Constitutional Bootstrapping: the Irish Nation
by Desmond Clarke
What Brubaker calls homeland nationalism looks further afield and is designed to protect the interests, as perceived from the core nation, and those who live in other states and are deemed to be members of the same nation. Evidently, these two kinds of nationalism are at cross purposes. To the extent that citizens of one state are said to share nationality with a core nation in a different state, they are likely to be the objects of assimilation by two competing movements the nationalising nationalism of a core nation in their own state and the homeland nationalism of some nation in another state. Thus in any multi nation state - ie nearly all modern states - competing nationalisms are likely to foster conflicts about cultural identity, and to distract attention from integrating citizens into the country to which they currently belong.
The cultivation of some forms of nationalism may also be inimical to democracy. As Brubaker comments, ' national building policies and democracy building policies are conflicting political logics.' 12. National building gives primacy to the cultural identity of citizens and to efforts to unite in a single political structure all those who are identified as members of the same nation. It also privileges, within the state, those who are conationals over others who are deemed either non nationals or less genuinely members of the 'core nation'. In contrast, democracy building is motivated by a different objective, namely to establish political structures which facilitate the participation, in decision making of all citizens, whatever their national identities.
The problem raised by Brubaker occur, not in the transition to establishing a new state, but in deploying different kinds of nationalism in the policies of established states vis-&aagrave;-vis their own citizens and those of neighbouring states. The implications of such policies are more starkly evident if the nationalisms in question are embedded in the state's constitution. Given the semantic richness, density and contested character of the concept of a 'nation' and the variety of nationalist claims that are made on behalf of nations, it would not be surprising if some of its latent implications emerged in the interpretation of any constitution that explicitly appeals to a nationalist political philosophy. These implications may also be inconsistent.
Articles 2 and 3
The revised articles of the Constitution exhibit clear signs of what Brubaker has termed homeland nationalism. The Constitution distinguishes between the 'Irish nation' and the state; the former is called 'naisun na hEireann' while the latter is called simply 'Eire'. Following the Nineteenth Amendment and the Government Declaration of December 2 1999, the Constitution (in Article 2) extends a right to membership of the historical, cultural reality called ' the nation' to all those born on the island of Ireland, to those who qualify legally for citizenship, and it expresses a 'special affinity' with people all over the world who share the cultural identity and heritage of the core nation. The aspiration towards unifying the nation is made even more explicit in Article 3, in which 'the Irish nation' is said to have a firm will to unite all the people of the island of Ireland.
At the same time, the Constitution continues to exhibit equally clear signs of the nationalising nationalism which partly motivated its original drafting. This is particularly evident when the Irish language is identified as the national language and ' first official language' while English is merely one of the two official language of the state (Article 8, 1). The equivalence synonymy of 'Irish' and 'the national language' is such that the Irish text of the Constitution often uses 'Gaeilge' where the English text has the phrase 'the national language'. Multiculturalist disputes elsewhere in the world, including Western democracies such as Canada and Belgium, testify to the significance of language as a central factor in cultural identity. To the extent that the identity of nations depends to a great extent on their culture and that language is central to culture, it is very significant that Article 18.7.1 (I)described the first panel for potential members of Seanad Eireann as persons with 'knowledge and practical experience' of 'National Language and Culture......' (in the Irish text: (An Ghaelge agus an tSaiocht Naisunta)
If membership of the Irish nation is to be expended to include all those
born on the island of Ireland, can the Constitution claim that Irish is
their national language and that Irish culture is so uniquely linked with
Gaeilge? The competing aspirations of nationalising nationalism and homeland
nationalism are evident; if 'the Irish nation' is to include such culturally
disparate groups as those mentioned in Articles 2 and 3, the criteria for
membership can no longer be defined by reference to the almost extinct language
of a core nation. Fundamentally, if a large majority of people on the island
of Ireland, as expressed in their approval of the Good Friday agreement,
wish to acknowledge the diverse cultural identities of people on the island
and to foster mutual understanding and reconciliation, is this objective
not likely to be obstructed and confused by inserting into the constitutional
law of the state called Eire/Ireland expressions of incompatible types of
nationalism? |
