Social Sciences in China, 2014

Vol. 35, No. 2, 174-188, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02529203.2014.900891

SPECIAL ISSUE: NATIONAL IDENTITY IN THE COURSE OF

GLOBALIZATION
National Identity Crisis in Developing Countries in the Global Age and
Its Causes
Zhou Guanghuia and Liu Xiangdongb
a and b
College of Public Administration, Jilin University

20世纪90年代以后，随着冷战的结束，世界图景发生了巨大变化，全球性族裔冲
突和民族矛盾更加凸显，这使得国家认同成为现实和学术关注的重点问题。在全球化
时代，要较好地处理国家认同问题，需要在基础理论层面对国家认同发生的逻辑，即
民族认同的性质、国家认同的性质、国家认同对地方民族认同以及国家认同危机发生
的逻辑等进行彻底的分析。从社会认同需求的角度分析，全球化对现代世界权力结构
的改变削弱了发展中国家的自主性，特别是发展中国家的现代化尚未完成，面临着社
会转型的风险，呈现出结构性失衡，从而降低了国家整合治理能力，使得国家认同对
民族成员的意义进一步被削弱，并引起了地方民族认同的兴起，进而导致了发展中国
家的国家认同危机的发生。

关键词：发展中国家 国家认同 国家认同危机

After the 1990s, with the end of the Cold War, great changes have occurred in the world
scenario, with ethnic clashes and national conflicts becoming all the more salient, making
national identity a hot topic in reality and the academia. To address the issue of national
identity in the age of globalization, a deep-going theoretical discussion of the logic behind it
is necessary, a discussion that covers the nature of both ethno-cultural identity and national
identity, the superiority of national identity to ethno-cultural identity and the logic behind
national identity crisis. In terms of the need for social identity, globalization, while changing
the power structure of the world, weakens the autonomy of developing countries, especially
that of those which are still in the process of modernization and are confronted with risks
inherent in social transformation and where a resultant structural imbalance undermines
the state’s integrity and control, making national identity less appealing to ethnic groups.
As a result, regional ethnic identity comes to the fore, leading to national identity crises in
developing countries.

Keywords: developing countries, national identity, national identity crisis

© Social Sciences in China Press

 Zhou Guanghui and Liu Xiangdong 175

Since the 1990s, with the end of the Cold War, great changes have occurred on the world
scene. Ethnic clashes and conflicts between peoples have become more salient. Instead of
a world free from national conflicts, as many had anticipated, the international community
has been brought face to face with a new harsh reality: the rise of nationalism, the dominant
ideology in developing countries now that opposition between the former rival ideologies
has subsided.1 Multi-ethnic countries undergoing modernization, in particular, are being
threatened by ethnic separatism from within, in a grave challenge to their sovereign integrity
and constitutional order. The present paper discusses the causes of national identity crises in
multi-ethnic countries in the context of globalization by analyzing the respective functions of
national identity (guojia rentong 国家认同) and regional ethnic identity (diqu minzu rentong
地区民族认同).

I. A Logical Analysis of the Emergence of National Identity Crises

In the post-Cold War era, long-term political conflicts among ethnic groups have been
growing rapidly worldwide. This is especially true of Africa and Southeast Asia, where about
80 percent of ongoing ethnic conflicts occur.2 When seen in terms of the relationship between
national identity and ethno-cultural identity (minzu rentong 民族认同), at the heart of this
failure of governance lie identity crises in which members of ethnic groups at the local level
have critical difficulties in identifying with the state’s political organs, political power and
other basic state institutions and therefore turn to an inherent ethno-cultural identity that
substitutes “parochial loyalties” to a secondary group for the broader concept of citizenship.3
Hence, ethno-cultural identity as a special form of cultural identity becomes a threat to
national identity and weakens its validity, resulting in a lack of due respect for constitutional
authority and legal order of the political community and even the breakup of the state.
1. The nature of ethno-cultural identity
In the general sense, identity refers to an emotional and conscious ’ sense of belonging
that emerges in people’s social life. Closely related to psychological activity, it involves a
process of convergence between the individual and other people, groups or role models in
terms of emotion and psychology. 4 It represents an emotional affinity with and conscious
recognition of belonging to one’s own ethnic group.5 In terms of content, this type of identity
includes a shared language, shared faith and shared customs.6 In a pure “nation-state,” where
the ethnic group constitutes the nation and the nation is composed solely of members of one

