Methodological nationalism and the politics of history‐writing: how imaginary scholarship perpetuates the nation

Abstract

The aim of this article is to contribute a greater understanding of the processes by which nationalism passes by unnoticed in research and distorts knowledge about the past. It identifies four narrative practices typical of methodologically nationalist history-writing and explains why they should be rejected as dubious scholarship. These are: concept overstretch; selection bias; the misrepresentation of governing bodies; and the conflation of culture with identity. It is argued that each functions as a hidden authentication route, entrenching nation-centric understandings of the past as valid perspectives in scholarly discourses under the legitimating cover of scientific protocol. By increasing awareness around methodological nationalism in history-writing, this article serves at least two normative purposes. First, it emphasises the reflectiveness required for analysts to avoid co-option by ideology. Second, it functions as a critical vantage point for dispelling misunderstandings that fuel interstate disputes, interethnic tensions, and the oppression of minorities among populations understanding themselves as heirs to timelessly national property.

Poland in the ‘Paris system’: self‐determination, stereotypes, and decisions in 1919

“…In many cases, it is not clear that the leaders intended to distinguish which Poles they meant. Such conflations of terms may have sometimes been accidental, but they have consequences: they implied a judgement about all Poles rather than a specific subset such as the government, even if the speaker was in the middle of a discussion of the Polish government (Castano et al : 465; Vasilev ). It is also not clear that the leaders believed that there was a distinction between the acts of the Polish leadership and the people of Poland, considering that they referred to both leaders and people in the same terms: disorganised, quarrelsome, aggressive, and anti‐Semitic.…”

Political philosophy beyond methodological nationalism

“…Nations define themselves in large part by whom they exclude, with particular attention to people in the territory who disrupt their self‐image 2 . While historians have played a major role in perpetuating nationalist narratives (Vasilev, 2018), histories of global migration, transnationalism, and diaspora are a powerful antidote to a nation‐state centered world view (Hoerder, 2011; Wang 1997).…”

Forum: Populism, Identity Politics, and the Archaeology of Europe

“…Here, methodological nationalism, i.e. the idea that 'national identification is a fundamental aspect of human nature' (Vasilev, 2019: 3) is key. The nation is popularly seen as one of the most preeminent forms of collective humanity.…”