Banal Nationalism

by Michael Billig

Michael Billig presents a major challenge to orthodox conceptions of nationalism in this elegantly written book. While traditional theorizing has tended to the focus on extreme expressions of nationalism, the author turns his attention to the everyday, less visible forms which are neither exotic or remote, he describes as `banal nationalism'.

The author asks why people do not forget their national identity. He suggests that in daily life nationalism is constantly flagged in the media through routine symbols and habits of language. Banal Nationalism is critical of orthodox theories in sociology, politics and social psychology for ignoring this core feature of national identity. Michael Billig argues forcefully that wi

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Sociology, History, Social Science, Psychology, Anthropology

208 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1995

About the author

Michael Billig is Professor of Social Sciences at Loughborough University . Working in contemporary social psychology, he trained in Bristol with Henri Tajfel as an experimental psychologist and helped design the so called minimal group experiments which were foundational to the social identity approach. He moved away from experimental work to considering issues of power, political extremism and ideology in a series of important books. His Social Psychology and Intergroup Relations (1976) offered a trenchant critique of orthodox approaches to prejudice in psychology. Fascists (1979) helped reveal the classic fascist and anti-semitic ideology underlying the UK's National Front at a time when it was bidding for political legitimacy and electoral success. In the 1980s his focus shifted to everyday thinking and the relationship between ideology and common sense. This strand of work is shown in the collectively written work Ideological Dilemmas (1988 - with Condor, Edwards, Gane, Middleton and Radley), Banal Nationalism, and in his major study of ideology and the UK royal family, Talking of the Royal Family (1998, 2nd Edition).

His influence runs across the social sciences and he has been one of the key figures highlighting and reinvigorating the use of classic rhetorical thinking in the context of social issues. For example, he shows that attitudes are best understood not as individual positions on topics, but as emergent in contexts where there is a potential argument. This perspective is introduced in his book Arguing and Thinking (2nd Edition, 1996) and has been the basis for innovative approaches to topics as diverse as psychoanalysis, humour and nationalism. It is also an important element to discursive psychology.

Billig is Professor of Social Sciences at Loughborough University where he has worked since 1985. He is a member of the internationally influential Discourse and Rhetoric Group, working with figures such as Derek Edwards and Jonathan Potter.

Reviews

[Jan Kjellin · Rating 5 out of 5]

From the first sentence to the very last - both being worth quoting in every discussion on nationalism you ever partake in - this book kept amazing me by covering almost every subject imaginable (for being a book on nationalism, that is). From the weather report to the World Wrestling Federation to gender politics to postmodernism to tradition. You name it.

While I might not be 100% sure what Billig is actually trying to say, he has helped me define where I stand regarding nationalism - and to see it from a much broader viewpoint than before. Not just as a way to deal with 'others' and to create 'us', but also as a way to describe the world in an orderly way (with nations, borders, languages...), as an ideology bordering on religion (he uses the word 'mysticism', which sums that up rather nicely).

He has shown me that nationalism isn't so easily put aside. That everything is so saturated by it - as if the world has been marinated in nationalism for a couple of hundred years - that whatever you do or say or believe, stands on a foundation built by nationalism. That the global community, or multiculturalism, is just another way to describe (and acknowledge) nationalism as a state of normality.

That last thing had already dawned on me when writing an essay on the subject some nine years ago, but it wasn't until I read 'Banal Nationalism' that I fully grasped the full meaning of that insight.

For that, I will be ever thankful to mr. Billig.

[George Lolashvili · Rating 5 out of 5]

The term "banal nationalism" adds a whole new dimension to the research of nationalism. The most important point in Bilings book is that nationalism has two types: "banal" and "hot". Hot nationalism is it's traditional definition - social and political processes and movements which are directed to reach or preserve a nation-state - but these actions are not needed in everyday life, they are occasional. Biling tries to prove that nationalism is part of our everyday life. In contrast of traditional sense of nationalism, banal nationalism is all the kind of daily actions which are refering to nationalism mindlessly, routinely, without noticing doing it. Biling calls these actions "ideological habits which enable the established nations of the West to be reproduced". He compares this actions to unwaved flags(on our houses, schools, offices, etc.) which are part of our usual environment and are not usualy noticed.