1 Anthony D. Smith, “Foreword to the Chinese Translation,” p. 1.

2 See Monty G. Marshall and Ted Robert Gurr, Peace and Conflict 2003: A Global Survey of Armed
Conflicts, Self Determination Movements, and Democracy, pp. 12-17.
3 Myron Weiner, “Political Integration and Political Development,” pp. 52-64.
4 Che Wenbo, Selected Works on Freudianism, p. 375.
5 Wang Xi’en, “Ethnic Identity and Ethnic Awareness.”
6 Hao Shiyuan, “Discussion of Western Academic Definitions of an Ethnic Group.”
176 Social Sciences in China

ethnic group, the ethnic group and the nation become one and the same. Politically, in such a
nation state, ethno-cultural identity coincides with national identity in terms of geography and
membership. When its members identify with their ethnicity, they identify with the nation.
In a multi-ethnic state, however, ethno-cultural identity tends to mean identification with
a particular group or groups of citizens. It is an identification with a given ethnic group or
groups, not a universal identity that covers all members of the nation. Ethno-cultural identity
is therefore cultural in nature rather than political. In terms of origin, ethno-cultural identity is
a social identity based on natural properties.
Firstly, in a multi-ethnic society, ethnic identity is a peculiar social identity which involves
only a segment of the total population. Its peculiarity is determined by how each ethnic group
relates to the state as a whole. On the one hand, all such states have either been constructed
by multiple ethnic groups for various historical and cultural reasons, or have emerged after
the founding due to their discriminatory policies. Thus, no one ethnic group can be equated
with the nation; it is merely a part of the nation. On the other, ethno-cultural identity stresses
common ancestry/descent, shared historical memory, social customs and language. These
features tend to differ greatly between ethnic groups, leading to quite different ethno-cultural
identities. Consequently, all constituent ethnic groups are on an equal footing, with their
identity being shaped by only their own members, who form but one component of the total
population. Such an identity is one of many that coexist in a multi-ethnic state; it cannot
become a universal identity shared by all members of the political community, otherwise it
would pose a threat to other ethnic groups coexisting with it but markedly different from it.
Secondly, ethno-cultural identity is also a form of cultural identity. In everyday life, people
generally divide modern society into economic, cultural, political and other fields, with each
running on its own set of principles, such as the principle of market exchange in the economy
and the principle of the public interest in politics. Each set of principles works within a certain
field; if one usurps the position of another, the self-operating system will malfunction and
social disruption may even ensue. Ethno-cultural identity involves the conscious recognition
of the common ancestry, language, customs, tradition, historical memory and way of life
shared by members of a given ethnic group. It is a cultural affiliation formed on the basis of
experience of particular religious beliefs, history and culture. What people require of ethno-
cultural identity is a sense of belonging together with a spiritual anchorage. Therefore, in
terms of its normative significance for behavior, ethno-cultural identity, as a form of cultural
identity, provides value guidance on a cultural level for people’s deepest questions about their
lives. It is thus a cultural identity that possesses a kind of personal emotional value, not one
that involves an alliance in the public domain.7 Ethno-cultural identity in a multi-ethnic state,
therefore, should exist in the realm of culture. It should guide conduct through morality and
public opinion rather than through coercion; still less should it impose a code of conduct in
the public sphere by means of coercion.

7 See Xu Bi, “Introduction,” p. 15.

 Zhou Guanghui and Liu Xiangdong 177

Finally, ethno-cultural identity is a social identity based on man’s natural disposition. It

answers the question “Who are we?” Human beings tend to define “we” according to the basic
traits members of the group share, thus forming a social identity. These traits include blood
ties, language, religion, ethics, taboos and myths as well as geography. They clearly mark off
one ethnic group from another and thus become the basis of ethno-cultural identity. People
with the inherited or ascribed nation have been shaped by a shared language and history.8 It is
this shared ancestry that determines the exclusive nature of ethno-cultural identity. Ethnicity
thus becomes an “inalienable property”9 of an ethnic group. For the members of that group,
ethnicity is inborn and has nothing to do with one’s preference or conscious effort. In other
words, a person who happens to be born in an ethnic group is labelled as possessing the traits
of that group. Whether he likes it or not, or however he lives later on, he is stuck with these
traits, unable to delete or alter them. Ethno-cultural identity, therefore, resists the rational
reflection which is a hallmark of modernity and which has been the dominant principle
underlying modern life. It is this resistance that renders ethno-cultural identity unfitted to set
norms of conduct in the public sphere in modern times.
2. The nature of national identity
National identity is political in the sense that it involves conscious recognition of the “state”
as a political community by members of different ethnic groups who create it by virtue of
their mutual recognition. Its salient features are its political nature, universality and rational
choice, features determined by the nature of the subject and object of the identity and the way
it comes into being as well as by the role of constitutional laws and regulations.
Firstly, we look at the object of national identity, or what it acts on; this is what makes
it political. National identity in this sense means acknowledgement of the authority of the
fundamental state institutions and political system and the agreement, approval and support
given by citizens to constitutionally based state power and legal systems. Essentially, it has
to do with the political legitimacy of the state and represents “the political recognition of the
political, economic and socio-cultural systems”10 of the state. It embodies the relationship
between members of the community and the state itself and represents the political
identification of citizens with the state’s overall organizations, institutions and legal systems
grounded in political power. Only when universal recognition of these core organs of public
power is achieved among its citizens will the state achieve the legitimacy necessary to its
stability and development.
Secondly, we look at the subjects or actors in national identity: the citizens. Unlike the
subjects of ethno-cultural identity, who are bound by common ancestry, the subjects of
national identity, or citizens, embody greater openness and equality. Equality means all
members of the state are equal regardless of their blood, faith, race, customs or history.

