34
Calhoun, Craig. Nations Matter:
Culture, History, and the Cosmopolitan
Dream. New York: Routledge, 2007.
Nations Matter is not Craig Calhoun’s
most rigorous and comprehensive state-
ment on nationalism (his 1997 book
Nationalism is a better source on this
topic); nor is Nations Matter Calhoun’s
most complete treatise on cosmopoli-
tanism (for that we will have to wait for
his forthcoming Cosmopolitanism and
Belonging). But Nations Matter holds
many treasures for thinking about citi-
zenship in the age of globalization.
Nations Matter is a collection of previ-
ously published essays, each one pitched
to a slightly different audience. The
common thread is that all are intended
to sway liberal-leaning audiences to real-
ize the danger of a cosmopolitan fantasy
that denies the historical, and current,
importance of nations and nationalism.
Calhoun is primarily concerned here
with the often-overlooked link between
nationalism and liberalism. According to
Calhoun, history proves that nationalism
has often served to promote the establish-
ment of democratic institutions, as well
as the equitable distribution of resources.
He further argues that the notion of
international cooperation makes little
sense in the absence of strong nations.
The cosmopolitan dream of transcend-
ing nationalism is, for Calhoun, a fanta-
sy. He believes that nations matter more
than ever in the age of globalization.
Some critics will assume that this
book is not worth reading due to the
repetitive nature of its genre—a collec-
tion of previously published essays on
a hot topic. However, it is the impor-
tance of the topic and the trajectory of
Calhoun’s research agenda that warrant
giving this book special attention. In
short, Calhoun is onto something, even
if his conclusions feel incomplete. His
historically informed view of nationalism
combined with his impressive knowledge
of current trends in globalization have
led him to some keen observations about
why the liberal, cosmopolitan dream is
inadequate as an empirical description
and as a political ideal. But Calhoun is
not entirely pessimistic. Although he
warns that transcending nationalism is
impossible, he believes that “nationalism
helps locate an experience of belonging
in a world of global flows and fears” (1).
For Calhoun, nationalism is a source of
solidarity that is crucial for democracy
and for resisting neo-liberal versions of
globalization. He wants well-intentioned
liberals to stop focusing on what is wrong
with nationalism—which he admits is
responsible for some horrific historical
events—and instead notice the transfor-
mative potential of nationalism.
Calhoun is at his best when he explores
the relationship between cultural identity
and forms of belonging. Nationalisms
are better thought of as having family
resemblances, rather than conforming to
an essentialist definition. Nationalism, as
a discourse, is a product of modernity,
meaning the last three hundred years.
Ideas about the individuation of the per-
son and the nation are historically emer-
gent and linked phenomena that form
the social foundations for nationalism.
Calhoun never loses track of the fact
that cultural identity is a moving object
of analysis and that nationalism is a rhe-
Book RevIeW
35
BOOK REVIEW
torical tool of identity production. At the
same time, he refers to national identity
as a Durkheimian social fact that shapes
individuals; thus, identity is not a matter
of completely free choice.
In chapter 5, “Nationalism, Political
Community, and the Representation
of Society: Or, Why Feeling at Home
Is Not a Substitute for Public Space,”
Calhoun draws our attention to the rela-
tionship between modes of belonging
and political participation. He shrewdly
observes that nationalist claims to eth-
nic or cultural similarity, on one hand,
and common citizenship, on the other,
ignore a crucial element that constitutes
political community. These dichotomous
perspectives focus on the continuity
of nations and do not explain cultural
reproduction or change. Whether claims
to nationhood are based in ancient eth-
nicity (the paradigmatic example being
Germany) or an historical moment that
constitutionally guarantees rights and
obligations (the paradigmatic example
being France), they underestimate the
importance of institutions, networks,
and movements that bring people
together across diversity within nations.
Affective attachments between concrete
persons differ qualitatively from indi-
vidual attachments to large-scale cultural
categories, such as nations. Furthermore,
affective attachments based on similarity
do not necessarily create the foundations
for navigating difference.
Calhoun warns that social scientists
are guilty of conflating nation and soci-
ety conceptually, a mistake he sees as
having political consequences. He argues
that conflating nation with society leads
to a failure to understand citizenship.
According to Calhoun:
Debates on nationality and
citizenship need to problem-
atize not only the contrast
among territorial, civic, and
ethnic models, and the ques-
tions of how to understand
immigrants, minorities, and
aboriginal populations, but
also the very way in which
a rhetoric of nations and
nationalism shapes the rep-
resentation of political com-
munity.