[Josep Maria Zapater Mestre · Rating 5 out of 5]

Extraordinari assaig sobre el nacionalisme banal dels estats que passa desapercebut (invisible) per a la gran majoria de la població, però impregna la psicologia dels individus i els prepara fins i tot si és precís, per sacrificar la vida per la pàtria. La majoria d’exemples que abonen la tesi provenen dels Estat Units i d’Anglaterra però sense cap dubte en podem trobar de semblants en qualsevol altre estat nació.
Lectura molt recomanable pels valencians que ens estimem la nostra llengua i que sovint se'ns qualifica pejorativament de nacionalistes. En canvi, a aquells que es proclamen, als quatre vents, no nacionalistes crec que no els agradarà aquest llibre perquè veuran reflexada la seua imatge en l’espill.
L'he llegit en valencià en una edició publicada per l'Editorial Afers 2006.

[Isaac Ortiz]

No suelo escribir reseñas ni tampoco tenía la  necesidad imperiosa de hacerlo con este libro pero quería dejarlo por algún lado

Se trata de una oda a las ciencias sociales no sé si innecesaria, pero sí al menos mucho menos deslumbrante de lo que se cita.

Precisamente, quizá este pequeño rechazo venga de que se suele citar al lado de nombres como el de Benedict Anderson o el de Miroslav Hroch

Es un libro sugerente pero tanto como una revolución científica en el estudio del nacionalismo etc .. no sé

Creo que simplemente uno de los primeros en decirlo desde las ccss (en decir esl de que hay nación más allá de la solemnidad y el belicismo) y ya está

[Sandre · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tot i que, comprensiblement, la majoria d'exemples i anàlisis concretes són sobre els països anglòfons, fa molt interessant i entenedor el concepte de "nacionalisme banal". Com pot passar amb els llibres d'assaig, de vegades m'ha semblat que insisteix massa sobre un mateix tema o que en dona massa exemples, i que el llibre podria tenir perfectament la meitat d'extensió per comunicar el mateix. Amb tot, un assaig excel·lent. La traducció al català, per cert, acurada i impecable.

[Tuki · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pf, a ver por dónde empiezo...
Billig expone una perspectiva reveladora (como todo lo que no es tanto subconsciente sino tan superficial y constante que se obvia), y sinceramente ha hecho que ponga mucho más el ojo en detalles discursivos o ideológicos que antes se me escapaban. Hasta ahí, perfecto. La forma es lo que me falla. Es repetitivo en algunos puntos hasta la extenuación, el discurso es más filosófico que sociológico en algunos aspectos y simplemente es como comerse un bollo de merengue: buenísimo, pero empacha un trecho. Se lo recomendaría a alguien que le pueda dedicar probablemente más tiempo y sosiego que yo. No me arrepiento de haberlo leído pero sí de no haber ido con otra mentalidad, para haberme encontrado con ello de otra manera.

[Andreas Haraldstad · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book rests on the simple premise that nationalism, or at least the concept of the nation and the nation state are all around us. They are not merely theoretical concepts but phenomeons that have become so ingrained into our way of viewing the world, even our language, that we don't even recognize it.

The main idea in the book is that of "banal nationalism". Billig observes that when people refer to "nationalism" it is always the "hot" kind. The one associated with right-wing extremists, chauvinism and secessionist movements. However, while talking of the established nation-states, nationalism is said to be "on the wane" or the word is not used, exchanged by the more positive sounding "patriotism" (which in many ways is just a civic based nationalism). Billig's theory is that we are "blind" to our own nationalism. A nationalism that in reality is around us all the time. It is the unwaved flag hanging on porches, the flags on products to increase sales, the map on the weather report, even the use of definitive articles and "we" in news reports that situates the language in a country without specifying directly what that country is. All these are examples of what Billig calls "flagging" the nation. It provides subconscious reminders of the nation and ensures it as a frame of reference. In essence, the nation is constantly reproduced around us every day.

