofspeaking thenational suppose language, evena commonnorm(see Balibar,1985).This latter is, as we know, function it is to perwhose universal inculcated primary schooling, by thistask. form precisely thenacorrelation between is a closehistorical That is whythere instituofschoolsas "popular" and thedevelopment tionalformation or to elite but to not limited culture, serving tions, training specialized That ofindividuals. ofthesocialization thewholeprocess to underpin of a nationalist the schoolshouldalso be the site of the inculcation - is a secitis contested also theplacewhere ideology-and sometimes a lessindispensable asand is, strictly speaking, phenomenon, ondary institution which is theprincipal saythatschooling pect.Let us simply the It is as not, however, only community. ethnicity linguistic produces lifeare also schools and family one: The state,economicexchange, lanin a sense,organsoftheideal nationrecognizable by a common here own." Forwhatis decisive belongsto them"as their guagewhich as the official be should that thenational is notonly recognized language thatit shouldbe able to language,but, muchmore fundamentally, which each ofthelifeofa people,thereality element appearas thevery without in her own thereby destroyway mayappropriate hisor person of between the There is no contradiction its instituting ing identity. and clash between and the national one dailydiscrepancy language not different whichare precisely of-"classlanguages" languages.In feed All are fact,the twothings complementary. linguistic practices notto thetextwhichis addressed "loveofthelanguage" intoa single the "mother that but to nor to norm book tongue," particular usage, back beyondlearning is, to the ideal of a commonoriginprojected which of and forms and by thatveryfact specialist usage processes
352
Etienne Balibar
becomes the metaphorforthe love the nationals feelforone another.9 One mightthen ask oneself,quite apart fromthe precisehistorical questions which the historyof national languages poses- from the difficulties of theirunificationor imposition,and fromtheirelaboration into an idiom that is both "popular" and "cultivated" (a process which we know is farfrombeing completed today in all nation-states in spite of the labors oftheirintellectuals withthe aid of various interto pronational bodies) - whythelanguagecommunity is notalonesufficient
duce ethnicity. Perhaps this has to do with the paradoxical propertieswhich, by virtueof its very structure, conferson individthe linguisticsignifier ual identity. In a sense, it is always in the element of language that is of individuals are interpellated as subjects, foreveryinterpellation the order of discourse. Every "personality" is constructedwith words in which law, genealogy,history, political choices, professionalqualand psychology are set forth. But the linguisticconstruction ifications, mother ofidentity is by definition No "chooses"his/her individual open. tongue or can "change"it at will. However,it is always possible to apkind propriate several languages and to turn oneselfinto a different of bearer of discourse and of the transformations of language. The constrainingethnic memory linguisticcommunityinduces a terribly far call but it is one Barthes once went so as to it "fascist"), (Roland naturalwhichnonetheless it immediately possessesa strange plasticity: in a sense. It is a collective izes new acquisitions. It does so tooquickly at the cost of an individual forgetting memorywhichperpetuatesitself - a notion which in of "origins." The "second generation"immigrant this contextacquires a structured significance inhabits the national it the nation language (and through itself)in a manner as spontaneand the imagand as imperiousso faras affectivity ous, as "hereditary," which we think heaths are as the son of those native concerned, inary of as so veryFrench (and most of which not so long ago did not even have the national language as their daily parlance). One's "mother" tongue is not necessarilythe language of one's "real"mother.The lanwhichproduces the feelis a community inthe present guage community ing that it has always existed,but which lays down no destinyforthe successive generations. Ideally, it "assimilates"anyone, but holds no one. Lastly, it affects all individuals in their innermostbeing (in the in which themselvesas subjects), but its historical constitute way they
THE NATION FORM
353
