the political form of community we have a strong linkto universalism, that is, the particular belongingness does not contradict theprinciples of universalism, for example, Kantian type of “univocal universalism”.Contrary to the standard accusation of the national form as the system ofcloseness, and as the special frame of exclusion, Schnapper stresses thatnation as the political form embeds the refined and complex dialectic betweeninclusion and exclusion. The act of dismissing the nation as a system ofcloseness, or as a totalizing and putative view of society, does not accountfor the constitutive dimensions of the nation. By contrast, ethnicism should beexplicated as the anti-universalistic, self-referential system of meaning, as aself-closed quasi-community intertwined with the mixture of egoism, resentmentsand desire for the authenticity that is coterminous with the dynamic ofcapitalism. In this sense, ethnicism is not the phenomena of the premodern pastbut the construction of collectivity in the post-modern epoch and is endemic tothe neoliberalized capitalism that rapidly and not surprisingly transformsitself along neoconservative lines. We havebenefited from the Schnappers explications and intend to emphasize theimportance of the discrepancy between nationalism and ethnicism concerning oursubject. We especially appreciate Schnappers attempt to denaturalize the relationship between the ethnicity and nation:this affiliation is exposed to several transformations and restructuration.
Schnapper hopes that civil education will prevent the forming of exclusivenationalism. In reality, her unfamiliarity with the logic of political economy posescertain difficulties. Indeed, there is a constitutive tension between theconstruction of nation and ethnicity on the horizon of universalism, but thisfact does not mean that the nation could be totally disassociated from theethnical references. Schnapper’s analysis is reductive in this respect as well.
Infact, we need a theory that articulates the intertwinementbetween nation and ethnicity depending on the complex determinations with theunintended, emergent and complex resultant of different politico-economictendencies. And we welcome the involving of the politics of universality in thetheory of nationalism that is a critical one concerning the current tendenciesso inimical to the principle of universalism. But the uneasy history ofmodernity, aggressiveness of national state in relation to colonialism,existing traces of imperialism, concurrence-regimes related to the nationalizedwealths, warns us to be cautious with the connection between nationalism anduniversalism. We need a delicate theory of universalism that could reflect the