Another interesting theory/observation is that nationalism is inherently an international ideology. A nation is always a nation among many, a nation-state always exists in a world of nation states. There can be no "we" if a "them" does not exist. In that way, globalization does not only weaken the nation states, it also strengthens them by providing evermore apparent "thems".

The book also summarizes the theories of nationalism and the development of modern states, nation and nation-states in an extremely succinct and clear way. Especially interesting is the way he explains the transformation from the locally centred world-view of the medieval peasant to the nation-centred view of modern man. Especially interesting is how we projects the nation back in time, when peasants living then wouldn't have been aware of the nation existing, perhaps not even the state.

The book does however also have some weaknesses. After a while, the points and theories of the book have become very clear and much of the rest just becomes tedious repetitions. The author's main field of study is rhetorics, and his analyzes can quickly become a bit vague for people outside that field. In general, the first 4 chapters of the book are the best, the quality gradually declines after that, in my opinion. Especially the last chapter was to me a bit weak and uninteresting. He focused here on the philosophy of Richard Rorty, a philosopher who's ideas apparently were quite important in the 1990s. This shows the book is a bit dated, there are many interesting aspects and developments in the world that could have been commented on if the book was to receive a new edition. Especially the whole post-modernistic debate and the dichotomy between "global" and "local". To me it is interesting to see that people discussed that also in the 1990s, and a new edition would have a lot to cover here.

All in all, this is a great read that provides interesting theories and summarizes a lot of knowledge. Some of the chapter are less interesting than others and the whole book can be a somewhat difficult read with dense imagery and analyzes, but if you're interested in nationalism, development and modern society, it is a book worth reading.

[Mikael Hall · Rating 4 out of 5]

Billig's Banal Nationalism is a must read for anyone interested in the study of nationalism. Surpassed only by Anderson's Imagined Communities. In the book he explores what he calls banal nationalism, the nationalism that we are subjected to everyday, which makes us continuously and unconsciously identify with our nation. It is so banal that we cannot see it, only identifying the brutish nationalism of "others". At the same time our media, politics, schools, philosophy, language, and terrain all "flagged" by nationalism. Sometimes the flag comes waving others, most of the time, it is hanging passively on the side of a building, nobody noticing. While Anderson explains the origin and the power of nationalism, Billig is able to explain why it sustains itself, and how it keeps its appeal. It does this ironically exactly through becoming banal, everyday and naturalized to such an extent that we cannot see it except for national holidays, sports or looking at the other. While Billig uses the United States and the United Kingdoms the concept of banal nationalism fit neatly into my own Nordic setting. The national chauvinism of Sweden comes not from overzealous stereotypes, xenophobia or a superiority complex. No Sweden portrays it's way of being as beyond nationalism, as having achieved the highest form of statehood and society. Doing so it claims to represent humanity, in a even more extreme way than for example the US, it claims to represent not Sweden but humanity. This often leads to a fantastic nativity over most people not having any interest at all in becoming Swedish, especially not culturally. At the same time swedes are so induced in their banal nationalism that they do not even perceive themselves as Swedish but humans, and patronizingly and patriarchally wish that others could become like them, believing funnily enough, that inside every foreigner there is a swede waiting to come out.

While holding my self to the left, I would claim that exactly this particular brand of Swedish banal nationalism make swedes so surprised when people, vote for far-right parties, for Trump or when many immigrants have no interest in adopting "Swedish" values of gender equality, sexual tolerance and openness, but rather prefer the safety of their traditions however patriarchal and archaic swedes can find them. This also makes swedes prone to screaming racist whenever anyone points any of this out. Because pointing out the fact that most people do not want to be Swedish seem to them as they don't want to be human, and that you by pointing out this dehumanizes the other. While in actually the Swedish Banal Nationalism is what dehumanizes the other, subjecting them to a idealistic idea of some innate swedishness. Of course when I speak of Swedes here I refer not to the majority but rather those middle-class urban residents, those studying like me anthropology or other humanities. Those who speak for Sweden. And many if not the majority of immigrants do adopt Swedish cultural norms and values and integrate.

