Readings
ABIZADEH, A. (2012). On the Demos and Its Kin: Nationalism, Democracy, and the Boundary Problem. American Political Science Review, 106(4), 867–882. doi:10.1017/S0003055412000421
Summary: The Boundary Problem
What is the prepolitical ground that legitimizes the exercise of political power?
Abizadeh argues that both cultural nationalism and democratic theory face an intractable issue in trying to legitimize political boundaries, as both seek pre-political grounds for legitimacy but end up relying on political constructs.
Self-Referential Theories: Both nationalism and democracy aim to legitimize political power by appealing to collective self-rule.
It demands that the human object of power, those persons over whom it is exercised, also be the subject of power, those who (in some sense) author its exercise.
For these theories, legitimacy requires first knowing the boundaries: who the collective self is, who constitutes “the people” or “nation,” but defining this is inherently political, leading to a paradox where a supposedly pre-political ground of legitimacy is actually politically constructed
The traditional question here has there fore been this: What is the pre-political ground for determining the boundaries of the human collectivity that legitimately exercises power (and over whom power is legitimately exercised)?
Cultural nationalism and the Problem of Prepolitical Boundaries
Cultural nationalism claims that legitimate political power reflects a pre-political, common culture among the nation. However, it struggles to specify what constitutes this shared culture without collapsing into ethnic nationalism. Because culture’s boundaries are inherently fuzzy, nationalism often resorts to myths of ethnic origin as a more “natural” criterion, but this compromises the notion of a purely cultural nation
Abizadeh points to figures like Fichte, who initially defined nationhood through language but ultimately leaned on ethnic ideas when cultural distinctions failed to clearly define the nation. Critics argue that shared culture or ethnicity provides necessary cohesion. However, Abizadeh suggests that these are instead tools used to justify exclusion in power dynamics, not genuine prepolitical facts. Historically, nationalism has often leaned on ethnic myths or politically constructed cultural identities to reinforce boundaries, rather than relying on authentic shared cultural features
Abizadeh challenges theorists who argue that some form of cultural or ethnic grounding is necessary for stable political communities. He argues that this view overlooks the ways that boundaries are inherently political and socially constructed.
Democratic theory and the Problem of Prepolitical Boundaries
Democratic theory assumes political power should reflect the collective will of “the people,” but determining the boundaries of “the people” itself cannot be justified democratically. Traditional democratic theories, like social contract theory, attempted to base legitimacy on a pre-political “will of the people.” However, this fails because it cannot define who belongs to “the people” without already exercising political power.
Also, democratic boundaries are exclusionary by nature, affecting both insiders and outsiders, which raises the issue that any boundary set inherently exercises power over both groups—something not easily justifiable in democratic terms
Proposed Solution: The Unbounded Demos
To avoid the issues faced by nationalism and democracy, the demos (the people) should be viewed as unbounded, which means abandoning the notion of pre-political boundaries altogether. Instead of relying on culture or prepolitical notions of peoplehood, political boundaries should be seen as outcomes of democratic procedures that are continuously subject to democratic revision.
It implies a shift toward more inclusive or cosmopolitan approaches to democracy, where political inclusion isn’t confined by prepolitical borders or national identities