8 Jürgen Habermas. The Inclusion of the Other, p. 135.

9 Ibid., p. 152.
10 Jiang Yi-Huah, Liberalism, Nationalism and National Identity, p. 16.
178 Social Sciences in China

Openness is seen in the fact that citizenship is not exclusive or rigid, but allows free choice
under the law, with citizens having the right to choose their own nationality. The equality and
openness of citizenship renders national identity a universal social identity and therefore a
more inclusive one.
Thirdly, we look at the formation of national identity. This type of identity is formed
through the rational choice of members of society. Socially constructed, it transcends the
membership of an ethnic group based on common ancestry. The state as a political community
is thus based not on blood ties but on the participation and mutual acknowledgement of
members of different ethnic groups. Unlike ethnic identity, national identity is formed not
through shared ties of blood, race, religious beliefs, customs or way of life but through the
active exercise by its members of their democratic right to participation and association.11 It is
in this sense that national identity results from the rational choice of members of society and
is socially constructed. Whereas ethnic community based on common ancestry is forged on
the principle of homogeneity, national identity is grounded in the voluntary principle whereby
“a political community that grants its citizens the option of emigrating.”12 Offering a higher
level of interdependence on the basis of mutual recognition among different ethnic groups,
national identity is an innovation in human cooperation which brings together different ethnic
groups to forge a more inclusive political community. Since a political community is based on
the mutual recognition among different ethnic groups on the voluntary principle, the bond that
holds the community together is in fact a community of shared destiny. All ethnic groups in
the community have the responsibility and obligation to join in supporting and defending one
another; none can disavow that obligation unilaterally. “In a community we can count on each
other’s good will. If we stumble and fall, others will help us to stand on our feet again.”13
Lastly, the guarantee of national identity is the constitutional system that governs and
unifies the state as a political community. Public social life is characterized by interaction and
cooperation. “Everyone’s well-being depends upon a scheme of cooperation without which
no one could have a satisfactory life.”14 The constitution is not only the basis and source of
the legitimacy of the state’s rule but also a consensus that different ethnic groups arrive at
politically in a multicultural society for common cooperative interests. This consensus is
in essence a political agreement reached through the equal participation of each individual
in debate and negotiation. By satisfying the equal interests of each member, this becomes
a common code that ensures mutual recognition among members of the community.15
Equal participation, debate and negotiation are the very basis on which the constitution is

11 Jürgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and
Democracy, p. 658.
12 Jürgen Habermas, The Inclusion of the Other, p. 152.
13 Zygmunt Bauman, Community, p. 3.
14 John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, p. 13.
15 Jürgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and
Democracy, p. 660.
 Zhou Guanghui and Liu Xiangdong 179