While I would recommend anyone interested in nationalism to read this book, while dated it seems like it could have been written yesterday. But still one should first read Andersons Imagined Communities as it lays the groundwork and has a broader and more fundamental perspective.

[C · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an indispensable addition to the now well-seasoned field of nationalism studies, arguably a a classic in its own right - up there with Gellner and Anderson's works on the same subject.

A quick note - I will, for these purposes, use the terms nationalism, nationhood and nations/nationality interchangeably, except where a distinction may be useful.

Billig's central thesis, as well summarised by other reviewers, is that nationalism (by which we mean the belief in the existence of "nations" and their place as the central legitimising force of state formation and power) is so taken-for-granted and everyday that it largely goes unremarked in contemporary society. Indeed, any quick assessment of this argument seems to prove it true - in contemporary discourse "the nation", and with it nationalism, are made to be appear natural and universal. Certainly Billig is correct in drawing attention to the false dichotomisation (still too common) between "nationalism" and "patriotism", in which the former is attributed to elements of the far-right and the latter portrayed as a more noble trait, despite the fact that both actually operate within the context of (and reproduce) the nation-state model. As another reviewer notes, Banal introduces a typology to distinguish between "banal" manifestations of nationalism and "hot" nationalism (p.43), only the latter of which tend to most often be called nationalism in common discourse and refers to active movements seeking the establishment of new nation-states.

Today, indeed, nationhood has been 'established as the universal form of sovereignty' (p.22) - at once both a inwardly-focused yet paradoxically universal ideology (p.22) that imagines the world as neatly divided into particular, territorially bounded, entities called nations - a 'cleansed vision of proper peoples in their proper places' (p.78).

Banal nationalism is for Billig the 'ideological habits which enable the established nations of the West to be reproduced' (p.6). He rejects the idea of nationalism as primordial (p.7), arguing instead that the 'aura of nationhood always operates within contexts of power' (p.4). As such:

'...in the established nations, there is a continual 'flagging', or reminding, of nationhood [...] nationhood provides a continual background for their political discourses, for cultural products, and even for the structuring of newspapers. In so many little ways, the citizenry are daily reminded of their national place in a world of nations. However, this reminding is so familiar, so continual, that it is not consciously registered as reminding' (p.8).

He stresses, however, that banality does not mean harmless and, in the case of many nation-states, it reproduces institutions that possess vast armaments (p.7). In this sense, and in line perhaps with a poststructuralist approach, nationalism both reflects and consolidates existing relations of power. Billig contends as much that the 'battle for nationhood is a battle for hegemony, by which a part claims to speak for the whole nation and to represent the national essence' (p.27). Even postcolonial states witnessed this process by which 'one section of the territory [...] [imposes it hegemony over the rest' (p.85). Any survey of the historically-specific origin of nationalist ideology - such as that offered by Gellner, Anderson, Hobsbawm, or Smith - would support these contentions.

Billig further rejects attempts to understand or explain nationalism through concepts that 'do not stand outside the topic' itself, such as language or the idea of "nations" (p.15, 29). Further, he adequately critiques the tendency of social scientists to unreflectively reiterate the norms of nationalism.

So, questions arise - if nationalism is dependant on 'collective amnesia' for its continued existence (p.38), how exactly does Billig envision this process functioning? And how is it perpetuated in societies? Billig accepts that the 'ordinary events' that overtly flag nationhood (nationalised sports events, ceremonies of remembrance, etc.) are not necessary sufficient by themselves to 'sustain a continuingly remembered national identity' (p.46).

