When does nationalism turn violent?

Abstract

Of all the civil wars that have erupted over the past half-century, a large numberbut hardly allinvolve nationalist movements pursuing greater autonomy. While the sheer number of ethno-nationalist civil wars offers evidence that nationalism can contribute to warfare, many countries with multiple and competing forms of nationalism are not afflicted by civil war and manage nationalist tensions in non-violent ways. Thus, nationalism appears linked to warfare but is neither necessary nor sufficient for it.This chapter explores factors that help determine whether nationalist movements turn violent. It compares competing nationalist movements in Canada and Sri Lanka and considers why the former has been overwhelmingly peaceful while the latter has suffered a long and devastating civil war. The analysis suggests that nationalism promotes civil war by intensifying grievances and shaping incentives but that these effects depend on contextual factors. Most notably, nationalism has only limited motivational effect in environments with abundant resources and effective and non-discriminatory political institutions. Alternatively, it intensifies the grievances caused by economic scarcity and ineffective and discriminatory political institutions, increases incentives to eliminate nationalist rivals in environments with limited resources and ineffective and discriminatory political institutions, and thereby contributes to nationalist violence.Theoretical approach: nationalism, grievances, interests, and elites For this analysis, I draw on my recent work (Lange 2012) and employ a theoretical approach that considers how nationalism helps motivate people to act violently. It focuses on two mechanisms. The first is the competition mechanism. Through it, individuals act violently in order to eliminate competitors. It is a variant of the rational-choice mechanism, as 124 terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.

Climate action now: How to fuel a social movement

“…First, we explore the mindset of individual upstanders-people who contribute to community-based climate solutions by rising up to solve problems (Nardini et al, 2021). Second, we examine collective action-upstanders acting together in solidarity with a shared purpose to address the climate crisis in grassroots communities-and its associated collective mindset (Diani, 1992;Gage, 2018;Horn, 2013). Such collective action is the basis for building the success of the climate movement because social movements result from grassroots collective action (Nardini et al, 2021).…”