formed. Its formation is not a process whereby the characteristics of different ethnic groups
are submerged but rather a search for a political consensus and compact that enables them
to accommodate one another and turns that consensus into a way of life. The end result
of this process is the state institutions and legal systems presented before all members of
society. A constitution based on political consensus thus becomes a code of conduct that all
members of the society must abide by. The inclusiveness embodied in formal openness offers
an institutional platform for different ethnic groups to coexist and interact. By defining a
common code of conduct for the governance of different ethnic groups, the unifying norms of
the constitution provide an institutional basis for the state as a political community.
3. The superiority of national identity over regional ethnic identity
Social identity not only indicates the psychological and emotional convergence of members
of society, but also provides value guidance for social conduct. This kind of guidance is
important for the establishment of cooperative ties in society and for the stability of public
order. Social identity usually involves “an understanding of what is of crucial importance to
us.”16 This understanding implies that social identity defines “the frame or horizon within
which I can try to determine from case to case what is good, or valuable, or what ought to be
done, or what I endorse or oppose.”17 In this sense, it provides guidance on moral conduct
and constrains behavior by defining social norms. But due to the complexity of public life
and modern relationships, people usually assume a number of social roles, thus developing
multiple social identities. In any given field, these identities have a certain order of priority
or precedence. This is because, in any field, the identity required by public affairs invariably
takes precedence and admits of no substitution. This order of precedence is determined by
the internal logic of public affairs in a given field and is also generally accepted as a code of
conduct by participants in that field, thus contributing to the stability of public order. If the
orderly nature of the various social identities were to be arbitrarily altered by a few, this would
constitute a threat to social order as defined by the order of priority among various identities.
By providing self-cognition and value guidance in different life fields, national and ethno-
cultural identities define social conduct in different ways. In the public field, the modern
state, as a unifying and integrating public authority, inherently demands from its citizens
recognition of and loyalty to the community of the state and to public power, as well as to the
organizations, institutions and legal system on which they rest, and compliance with public
order as defined by constitutional authority, centered on the constitution, within the borders of
the state. These go to the basic institutions involved in the comprehensive functioning of the
state and the authority of its legal system, and are even more important for political, economic,
cultural and social order. They constitute the prerequisites both for the state’s unity and order
and for cooperation among different ethnic groups so that all members of society may enjoy
a fulfilling life. In the field of social life, members of an ethnic group can still remain loyal to

16 Charles Tayler, Sources of the Self: The Making of Modern Identity, p. 37.
17 Ibid.
180 Social Sciences in China

that group and accept its language, religious beliefs and social customs, thereby ensuring the
maintenance and development of a multicultural society with all its diversity and possibility.
Hence, national identity sets norms for public life, backed by the constitution, and ethno-
cultural ethnic identity influences the social life of different ethnic groups through public
opinion and the attractive power of their respective customs, thus creating a kind of benign
interaction. The state’s inherent demand for integration requires that in the public field of “the
state” as a political community, national identity must take precedence over ethno-cultural
ethnic identity and other social identities, and members of secondary groups, including ethnic
groups, must give first place to their loyalty to the state, thus forging a more inclusive national
consciousness together with members of other secondary groups.
In a multi-ethnic state, national and ethno-cultural identities coexist, but the former
takes precedence in political terms. Even if they fall out, citizens should remain loyal to
the state, rather than forgoing their national identity and citizenship and instead using their
particularistic ethnic identity and “ethnicity” as special pleading for resolving public issues
that arise on the political level. The priority of national identity over ethno-cultural identity is
determined by the characteristics of modern states.
Firstly, the value rationality behind the priority given to a universal national identity over
any ethno-cultural identity in the public field is grounded in the following facts: 1) the modern
state is a political community made up of ethnic groups that acknowledge one another; 2) the
modern state is “the common business (res publica) of the citizens, conducted by them for the
common good”;18 3) the modern state is built on a consensus among its members regarding
what constitutes their wellbeing.
Secondly, the priority given to national identity over ethno-cultural identity is due to the
inclusiveness of the former, which overcomes the ethnic discrimination or ethnic cleansing
associated with ethno-cultural identity in the political sphere. The basis of ethno-cultural
identity is shared ancestry, which is inborn.19 This inborn identity separates one ethnic group
from another, making them non-substitutable. A person cannot be a member of both ethnic
group A and ethnic group B. In terms of value guidance, ethnic identity can only be binding
on the conduct of its own members, but cannot define conduct in the public domain. Once it
attempts to reach beyond its own members to influence the conduct of other ethnic groups, the
result is usually disruption of the original behavioral norms. Worse still, the disruption seen
in the conduct of individual members cannot be solved through rational negotiation, because
“ethnicity” is incommensurable and this inborn identity may give rise to a closed, exclusionist
way of thinking. Thus once ethnically based conflicts occur, violent confrontation or
submission are the only alternatives. Conversely, national identity is built on the authority of
the constitution and constructed through rational choice. Citizenship can transcend the culture
and “ethnicity” of any ethnic group. Its inclusiveness is further guaranteed by the openness of

18 David Miller et al., eds., The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Political Thought, p. 699.
19 Eric Hobsbawm, “Identity Politics and the Left.”
 Zhou Guanghui and Liu Xiangdong 181

the constitution and the universal right to participation.