Rather, banal manifestations of nationalism (the unwaving flag hanging from a public building, for example) and the assumptions they embody 'have to be flagged discursively' (p.93). That is, he explains, 'routinely familiar habits of language [...] continually [act] as reminders of nationhood' (p.93). This is demonstrated in the ways in which nation-states are commonly referred to as 'home' or the 'homeland' in media discourse, the empty ways in which politicians appeal to 'the people', etc. In this way, citizens - in spite of most never choosing the nation into which they were born or live - unmindfully (though not unconsciously) reproduce themselves as the aforementioned people simply by adhering to the 'habitual routines' of banal nationalism (p.95). There is, perhaps, something more sinister going on at the elite level - something taken up more forcefully by Hroch and Mann in their respective examinations of the spread of nationalisms. Indeed, Billig warns in his conclusion, 'national identities are rooted within a powerful social structure, which reproduced hegemonic relations of inequity' (p.175).

After the opening chapters, which embellish this theory, the book is then largely taken up by an analysis of British newspapers, which largely supports these arguments.

Another interesting and timely section is the time dedicated later in the study to the so-called "postmodern" thesis, which imagines the world of nation-states receding and being replaced by some kind of internationalised world order. Yet, Billig rejects the premise of this thesis - as his own study shows, the habits of nationalist thinking persist (p.139). It is indeed a myth to believe all nation-states operate with the freedom to act 'independently of a superior power' (p.141), but even in multinational organisations (such as the EU) that are commonly blamed for eroding national identities actually 'perpetuate the notion of nationhood' (p.141).

To be sure, there are faults with the book. Not only is it quite old now, but it sometimes needs greater elaboration. A deeper application of Gramsician theory on hegemony may have complemented the arguments alluded to above. And there is a want of appropriate anthropological evidence to back up his portrayal of medieval peasantry as narrow-minded and (implicitly, naturally) hostile to outsiders (p.79). Further, he perhaps misses slightly in his assertion that 'nationalism [...] has been produced by the age of the modern nation-state' (p.9). While I accept the two have emerged almost simultaneously, scholars like Anthony Smith might argue the inverse is actually true (the idea of 'nations' preceded the 'nation-state'). Additionally, he wrongfully suggests US involvement in Korea, Vietnam, Panama, etc. was nationalist - though I can accept the notion that the US's role was portrayed in nationalistic terms.

This is, nevertheless, essential reading for any student of nationalism or the social sciences more generally.

[Malcolm · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of my basic academic texts. Billig gets beyond the idea that nationalism is only a big political idea that happens out there, to unpack ways that it is in the everyday – the shape of the weather map in our local paper, the language of everyday politics, sports watching, and other mundane things. Direct, to the point, challenging.

[Βασίλης Πλαΐτης · Rating 4 out of 5]

Πολύ ενδιαφέρον, "προκλητικό" βιβλίο. Η ατέρμονη σχεδόν προσπάθειά του να ανιχνεύσει όλα τα ίχνη μιας ήσυχα αναπαραγούμενης ιδέας της φυσικότητας του έθνους, ίσως είναι κουραστική, ωστόσο πιστεύω ότι το συμπέρασμά του ήταν ξεκάθαρο και, κατ'εμέ, σημαντικό, ώστε να κατανοηθεί η ύπαρξη και η αναπαραγωγή του εθνικιστικού φαινομένου. Κρίμα που δεν έχει μεταφραστεί ακόμα στη γλώσσα "μας" :)

[Cărăşălu · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book starts alright but it becomes a drag midway through and the finish is almost hilarious. The thesis is that nationalism is not merely a radical fringe ideology of white power groups or ethnic separatists. Billig argues that nationalism is a dominant ideology according to which the nation-state is the natural/normal form of society. It also has an international side: it posits a world order consisting of nation-states. This, in turn, includes a moral order: what is right and what is wrong in international affairs is determined by the rules of nationalism. Just like property is sacred in the US, the nation-state's border is sacred, violating it is a crime that will bring global condemnation. Of course, not all nation-states are equal: some are proper ones, like the Western countries, while others are wannabes. In this hierarchy, the US stands at the top and its often speaks in the name of the whole world order. Nothing remarkably original so far.