is only bound to interchangeableinstitutions. When cirparticularity nations (as English, Spancumstances permit,it may serve different even French or survive the and ish, "physical"disappearance of do) the peoples who used it (like "ancient"Greek and Latin or "literary" of a particularpeople, Arabic). For it to be tied down to the frontiers of particularity, needs an extra degree (un supplment) or it therefore a principle of closure, of exclusion. This principle is that of being part of a common race. But here All kinds we mustbe verycarefulnot to giveriseto misunderstandings. of somatic or psychologicalfeatures,both visible and invisible,may ofa racial identity to creatingthe fiction and therefore lend themselves betweensocial groups naturaland hereditary differences to representing I have discussed eitherwithinthe same nation or outside its frontiers. elsewhere, as have others before me, the development of the marks historicalfigures of social ofrace and the relationtheybear to different What I am solelyconcerned withhere is the symbolickernel conflict. which makes it possible to equate race and ethnicityideally, and to unityof race to oneselfas the originor cause ofthe historical represent a of people. Now, unlikewhat applied in the case ofthelinguistic unity it cannot be a question here of a practice which is really community, common to all the individuals who forma political unit. We are not What we are speakequivalentto communication. dealingwithanything a fiction. of is therefore However, this fictionalso second-degree ing fromeverydaypractices, relationswhich imderives its effectiveness "life"of individuals. And, most importantly, structure the mediately whereas the language communitycan only create equality between individuals by simultaneously"naturalizing"the social inequality of linguisticpractices, the race communitydissolves social inequalities it ethnicizesthe social differin an even more ambivalent"similarity"; ence which is an expressionof irreconcilableantagonismsby lending and the "falsely" nait the formof a division between the "genuinely" tional. I thinkwe may cast some light on this paradox in the following way. The symbolickernelof the idea of race (and of its demographic thatis, quite simand culturalequivalents) is the schema of genealogy, fromgeneration of individuals transmits ply the idea thatthe filiation to generation a substance both biological and spiritual and thereby That is inscribesthem in a temporal communityknown as "kinship."
354
Etienne Balibar
thatthe the proposition as nationalideologyenunciates whyas soon to the same people are interrelated individuals belonging (or, in the kina circle of extended that should constitute mode, prescriptive they of the secondmode of ethnicization. ship),we are in the presence The objection willno doubtbe raisedherethatsuch a represennawhich havenothing societies and communities tation characterizes on this point that the tional about them. However,it is precisely is articulated innovation particular hingesby whichthe nationform withthetendency to themodern idea ofrace. This idea is correlative for as (still)codified prefsystems bytraditional "private" genealogies, a racial The idea to erential and community of marriage lineage, disappear. at the level dissolve makes itsappearance when the clan, ofthe frontiers ofkinship to be the social at the class, least, and,theoretically imagneighborhood community, That is, whennothing tothe threshold preofnationality: inarily transferred and when, citizens" ventsalliancewithanyof one's"fellow whatever, or "naton thecontrary, suchan allianceseemstheonlyone "normal" as one itself has a tendency to represent ural."The racialcommunity relations or as the commonenvelopeof family (the combig family From that or "Algerian" of "French," "American" families).10 munity his/her sowhatever has his/her each individual family, pointonward, becomesa contingent like propertycial condition, but the familyIn this to consider relation between individuals. order further, question ofthefamily, ofthehistory we oughttherefore to turnto a discussion as thatplayed an institution which hereplaysa roleevery bitas central is omniinthediscussion above,and onethat immediately bytheschool in race. the discourse of present TheFamily andthe School a subject We here run up againstthe lacunae in family history, whichremainspreyto the dominant to of laws perspective relating on theone hand,and on theother, life" as a litof"private marriage and The of recent histheme the erary anthropological subject. great is the emergence or small family of the "nuclear" toryof the family the and their and heredisby parental (constituted couple children) cussionis focused on whether it is a specifically "modern" phenomenon(eighteenth-nineteenth connected with forms bourgeois centuries) ofsociality ofAriesand Shorter) or whether it is theresult (thethesis ofa development thebasis ofwhichwas laid downa longtimebefore
THE NATION FORM
355