4. The inner logic of national identity crises
Viewed politically, national identity crises in multi-ethnic countries, though appearing in
different forms, have an inner logic. Firstly, when ethno-cultural identity goes beyond cultural
identification and claims state power in the political domain, the ethnic group concerned is
actually seeking privileges for itself. Ethnicity based on common ancestry is characterized by
exclusion, but once it enters the public domain, it claims public power, seeking recognition of
its own distinctive features and demanding special treatment. By its nature, this claim to ethnic
privilege will undermine equality in the public domain and result in ethnic discrimination and
reverse discrimination.
Secondly, in modern society, cultural life falls within the sphere of social life; the way
a person lives is a matter of personal choice. When ethno-cultural identity makes inroads
on politics, ethnic customs and religious beliefs join with public power to become coercive
norms. This deprives members of other ethnic groups of their free choice.
Thirdly, when ethno-cultural identity enters the public domain, citizenship is called into
question, threatening the constitutional authority on which political consensus is based and
the universal legal system that hinges on constitutional authority. The law will no longer be
the basic norm for handling conflicts, leading necessarily to a situation where social conduct,
especially among members of different ethnic groups, becomes unpredictable and public order
is jeopardized.
Fourthly, modern politics has advanced to a degree where the use of public reason to replace
physical violence in regulating social interaction and conflict has become a basic principle
of public life. But due to the particularity and exclusiveness of ethno-cultural identity, once
it starts to claim public power and attempts to replace citizenship with membership of an
exclusive group, other members of society will find these claims impossible either to accept
or to negotiate. The principle of rational negotiation in public life will thus lose its raison d’être
and politics will lose its openness and negotiability. Without the regulation of a legal system
based on public reason, conflicts between ethnic groups will become non-negotiable and resist
regulation, leading to violent clashes. This is the inner logic of why ethnic conflicts inevitably
escalate to violent clashes and the primary reason why national identity crises are always
accompanied by ethnic violence and bloodshed.
Finally, in forgoing their national identity, ethnic groups make a claim to sovereignty,
demanding the absolute union of ethnicity and political power and full regional autonomy. In
such attempts, the cultural communities that make up local ethnic groups seek support from
ethnicity to legitimize their separatist claims; they totally reject the authority of the central
government and demand to set up independent regimes, endangering the integrity of the
state. National identity crises in developing countries are, in the last analysis, an attempt by
regional ethnic identity to overstep its cultural and geographical boundaries and enter national
politics to seek public power, thus challenging citizenship and the constitutional authority of
182 Social Sciences in China

law and order. This casts doubt on national identity and political legitimacy, threatens national
unity and social order, sabotages inter-ethnic cooperation, and jeopardizes citizens’ lives and
possessions. It constitutes a revolt against the openness and inclusiveness of modern political
civilization.

II. The Root Causes of National Identity Crises

Viewed politically, the logic of national identity crises is to be found in the political challenge
posed by ethno-cultural identity to national identity. What, then, prompts this challenge in
the developing world? Or rather, what are the historical and social contexts in which national
identity crises have materialized? In terms of the need for social identity, we believe that
the changes brought about by globalization in the power structure of the modern world have
weakened developing countries’ autonomy, especially when their modernization is incomplete
and they are confronted with the risks inherent in social transformation, such as structural
imbalances. Such risks weaken their overall efforts at integration and control, lessen ethnic
groups’ need for a national identity and lead to the rise of local ethnic identities and ultimately
to national identity crises.
1. The need for social identity
Identity is closely bound up with psychology. A successful ungoing identity is inextricably
involved with the gratification of primary need. This is a blatantly observable part of general
human experience.20 The satisfaction of human needs is an indispensable part of everyday
experience. Social identity, when viewed this way, is conditional; conditional on the ability
to be the object of identification and satisfy the needs of members of society. To some
extent, the effective maintenance of national identity hinges on whether a modern state
can effectively meet its citizens’ need for basic rights. Admittedly, the citizens of different
countries have different expectations of their state; but they all expect that their basic social
needs can be met. Their first need is security. The state should be able to dispel its citizens’
fear of anarchy. If it cannot effectively maintain social order and stability, its citizens are not
likely to form expectations of future stability. Living in constant dread, they may find it hard
to identify with the state. The second need is basic social rights, which are important to the
satisfaction of citizens’ developmental needs. In contemporary society, it is widely held that
the state should assume the responsibility of developing national economy and providing its
citizens with basic social security. The prerequisite for citizen identification with the state’s
governance and authority is the sense that the state has provided basic social rights. The
third need is dignity. A life lived with dignity is a psychological need. The state is required
to furnish the necessary conditions for this need to be realized. In the international arena, a
state which always safeguards its citizens’ legitimate rights and interests can instil pride in
its citizens when they face other countries’ nationals. At home, the state is required to ensure