Billig's sole interesting contribution to the topic is the way in which this wider ideology of nationalism is reinforced in the daily life: politicians who talk about „our great country”, international sports competitions, national flags hanging on public building, etc. The fact that we barely see and usually ignore these flags confirm, for Billig at least, how much we have internalized the normality of the nation-state. The idea is catchy and I hoped for a more sociological account of this everyday maintenance of national affiliation. Instead, what I got is this: when a journalist or a politician says „our country” or „the country”, they reinforce our identification with the nation we are living in. Which is really dumb and disappointing. Billig even compares this to a kitchen: when I say „the kitchen”, I mean „my kitchen”, there's a bond being implied in these words. Now let's say I visit Mr Billig and, in his home, I ask „Do you need anything from the kitchen?”, I would obviously mean his kitchen. If we were in a hotel, I would mean the kitchen of the hotel room. There would be no bond implied by my choice of words. This is basic logic and normal use of a language. ”The” kitchen, unless otherwise specified, usually means the kitchen of the house were we physically find ourselves at the moment of the discussion. The same goes for „the” country. For Billig, if I say „Moldova”, it's a discrete flagging of the nation, if I say „my country”, it's also a discrete flagging of the nation. In short, everything is nationalism.

In the final part, he does an even sillier thing: he „unmasks” Richard Rorty as an American patriot and thus a nationalist. He literally brings up quotes where Rorty professes his love for his country and then adds a „haha, caught you”. And he does it again and again: patriotic Rorty quotes are followed by rephrasings of the same ideas with synonymous words and bad Sherlock conclusions „this is what Rorty actually thinks”. This book began with some promise but then went from dumb to dumber.

[MassiveMichael · Rating 5 out of 5]

Michael Billig (1995) describes banal nationalism as a concept that encompasses “the ideological habits which enable the established nations of the West to be reproduced”. Billig further stresses that the reproduction of the nation must be “in a banally mundane way” and involves “a continual ´flagging´, or reminding, of nationhood”. Hence, banal nationalism is different from hot and more explicit forms of nationalism like violence committed in the name of the nation. However, this does not mean that banal nationalism is benign. As Billig outlines by discussing the reading of sporting pages. Billig highlights how banal forms of nationalism can be used to mobilize people for wars and other conflicts.

"No sense of duty attends the reading of sports reports. The sporting pages are, to adapt a phrase from Barthes (1975), texts of pleasure. Day after day, millions of men seek their pleasures on these pages, admiring heroism in the national cause, enjoying prose which intertextually echoes warfare.
Such pleasures cannot be innocent. If nationhood is being flagged, then the routine reminders might also be rehearsals; the echoes of the past cannot be discounted as preparations for future time. Perhaps we - or our sons, nephews or grandsons - might respond one day, with ready enthusiasm, or with dutiful regret, on hearing that our country needs us to do-or-die. The call will already be familiar; the obligations have been primed; their words have long been installed in the territory of our pleasure."

So much about the concept itself. But Billig further outlines many other interesting thoughts on nationalism. For example, he explains how nationalism is also used by the political left or how sports is used as a form of banal nationalism (Billig also analyzed the role of gender e.g. men in sports often being portrayed as masculine and national heroes and girls being invited by the media to love them). Billig criticizes the post-modernist take that nationalism does not really matter in a globalized world. Billig emphasizes how the nation is still all-embracing. This can be seen in the Pax-Americana/ US hegemony. To illustrate this, Billig ends his book with highlighting how the philosopher Rorty solidifies the nation, particularly the American Nation.

"Although Rorty does not explicitly reclaim the role for his nation, his rhetoric implies a reclamation. We' hope to spread 'ourselves', and 'our' way, across the globe, for 'we' are the force of historical progress. If 'we' succeed, 'we' will lead the nations. In this way, Rorty writes of his hope that "America will continue to set an example of increasing tolerance and equality" (1993a, p. 45). He does not specify to whom this example is being set, nor who 'they', the followers of 'our' example, should be. But the rest of the world can be assumed."