law and thecontrol ofmarriage aubytheChristian byecclesiastical thorities 1975; Goody,1983). (Goody'sthesis)(Aries, 1975; Shorter, In fact, thesepositions are not incompatible. But, mostimportantly, tendto pushintotheshadewhatis forus themostcrucialquesthey which has gradually beenestablished since tion:Whatis thecorrelation and thecodification ofpublicregistration ofthefamily theinstitution was the between the dissowhich the Code Napolon prototype) (of of"extended" and thepenetration offamily lutionofrelations kinship which from intervention of the nation-state runs relations the legby ofbirth in respect ofinheritance to theorganization control? islation nationalsocieties, Let us notehere thatin contemporary exceptfor "fanatics" and a fewwho are "nostalgic" forthedays a fewgenealogy a is no either of ofthearistocracy, body theoretical genealogy longer nor is it recorded and connor an objectoforal memory, knowledge and stores the archive it is the state which draws served up of Today privately: andalliances. filiations a deep and a superficial between Here againwe haveto distinguish ofcondiscourse levelis familialist level.The superficial (constitutive became linked with which at a servative earlystage very nationalism) within theFrench train political tradition particularly nationalism of dition.The deep levelis thesimultaneous life," emergence "private circle" andthe family the"intimate policyof the state, (small) family intothe public spherethe new notionof population whichprojects formeasuring and thedemographic it, ofthesupervision techniques The resultis that of its healthand morals,and of its reproduction. ofan autonomous circle is quitetheopposite themodern sphere family of the statewouldhalt. It is of whichthe structures at the frontiers are immediately between individuals in which therelations thesphere state and made a "civic" function with possibleby constant charged are aligned thesexeswhich with relations between assistance beginning the anarThis is also whatenablesus to understand to procreation. in on modern behavior takes "deviant" chistic tonethatsexually easily it moreusuallytook whereasin earliersocieties nationalformations, social security have Public health and on a tone of religious heresy. but by introducing not termforterm, confessor, replacedthefather a a new mission and newassistance, and therebotha new"freedom" between forealso a new demand.Thus, as lineal kinship, solidarity of the extended disand theeconomicfunctions family generations,
356
Balibar Etienne
solve, what takes their place is neither a natural microsocietynor a contractualrelation,but a nationalization of purely "individualistic" thefamily ofthe national whichhas as itscounterpart the identification witha symbolickinshipcircumscribed by rulesof pseudocommunity into a sense ofhava less to itself and with tendency project endogamy descendants. ing common antecedents as a feelingof having common That is whythe idea of eugenics is always latent in the reciprocal relationbetween the "bourgeois"familyand a societywhich takes the with nation form.That is why nationalism also has a secret affinity trasexism: Not so much as a manifestation of the same authoritarian ditionbut insofaras the inequalityof sexual roles in conjugal love and theanchoring constitutes pointforthejuridical,economic, child-rearing the state. Lastly, that is why and medical mediation of educational, the sociologists' therepresentation as a "tribalism"ofnationalism grand - is both mystificatory and alternativeto representing it as a religion a because it imagines nationalism as regresrevealing. Mystificatory sion to archaic formsof communitywhich are in realityincompatible withthe nation-state (this can be clearlyseen fromthe incompleteness of the formationof a nation whereverpowerfullineal or tribal soliof one darities still exist). But it is also revealing of the substitution a substitution whichthe nationeffects ofkinshipforanother, imaginary of the familyitself.It is also and which underpinsthe transformation what forces us to ask ourselvesto what extentthe nation formcan continue to reproduce itselfindefinitely (at least as the dominant form) that is, once reonce the transformation of the familyis "completed," lations of sex and procreationare completelyremoved fromthe genealogical order. We would then reach the limit of the material that ofconceivingwhat human "races"are and ofinvesting possibilities But particular representationin the process of producing ethnicity. we have not reached that undoubtedly point yet. of the "IdeologAlthusserwas not wrong in his outline definition ical State Apparatuses"to suggestthatthe kernelofthe dominantideocouple logy of bourgeois societieshas passed fromthe family-Church I to the family-school tempted couple (Althusser,1971). am, however, to introducetwo correctives to that formulation. First,I shall not say that a particularinstitution an "Ideoof this kind in itselfconstitutes logical State Apparatus": What such a formulation adequately designatesis rather thecombinedfunctioning ofseveral dominantinstitutions.