20 See William Bloom, Personal Identity, National Identity and International Relations, p. 34.
 Zhou Guanghui and Liu Xiangdong 183

equity and justice, eliminate discrimination due to unjust laws and systems and enable each
of its members to live with dignity. Therefore, the extent to which citizens identify with the
state is based on how well the state can meet the basic social needs of the people living within
its borders and how well it can protect and develop the basic rights of its citizens. National
identity crises in developing countries are largely attributable to these countries’ present
inability to meet the needs of the people living on their territory. This inability results partly
from the fact that these countries have not yet fully established a modern state system, and
that structural imbalances have arisen during their transformation, weakening their integration
and governance. On the other hand, part of the reason is that their autonomy is undermined by
the presence of globalization.
2. Social transformation weakens the state’s capacity for integration and governance
For various reasons, historical or non-historical, developing countries are constantly
running after their developed counterparts with a view to overtaking them some day.
Consequently, the economic, political and socio-cultural problems that developed countries
had to solve diachronically have to be addressed synchronically by developing countries
in their “leaps and bounds.”21 This “compressed modernity,” on the one hand, increases the
production of risks while leaving little time for institutionalized prediction and management
of such risks22 and on the other results in a social transformation characterized by structural
“strain,” a situation in which society’s structural differentiation outpaces the integration of
institutional norms, causing tension and dislocation among various structural elements.23
Confronted with this imbalance, developing countries are in want of effective management
and have to face more conflicts and problems than traditional nations.24
This kind of imbalance can be clearly seen in the structural imbalances in regional
development in developing countries. It is a comprehensive imbalance, manifest not only
in the economy but also in culture, society and many other areas. More seriously, it often
coincides with ethnic and geographical borders. Once this is felt, these structural imbalances
tend to make people feel that as a group, they have been neglected or discriminated against
in terms of development. In their collective imagination, “to be the object of contempt or
patronising tolerance on the part of proud neighbors is one of the most traumatic experiences
that individuals or societies can suffer.” They will therefore be filled with “resentment and
hostility” towards other ethnic groups,25 triggering their primordial anger and intense desire
for self-affirmation, as the state gradually “delegitimizes its protective and representative
role vis-a-vis discriminated minorities. Subsequently, these minorities seek refuge in their

21 See Chang Kyung-Sup, “The Second Modern Condition? Compressed Modernity as Internalized
Reflexive Cosmopolitization,” pp. 444-464.
22 Ulrich Beck, Deng Zhenglai and Shen Guolin, “Risk Society and China: A Dialogue with Ulrich
Beck.”
23 See Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure.
24 Anthony Giddens, “Nation-State in the Global Age.”
25 I. Berlin, The Crooked Timber of Humanity, p. 249.
184 Social Sciences in China

local communities, in non-governmental structures of self-reliance.” 26 Questioning their

national identity and citizenship, they naturally put their faith in mutual affirmation of
their shared customs and religion. Thus, ethno-cultural identity enters politics and public
life in the form of value guidance, filling the void left by the absence of national identity.
However, the exclusiveness of ethno-cultural identity can only bring reverse discrimination
and exclusion in modern public life. This is the principal reason why ethnic conflicts always
happen in developing countries where structural imbalances exist. Although some developing
countries have realized this potential danger and tried to address it by formulating state
economic policies and mandatory institutional arrangements and by granting collective
privileges to certain ethnic groups in terms of transfer payments and social affairs, the effects
of such policies are controversial: on the one hand, favors granted on the basis of ethno-
cultural identity will only make the recipients feel their own backwardness, for subsidies
and privileges depend on pity and charity; on the other hand, distribution based on ethnicity
will lead people to question the value of citizenship because they will get the impression that
ethnicity rather than citizenship plays a key role in public politics. This may prompt people to
make political demands or even claim sovereignty and other political rights by virtue of their
ethnicity.
3. Globalization undermines state autonomy
Globalization is a double-edged sword for the construction of national identity in
developing countries. Participation in a globalized market boosts their economic development
and helps to improve living standards, so that economic achievement becomes a means
to political legitimacy. In this sense, while building a better material life for people and
improving their living conditions, globalization strengthens national identity. On the other
hand, it also undermines developing countries’ autonomy, weakens their ability to respond to
their citizens’ multiple needs and ultimately has a negative effect upon national identity.
Prior to the global age, the state was the manager of society, “the main conditions affecting
the social life of the members of the political community need to be under their collective
controls.”27 With the advent of the global age, however, all states have been incorporated
into the global economy. The state is losing its traditional position as a fully “independent
actor” and its absolute autonomy in decision-making has been consigned to history. First,
globalization has altered the power structure of modern society, and its impact on state
sovereignty has resulted in a weakening of state control over domestic social affairs. The
formation of a global market indicates final worldwide acceptance of the market economy.
Large multinational financial institutions, multinational companies and global production
networks have become increasingly independent of state sovereignty and play a significant
role in the state’s monetary policies and the formulation and implementation of its industrial
policies. The state’s control over economic affairs is severely limited by the international