Membership in a society
is an issue of social solidarity
and cultural identity as well as
legally constructed state citi-
zenship. (104–5)
Calhoun goes on to argue that broad-
ening our understanding of citizenship
requires attention to distinctions among
different modes of social belonging. This
is his most intriguing idea—that citizen-
ship can serve as a safeguard against the
darker sides of ethnicity and national-
THE HEDGEHOG REVIEW / FALL 2008
36
ism. Citizenship, then, becomes a meso-
level theoretical tool (or, if you prefer,
a metaphorical tool) for imagining the
space between the demands of a dense
web of local networks (for example, kin
groups) and the cultural conformity
associated with nationalism. Calhoun’s
conception of public space—a space of
discourse but also a space in which legal
entitlements can be enforced—mediates
between a diversity of interpersonal rela-
tions and large-scale cultural categories.
Thus, Calhoun makes the case in chap-
ter 5 for the creation of public space, a
space for engaging in discourse, perhaps
even critical-rational discourse as Jürgen
Habermas suggests, but also something
beyond critical-rational discourse—
a space to make culture and even to
remake identities.
Chapter 6, “Inventing the Opposition
of Ethnic and Civic Nationalism: Hans
Kohn and The Idea of Nationalism,” is
the most impressive accomplishment of
this volume. Calhoun critically examines
the accepted notions of ethnic and civic
nationalism by revisiting Hans Kohn’s
1944 work, The Idea of Nationalism. He
makes a compelling case for reinterpret-
ing Kohn for contemporary audiences.
Calhoun admires Kohn’s optimism about
nationalism and his insistence about its
importance for liberalism. For Kohn,
liberal nationalism could serve as a valu-
able step on the path to cosmopolitan
integration. Calhoun finds this convic-
tion remarkable in the context of 1940s’
politics—the rise of the Nazis, World
War II, the threat of National Socialism,
events that tended to highlight the evil
side of nationalism. Calhoun sees Kohn’s
sustained, and largely positive, attention
to nationalism as holding valuable les-
sons for contemporary liberals:
Many have rejected nation-
alism as a fundamentally
illiberal imposition of the col-
lectivity over the individual,
of ethnic loyalty over human
rights, and of tradition over
reason. And even more com-
monly, liberalism has swept its
own tacit reliance on nation-
alist thinking under the car-
pet, failing to analyze why the
population of any one country
belonged there and why the
state was entitled to keep oth-
ers out. Liberalism generally
took up questions about how
to advance justice and liberty
within “societies,” didn’t much
examine what made a society
a society, and (except when
prodded by war) was vague
on the relationship between
a world of such distinct soci-
eties and sovereign states and
the rights of individuals in the
world as a whole. These issues
have come to the fore recently
in response to globalization,
with many liberals struggling
with national identities and
state boundaries and pro-
claiming adherence to a more
cosmopolitan ideal. (126–7)
Calhoun admits that The Idea of
Nationalism has influenced its readers
most by contrasting ethnic nationalism
(read: irrational and particularistic) with
civic nationalism (read: rational and uni-
versalistic). However, he instead chooses
to reinterpret it with an eye towards
the insights that it offers about the link
between nationalism and liberalism. In
Calhoun’s eyes, Kohn was ahead of the
wave of postwar modernization projects.
37
BOOK REVIEW
Calhoun traces this insight to Kohn’s
unlikely synthesis of values from cultural
Zionism with Enlightenment liberalism.
Kohn’s belief in the spiritual foundations
of democracy indeed transcends the tra-
ditional dualism inherent in contrasting
ethnic with civic nationalism. This insight
is undoubtedly a product of Kohn’s
remarkable biography, which Calhoun
weaves nicely throughout chapter 6.
Nations Matter can be read as a
defense of nationalism, a critique of lib-
eral cosmopolitanism, or, in my view, an
insightful look at citizenship today. He
insists that a failure to appreciate the
power of nations to motivate collective
responsibility through solidarity will lead
to unintended pernicious politics. He
then begins to point towards citizenship
and the creation of public space as the
hopeful antidote for liberal pipe dreams.
We can anticipate that Calhoun will con-
tinue to explore the relationship between
modes of belonging and political partici-
pation and that he will continue to sup-
ply us with nuanced observations about
the emergence of globalization. For stu-
dents of citizenship, Calhoun is a man
to watch.
Regina Smardon is an associate fellow
at the Institute for Advanced Studies in
Culture. She completed her Ph.D. in soci-
ology at the University of Pennsylvania and
is currently working on a book based on her
fieldwork in a small Appalachian commu-
nity that explores the meaning of disability
and citizenship.