THE NATION FORM
357
I shall further importanceof schooling propose thatthe contemporary and the familyunit does not derive solely fromthe functionalplace they take in the reproductionof labor power, but fromthe fact that of a fictive eththeysubordinatethatreproductionto the constitution a a articulation of and comto the that is, linguisticcommunity nicity, in race of implicit population policies (what Foucault called munity but a ambiguous termthe systemof"bio-powers") (Fouby suggestive cault, 1977). School and familyperhaps have otheraspects or deserve to be analyzed fromother points of view. Their historybegins well before the appearance of the nation formand may continue beyond constitute the dominant ideological it. But what makes them together apparatus in bourgeois societies- which is expressedin theirgrowing interdependenceand in theirtendencyto divide up the time devoted to the trainingof individuals exhaustivelybetween them is their national importance,thatis, theirimmediateimportanceforthe producIn this sense, thereis only onedominant "Ideological tion of ethnicity. State Apparatus" in bourgeois social formations using the school and forits own ends togetherwith other institutions familyinstitutions and the family- and the existenceof that apthe school on to grafted paratus is at the root of the hegemonyof nationalism. I must add one remark in conclusion to this hypothesis. - even complementarity-does not mean harmony.LinArticulation are in a sense mutand racial (or hereditary) ethnicity guisticethnicity is open, above thatthelinguistic community uallyexclusive.I suggested in it closed whereastherace community appears principle (since leads until the end of the gentheoretically-to maintaining indefinitely, "inferior" or its the outside erations, marginsthose "foreign" community who, by itscriteria,are not authentically national). Both are ideal representations.Doubtless race symbolismcombines the element of anon whichit is based (the chain ofgenerations, universality thropological the absolute of kinship extended to the whole of humanity) with an imaginaryof segregationand prohibitions.But in practice migration the limits which are are constantlytransgressing and intermarriage thus projected (even where coercive policies criminalize "interbreedrather ing").The real obstacleto themixingofpopulationsis constituted caste phenomena. The which tend to reconstitute by class differences constantlyhas to be redefined:Yeshereditarysubstance of ethnicity "the French,"or "Anglo-Saxon"race, toterdayit was "German-ness,"
358
Etienne Balibar
or "Western-ness," tomorrow day it is "European-ness" perhapsthe "Mediterranean race." theopenness comofthelinguistic Conversely, is an ideal even it has as its material munity openness, support though thepossibility oftranslating from one languageto another and therefore thecapacity ofindividuals to increase therangeoftheir linguistic competence. Though formally egalitarian, belonging to the linguistic because of the factthatit is mediatized communityby the chiefly - immediately institution oftheschool differential re-creates divisions, norms which also overlap with classdifferences to a very great degree. The greater the role takenon by theeducationsystem within bourthemoredifferences in linguistic litergeoissocieties, (and therefore as caste and function ary, "cultural," technological)competence In these different "socialdestinies" toindividuals. differences, assigning be it is not that should circumstances, immediately surprising they terassociated withforms ofcorporal habitus (to use PierreBourdieu's nonwhich confer on the of in its act personal, speaking minology) universalizable traits thefunction ofa racialor quasiracialmark(and whichstilloccupya veryimportant of"class place in theformulation or "regional" ofspeech,lanaccent, "foreign" "popular" style racism"): "errors" ostentatious "correctness" or, conversely, guage immediately a speaker's and sponto a particular designating belonging population as a and an hetaneously interpreted reflectingspecific family origin The of is also the reditarydisposition.11 production ethnicity racialization of languageand the verbalization of race. It is notan irrelevant matter-either from theimmediate political of view or from the of view of the of point point development thena- that tionform or its future rolein theinstituting of social relations a particular of ethnicity shouldbe dominant since it representation leads to tworadically different to theproblem ofintegration attitudes and assimilation, twowaysof grounding thejuridicalorderand nainstitutions.12 tionalizing The French nation" accordeda privileged "revolutionary place to thesymbol oflanguage in itsowninitial of formation: It bound process to linguistic thedemocratization of political unity closely uniformity, the stateto the coercive of cultural local repression "particularisms," For its part,the patois being the objecton whichit became fixated. American on a double nation" built its ideals "revolutionary original
THE NATION FORM
359
"natives" and oftheAmerindian thatoftheextermination repression: betweenfree"White" men and "Black"slaves. thatof the difference from the "mother inherited The linguistic Anglo-Saxon community untilHispanic did notpose a problem at leastapparentlycountry" of class it the conferred symboland upon signification immigration in the history has alwaysbeen implicit of "Nativism" racial feature. at end of the nineteenth the Frenchnationalideology until, century, of theimportaon theone hand, and an intensification colonization ofmanualworkers tionoflaborand thesegregation bymeansoftheir of thephantasm of on theother, led to theconstitution ethnic origin in made race."It was, by contrast, the"French explicit veryquickly whichrepresented the nationalideology, oftheAmerican thehistory of of the Americanpeople not onlyas the melting formation pot a ofthedifferent ethcombination newrace,butalso as thehierarchical between at the costof difficult nic contributions European analogies inherited from slavand thesocial inequalities or Asian immigration of the Blacks.13 economic the reinforced and exploitation by ery in no sense impose any necessary differences These historical butthey ofpolitical thestuff arerather outcome-they deeply strugglesof assimilation, in whichproblems theconditions equalityof modify are posed. One and internationalism nationalism, citizenship, rights, offictive in regard to theproduction whether wonder seriously might will seek to the extent that it to of the ethnicity, "building Europe"and symbols ofthenationlevelfunctions tothe"Community" transfer ofa "Euthe institution toward itself state- willorientate predominantly whichlanguage)orpredom(and ifso, adopting ropeanco-lingualism" of idealization of the in direction the "Europeandemographic inantly to the"southern in opposition conceived populations" mainly identity" ofa nawhich is the Arabs,Blacks).14 product "people," Every (Turks, is forced tionalprocessof ethnicization, todayto findits own means in theworldof or identitarian of goingbeyondexclusivism ideology relations of force.Or and planetary communications transnational in of find the transformation to is individual rather: compelled every of "his/her" the imaginary people the means to leave it, in orderto he/she ofother withtheindividuals communicate peopleswithwhich the same future. sharesthe same interests and, to some extent,
360 NOTES
Balibar Etienne
Mourir textes pour la patrieet autres (1985).