26 Manuel Castells, The Power of Identity, p. 316.

27 David Held, Taming Globalization: Frontiers of Governance, p. 3.
 Zhou Guanghui and Liu Xiangdong 185

economic environment. The emergence of globalization, the building of a global consensus

and the formation of supra-national organizations also undermine the state’s traditional control
over social and political affairs. Such global issues as environmental problems and non-
traditional security issues are more than any state can address on its own, making it necessary
for individual states to transfer part of their sovereignty to be coordinated by regional or
international associations or organizations. “The modern state is increasingly entangled
in a regional or global network of supranational, intergovernmental and multinational
organizations and doesn’t have full control over its own destiny.” “The development of
international and multinational organizations or blocs, from the United Nations and its many
organizations to various international pressure groups or social movements, not only changes
the state…making it a less self-sufficient platform in decision-making.”28 Even the absolute
control that a sovereign state claims over its internal political affairs is being challenged. The
development of the Internet further renders it impossible for any state, in the face of advanced
media, to remain oblivious to the concern and influence of the international community when
coping with internal affairs.
Secondly, while weakening state autonomy, globalization has also caused the
“decentralization” of political identity. People whose existence used to be confined to a
certain geographic area now have their lives infinitely expanded in the global age. Rid of
their restricted roles and movement, they can now enjoy global mobility. But in the face of
the many “others” in different cultures, questions like “Who am I?” or “Who are we?” are
again on their mind. Wishing for a sense of belonging, they instinctively call for a certain
identity. Meanwhile, globalization has resulted in the secularization of modern lifestyles
and the diversification of interest bodies. In terms of the effect of a secular way of life upon
individuals, “in conditions of day-to-day life in which routinisation has largely replaced
tradition, and where ‘meaning’ has retreated to the margins of the private and the public,
feelings of communality of language, ‘belongingness’ in a national community, etc., tend to
form one strand contributing to the maintenance of ontological security.”29 Therefore, “While
weakening national strength, globalization has also promoted the localization of things in a
way that creates demands for regional autonomy and a new type of regionalism. Regional
identity thus begins to attract more attention....”30 Global mobility has undoubtedly intensified
the demand for regional identity. Information flows and human mobility in the global age
have made gaps between the development of different countries or regions all the more
apparent, especially in relation to underdeveloped ethnic areas. With high population mobility
and the cultural clashes thus generated, the people involved are more than willing to find
things that distinguish them from “the other.” They resort to age-old ethno-cultural identities
and invoke regional social identities. Meanwhile, the diversification in interest bodies

28 David Held and Anthony McGrew, Globalization and Anti-Globalization, p. 15.

29 Anthony Giddens, A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism, p. 194.
30 Anthony Giddens, “Nation-State in the Global Age.”
186 Social Sciences in China

renders the state unable to remain as a political center in the traditional sense. The existence
of diversified social groups not only makes it more difficult to rely purely on the state to
coordinate various interests, but also makes less likely the use of traditional methods of social
management featuring “social control” to balance stability maintenance and the promotion
of social dynamism. Developing countries, therefore, have to further encourage their
citizens and various social groups to participate in social management and replace top-down,
unilateral management with a new “pluralist public governance” form of management led by
government and mobilizing the participation of multiple parties. It is worth noting, however,
that this change in the mode of social management will inevitably weaken the “centralization”
of political identity.

Notes on Contributors

Dr. Zhou Guanghui is Professor of political science at the College of Public Administration and Director
of the Research Center for Social Justice and Governance, Jilin University. His research interests are
political theory and contemporary Chinese politics. His representative monograph is Legitimacy of
Public Power (论公共权力的合法性, Changchun: Jilin Publishing Group Co. Ltd., 2007). Some of his
articles are: “From Control to Service: The Chinese Government’s Administrative Revolution—China’s
30 Years of Administrative Management Reform” (从管制转向服务：中国政府的管理革命——中国
行政管理改革30年, Jilin University Journal: Social Sciences Edition [吉林大学社会科学学报], 2008,
no. 3); “The Pursuit of Justice across the Time Dimension: A Feasibility Study of Intergenerational
Justice” (民主：跨越时间之维的正义追求——代际正义的可能性研究, CASS Journal of Political
Science [政治学研究], 2009, no. 3); “The Development and Reform of the Policy-making System in
Contemporary China” (当代中国决策体制的形成与变革, Zhonguo Shehui Kexue [中国社会科学],
2011, no. 3). E-mail: guanghui826@aliyun.com.

