Banal nationalism refers to everyday representations of anation, which build a sense of sharednational identity.[1]
The term is derived from English academic,Michael Billig's 1995 book of the same name and is intended to be understood critically. Billig's book has been described as 'the fourth most cited work on nationalism ever published'.[2] Billig devised the concept of 'banal nationalism' to highlight the routine and often unnoticed ways that establishednation states are reproduced from day to day.[3]
The concept has been highly influential, particularly within the discipline ofpolitical geography, with continued academic interest since the book's publication in 1995.[4] Today the term is used primarily in academic discussion ofidentity formation,geopolitics, and the nature ofnationalism in contemporary political culture.[5]
Examples of banal nationalism include the use offlags in everyday contexts,sporting events,national songs, symbols on money,[6] popular expressions and turns of phrase,patriotic clubs, the use of implied togetherness in the national press, for example, the use of terms such asthe prime minister,the weather,our team, and divisions into "domestic" and "international" news. Many of these symbols are most effective because of their constant repetition, and almostsubliminal nature. Banal nationalism is often created via state institutions such as schools.[7]It can contribute to bottom-up processes ofnation-building.[8]
Michael Billig's primary purpose in coining the term was to clearly differentiate everyday, regular nationalism fromextremist variants. He argued that the academic and journalistic focus on extreme nationalists,independence movements, andxenophobes in the 1980s and 1990s obscured the strength of contemporary nationalism, by implying that nationalism was a fringe ideology rather than a dominant theme in contemporary political culture.[4][5]
Billig noted the almost unspoken assumption of the utmost importance of the nation in political discourse of the time, for example in the calls to protectKuwait during theGulf War, or to take action in the United States after theSeptember 11 attacks. He argues that the "hidden" nature of modern nationalism makes it a very powerful ideology, partially because it remains largely unexamined and unchallenged, yet remains the basis for powerfulpolitical movements, and mostpolitical violence in the world today. Banal nationalism should not be thought of as a weak form of nationalism, but the basis for "dangerous nationalisms".[9]
However, in earlier times, calls to the "nation" were not as important, whenreligion,monarchy orfamily might have been invoked more successfully to mobilize action. Billig also uses the concept to disputepost-modernist claims that thenation state is in decline, noting particularly the continuedhegemonic power ofAmerican nationalism.