This is the first book ever that I borrowed from the university library (and it was way too difficult to find this book by the way) and it was absolutely worth it.

[Sara G · Rating 5 out of 5]

Da odmah kažem, ja sam ovu knjigu već čitala, naravno na engleskom i u "pozajmljenom" izdanju. I eto na kraju jeste vredela para pa sam je i kupila. I stvarno nemam šta da kažem o njoj sem da vam bacim ovde gomilu citata ili da možda uzmem odmor od par nedelja u nadi da će mi to dati dovoljno energije i vremena da napišem neki esej na ovu temu.

Ipak, ima par stvari koje sam želela da istaknem:

Prvo, biblioteka XX vek izuzetno dobro stavlja strana dela u prikladan kontekst za domaću publiku. Iskreno mislim da mi je prevod pružio kvalitetnije čitalačko iskustvo nego original, što je retko.
Drugo, ovu knjigu sam originalno čitala pre "Filosofije palanke" ali mislim da je stvarno trebalo obrnuto jer se izuzetno dobro nadovezuje na neke momente i opažanja iz "Filosofije palanke". Naravno, "Filosofija palanke" je knjiga o kojoj imam mnogo raznih mišljenja, prvenstveno da stvarno ne mora da se čita. Tako da, predlažem prvenstveno čitanje pojedinih odlomaka objavljivanih nezavisno od knjige pre čitanja "Banalnog nacionalizma".

[Luke Echo · Rating 3 out of 5]

I suppose the ideas developed by Billig in this work have now become a bit more mainstream, which perhaps bluntens the forece of his arguement. (Although Balibar / Wallerstein had suggested some aspects in their work on Race Nation Class a few years earlier -- and Billig references them, as well as Roland Barthes).

[Alek Sigley · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the better books on nationalism imo. Deserves praise for its original and well-supported argument which calls attention to the much overlooked phenomenon of "banal nationalism". The writing is also engaging and accessible, which makes the book stand out even more alongside the fusty academic tomes it shares shelves with.

[Robiswalking · Rating 4 out of 5]

An updated version would be welcome. This is a good snapshot of where we stood at the end of the 20th century but the entrance into the true information epoch, era of transnationalism, celebrity politicians, and pandemic induced culture change are factors that make re-examining this topic a worthy prospect.

[Kate Wise · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read a good portion of this book for a paper I wrote on the rhetoric of American Nationalism in the film National Treasure (lmao) and this was a wonderful piece of work. I sincerely look forward to sitting down and rereading the entire book as to really sink my teeth into it!

[Raquel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Muy recomendado. La manera de reflexionar y analizar el nacionalismo y todos sus actos de presencia en el día a día no se queda obsoleto por el momento. Un libro bien escrito, que es sencillo de leer y que toca temas muy importantes sin olvidarse de lo esclarecedor que puede ser un buen ejemplo.

[Júlia {fitzloved era} · Rating 5 out of 5]

Una lectura molt necessària per entendre fins a quin punt les idees nacionalistes formen part del món contemporani en el que habitem, siguent inherents en les decissions tant institucionals com en la percepció més social de les mateixes.

[HarryChen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good points with a lot of repetition even in the first three chapters. But good points.

[Agana-Nsiire · Rating 4 out of 5]

Deeply incisive analysis. Prolific with authentic examples. Excellently written.

[Lucía Aliagas Picazo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Està bé i molt interessant però la segona meitat del llibre se m'ha fet una mica feixuga sincerament. Hi ha idees que em feia que es repetien molt.

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

It repeats itself, it can be a bit heavy going but this is an essential read for those wanting to know about nationalism. You can tell Billig reads the Guardian.

[Álex]

Libro abandonado: desactualizado y con cierto sesgo injustificado.