Liu Xiangdong is a doctoral candidate in the College of Public Administration, Jilin University. His
research interest is state theory.

References

Bauman, Zygmunt. “Foreword.” In Community. Trans. Ouyang Jinggen. Nanjing: Jiangsu People’s
Publishing Ltd., 2007.
Beck, Ulrich, Deng Zhenglai and Shen Guolin. “ Risk Society and China: A Dialogue with Ulrich Beck.”
(风险社会与中国——与德国社会学家乌尔里希·贝克的对话). Social Studies (社会研究), 2010,
no. 5.
Berlin, I. The Crooked Timber of Humanity. Trans. Yue Xiukun. Nanjing: Yilin Press, 2009.
Bloom, William. Personal Identity, National Identity and International Relations. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Castells, Manuel. The Power of Identity. Trans. Xia Zhoujiu, Huang Liling et al. Beijing: Social
Sciences Academic Press (China), 2003.
 Zhou Guanghui and Liu Xiangdong 187

Chang, Kyung-Sup. “The Second Modern Condition? Compressed Modernity as Internalized Reflexive
Cosmopolitization.” The British Journal of Sociology, vol. 61, 2010, no. 3.
Che, Wenbo. Selected Works on Freudianism (弗洛伊德主义原著选辑). Shenyang: Liaoning People’s
Publishing House, 1988.
Giddens, Anthony. A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism. Berkeley and Los Angeles:
University of California Press, 1981.
——. “Nation-State in the Global Age.” Trans. Guo Zhonghua and He Lijun. Journal of Sun Yet-Sen
University (Social Science Edition), 2008, no. 1.
Hao, Shiyuan. “Discussion of Western Academic Definitions of an Ethnic Group” (对西方学界有关族
群 [ethnic group]释义的辨析). Journal of Guangxi University for Nationalities (广西民族学院学报),
2002, no. 4.
Habermas, Jürgen. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and
Democracy. Trans. Tong Shijun. Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 2003.
——. The Inclusion of the Other. Trans. Cao Weidong. Shanghai: Shanghai People’s Publishing House,
2002.
Held, David. Taming Globalization: Frontiers of Governance. Trans. Tong Xingeng. Shanghai: Shanghai
Translation Publishing House, 2005.
Held, David and Anthiny McGrew. Globalization and Anti-Globlization. Trans. Deng Zhigang. Beijing:
Social Sciences Academic Press (China), 2004.
Hobsbawm, Eric. “Identity Politics and the Left” (认同政治与左翼). Trans. Zhou Hongyun. Marxism &
Reality, 1999, no. 2.
Jiang, Yi-Huah. Liberalism, Nationalism and National Identity (自由主义、民族主义与国家认同).
Taipei: Yang-Chih Book Co. Ltd., 1998.
Marshall, Monty G. and Ted Robert Gurr. Peace and Conflict 2003: A Global Survey of Armed Conflicts,
Self Determination Movements, and Democracy. University of Maryland, Center for International
Development and Conflict Management (CIDCM), 2003.
Merton, Robert K. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press, 1968.
Miller, David et al., eds. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Political Thought. Trans. Deng Zhenglai et al.
Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law Press, 2002.
Smith, Anthony D. “Foreword to the Chinese Translation” (中文版序). In Nations and Nationalism in a
Global Era. Trans. Gong Weibin and Liang Jingyu. Beijing: Central Compilation & Translation Press,
2002.
Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Trans. He Huaihong et al. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press
(China), 1988.
Tayler, Charles. Sources of the Self: The Making of Modern Identity. Trans. Han Zhen et al. Nanjing:
Yilin Press, 2001.
Wang, Xi’en. “Ethnic Identity and Ethnic Awareness” (民族认同与民族意识). Ethno-National
Studies (民族研究), 1995, no. 6.
Weiner, Myron. “Political Integration and Political Development.” The Annals of the American Academy
188 Social Sciences in China

of Political and Social Science, vol. 358, 1965.

Xu, Bi. For a Dignified Public Life: Global Justice and Citizenship Identity (通往尊严的公共生活：全
球正义和公民认同). Beijing: New Star Press, 2009.

—Translated by Cheng Yanqin from

Zhongguo Shehui Kexue (中国社会科学), 2013, no. 9
Revised by Sally Borthwick