a givenclass as theonly"na1. These twopossibilities maybe combined bypresenting tional" theinterests ofthewholepeople, conditions class,one whichundercertain expresses "aboveclass." or one whichis able to imposeon the others a statewhichis apparently Ren Gallisot. 2. A phraseI have takenfrom one might 3. Ifone did,however, haveto choosea datesymbolically, pointtothemiddle thebreakoftheNewWorld, ofthesixteenth thecompletion oftheSpanishconquest century: wars in England,and the beginning up of the HabsburgEmpire,the end of the dynastic of the Dutch War of Independence. thatthe"orthodox" aboutthefact 4. Fromthispointofview, there is nothing surprising doctrine became theofficial Marxisttheory of thelinearsuccession of modesof production as it made in theSovietUnion at thepointwhennationalism there, particularly triumphed nation. it possibleforthe"first as the new universal socialiststate" to be represented surla ci5. Forsome further remarks on thissame point,see mystudy,Propositions toyennet" (Balibar,1988). see is clearly of crucialsignificance: b. On all thesepoints,the workot Kantorowicz sincethe 7. I say"included within but I shouldalso add "orexcluded them," by them," thereare no withthatof the"nationals": ethnicization of the"others" occurssimultaneously ones(thustheJewsalso haveto be a "peodifferences other thanethnic longer anyhistorical and E. M'Bokolo(1985). ofcolonized seeJ.-L.Amselle ple").On theethnicization populations, are as opposed 8. Ernest Anderson Gellner(1983) and Benedict (1983),whoseanalyses as "materialism" stress thispoint. and "idealism," bothrightly on thispoint,though 9. Jean-ClaudeMilneroffers someverystimulating suggestions more in Les Nomsindistincts than in LAmour de la langue (1978). On the "class (1983: 43ff.) alternative in theU.S.S.R. at thepointwhenthepolicyof"sostruggle"/"language struggle" E. RouY. Mignot, cialismin one country" becamedominant, see F. Gadet,J.-M.Gaymann,
dinesco, Les Matresde la langue(1979).
racismand between ofthecommutation 10. Let us add thatwe haveherea surecriterion with thesenotions nationalism: discourse on thefatherland or nationwhichassociates Every - is alreadyensconced in theunirate the"defence not to speakof thebirth ofthefamily"verseof racism.
lindeschanges 11. See P. Bourdieu, Distinction dire:L'conomie (1984), and Ce queparlerveut
dusociologue in L'Empire guistiques by the"Rvoltes logiques"collective (1982),and thecritique and social rolesas "destinies" on thewaythatBourdieu fixes (1984), whichbears essentially the"toof reproducing between thema function attributes to the antagonism immediately on languageis by FranoiseKerleroux). tality" (the chapter on thispointin Gadet & Pecheux(1981:38tt.). 12. See some mostvaluableremarks and 13. On American see R. Ertel,G. Fabre,& E. Marienstras "nativism," (1974: 25ff.) Michael Omi & HowardWinant(1986: 120). It is interesting to see a movement developing callingforEnglish todayin theUnitedStates(directed immigration) againstLatinAmerican to be made the official nationallanguage. 14. Rightat the heartof thisalternative crucialquestion:will lies the following truly theadministrative and educational ofthefuture institutions "UnitedEurope"acceptArabic, withFrench, or evencertain Asian or African on equal footing German, Turkish, languages and Portuguese, or willthoselanguagesbe regarded as "foreign"? REFERENCES in Lenin andPhilosophy Louis (1971)."Ideology and StateIdeologicalApparatuses," Althusser, andOther London: NLB, 127-86. Essays.