[JOAN BASSETS · Rating 5 out of 5]

Un molt bon llibre, que des de la perspectiva d'un pensador dels estats units, analitza com existeix un nacionalisme d'estat, banal, rutinari, que és present en totes les nostres vides i que té totes les virtuts i els defectes que normalment es concedeixen als nacionalismes sense estat. És a dir, que quan catalans, bretons, bascos, gallecs... qualsevol nació sense estat és criticada pel seu nacionalisme excloent, que no pateixi. El que el critica és un nacionalista excloent amb estat.

[Erin · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’m not sure how I feel about posting on non-fiction. Reasons for? I read a lot of it and much of it is interesting. Reasons against? I only ever read non-fiction for work and I’m not sure I like the idea of “Literary Vice” being related to work. Also, I have less to say about character consistency and plot engagement when it comes to non-fiction. Considerably less.

I read “Banal Nationalism” because I was curious about the ways individuals perform their national-allegiance (nationalism, if you will). The book was written by a sociologist (Michael Billig) in 1995 and makes a few interesting points (and then makes those same points over and over and over again), chiefly: nationalism is not confined to extremist states or burgeoning states; nationalism can be seen in everyday life in things like flags on buildings and national news sources that refer to “us” when speaking of the country-proper; the nation is still important in a “so-called” postmodern era. He had very little to say about individual performance of nation. Sigh.

The problems: very little distinction made among nation, state, and nation-state; passing remarks about “Quebec nationalism,” but nothing specific about nationalism in the Canadian context (a problem for me because I work on Canadian literature); the idea of counting hanging flags as evidence of the strength of nationalism in a given region is silly; it was written before 9/11.

This last point is certainly not the fault of the book, but all the same, I can’t help reading it with a certain frustration. Some of the comments about the distinction between patriotism and nationalism (patriotism is seen as something at best, good, at worst benign, nationalism is aggressive) and the supposed anxiety about the permeability of borders would be much strengthened by a post-9/11 critique of changed border security methods, the Patriotism Act (or in Canada, Bill C-36), the divisiveness of the war in Iraq (which functions contrary to Billig’s claim that wars show the strength of nationalism), for example. I should follow-up and see what Billig has said post-9/11, but frankly I’d be surprised if he sad anything more than “A lot of flags waved post 9/11. Flag waving proves nationalism is alive and well.”

[Alex Marshall · Rating 4 out of 5]

As someone who's just written a book about national anthems, I'm clearly going to see this as important - showing just how every day things, like anthems, reinforce our conceptions of national identity. But the fact it's such an incredibly fast and easy read really does add to its worth - his points made so well, you can't feel overwhelmed by the intellect behind them.
The only problem with it is the bizarre final section which is largely him listing all the foreign countries where the book's been published and talking about how he secured deals or got the book translated. I really couldn't work out what it added, and it felt rather like an album reissue where someone's thrown in several bonus tracks to make it look a worthwhile purchase. It didn't need that. Stop before you get there, be provoked and learn a lot

[Iñaki Tofiño · Rating 4 out of 5]

Billig explains how apart from a "hard" nationalism, militant and considered dangerous because it goes against established nation-states, there is a "soft" nationalism, pervasive and ingrained in everyday life, which is often overlooked by sociologists and political analysts. This nationalism, which he labels as "banal", is present everywhere in everyday life: flags all over, newspapers, TV, political discourses... and shapes the way we see the world, often divided between us and them, our country and the rest of countries.
I think that the distinction is brilliant and the case for the existence of a banal nationalism is well defended, but once he presents his argument and covers some examples, the rest of the book is somehow repetitive and boring. A good paper could have been equally interesting, there was no need for so many words.

[Tanya Ivanova · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book with a valid and very important central narrative deconstructing our world's everyday barely-visible nationalist dogma we are being brainwashed with, which paves the way for competition and hate between humans of different nations.

Read first couple of chapters, skip the rest as they are repetitive and go to the concluding chapters which deconstruct what is referred to by the lexically benign sounding "globalization" (global implying innocent, all-inclusive, all-connecting natural process) to americanization (not that nowadays it is only american domination, but at least exposes the asymmetric power relationship between beneficiaries and price-payer human communities which is invisibilized in "globalization").