THE NATION FORM
361
tribalisme etEtatenAfrique. Paris: de l'ethnie: Ethnie, Amselle, J.-L. & M'Bokolo, E. (1985). Au coeur La Dcouverte. on theOrigin and Spread Communities: Anderson, Benedict (1983). Imagined ofNationalism. Reflections London: Verso. trans. Robert Baldick. London: Cape. Aries, Philippe (1962). Centuries of Childhood, Balibar, Etienne (1982). "The Long March for Peace," in Edward Thompson et al., eds., Exterminism and Cold War. London: Verso, 135-52. in C. Wihtol de Wenden, d., La Balibar, Etienne (1988). "Propositions sur la citoyennet," Paris: Fondation Diderot. Citoyennet. descarolingiens dufranais: Essai surle co-linguisme la Rpublique. Balibar, Rene (1985). L'institution Paris: Presses Univ. de France. etguerres d'Etaten Afrique. Paris: Ed. des de lignage Bazin, Jean; Terray,E., et al. (1982). Guerres Archives Contemporarines. de changes Paris: Fayard. Bourdieu, P. (1982). Ce que parlerveutdire:L'conomie linguistiques. trans. Richard Nice. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction, II: The Wheels trans. Sin Reyand Capitalism, Braudel, Fernand (1982). Civilization ofCommerce, nolds. London: Collins. and Capitalism, III: The Perspective trans. Sin Braudel, Fernand (1984). Civilization oftheWorld, Reynolds. London: Collins. in Margins Derrida, Jacques (1982). "Diffrance," ofPhilosophy. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1-29. aux Etats-Unis. Paris: MasErtel, R.; Fabre, G. & Marienstras, E. (1974). En Marge:Les minorits pro. I, trans. Robert Hurley. London: Allen Lane. Foucault, Michel (1977). A History ofSexuality, Gadet, Franoise & Pcheux, Michel (1981). "^anthropologie linguistique entre le Droit et Paris: Maspro. la Vie," in La Langue introuvable. Gadet, F, et al. (1979). Les Matresde la langue.Paris: Maspro. and Nationalisms. Oxford. Blackwell. Gellner, Ernest (1983). Nations andMarriage in Europe.Cambridge: Cambridge ofthe Family Goody, Jack (1983). TheDevelopment Univ. Press. social. Paris: Ed. Galile. Joxe, Alain (1979). Le Rempart etautres textes. Paris: Presses Univ. de France. Kantorowicz, Ernst E. (1985). Mourir pourla patrie de la langue.Paris: Ed. du Seuil. Milner, Jean-Claude (1978). LAmour Paris: Ed du Seuil. Milner, Jean-Claude (1983). Les Noms indistincts. etproltaires, 1880-1980. Paris: Presses Univ. de France. Noiriel, Grard (1984). Longwy: Immigrs XIX-XX sicles. Histoire del'immigration, Paris: Ed. du Seuil. Noiriel,Grard (1988). Le Creuset franais: in theUnited States:Fromthe1960s Omi, Michael & Winant, Howard (1986). Racial Formation to the1980s. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Paris: La Dcouverte. du sociologue. "Rvoltes logiques" collective (1984). L'Empire Shorter, Edward (1975). The MakingoftheModem Family.New York: Basic. I: Capitalist and theOrigin Wallerstein, Immanuel (1974). The Modem World-System, Agriculture of New York: Academic. in theSixteenth theEuropeanWorld-Economy Century. II: Mercantilism and theConsolidation Wallerstein, Immanuel (1980). The ModernWorld-System, of 1600-1750. New York: Academic. theEuropeanWorld-Economy, intoFrenchmen. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press. Weber, Eugen (1976). Peasants

Balibar - The Nation Form

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Balibar - The Nation Form

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Foundation of SUNY

The Nation Form

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

THE NATION FORM

Mourir textes pour la patrieet autres (1985).

THE NATION FORM

You might also like