Integral nationalism
Integral nationalism is a radical, authoritarian form of nationalism that emerged in late 19th- and early 20th-century Europe. It insists that the nation is an organic, almost mystical entity that transcends individuals and demands total allegiance. Unlike traditional patriotism or civic nationalism, integral nationalism views the nation as an end in itself, with all aspects of life (politics, culture, religion, economy) subordinated to its strength and purity.
The nation is compared to a living body; foreign influences, minorities, or dissenting ideologies are "diseases" to be removed. In many versions it emphasizes ethnic homogeneity and can slide into racism or antisemitism. The collective will is considered more critical than individual rationality.
Led by Charles Maurras, who coined the phrase "integral nationalism" (nationalisme intégral), it was violently antisemitic. Its slogan was "Politique d’abord!" (Politics first)—everything must serve the nation. It was condemned by the Vatican in 1926. then later partially lifted and supported by Vichy France.
Italian Fascism and German Nazism borrowed heavily from its rhetoric with the cult of the nation/race as supreme value, the leader as the embodiment of the nation's will, and a rejection of universal human rights.
The nationalists who emerged in Galicia following the First World War adopted integral nationalism.[1][2] The nation was held to be of the highest absolute value, more important than social class, regions, the individual, religion, etc. To this end, members of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) were urged to "force their way into all areas of national life", such as institutions, societies, villages and families. Politics was seen as a Darwinian struggle between nations for survival, rendering conflict unavoidable and justifying any means that would lead to the victory of one's nation over that of others. In this context, willpower was seen as more important than reason,[3] and warfare was glorified as an expression of national vitality.
The OUN's conceptualization was particular in several ways. Because Ukraine was stateless and surrounded by more powerful neighbors, the emphasis on force and warfare was to be expressed in acts of terrorism rather than open warfare, and illegality was glorified. Because Ukrainians did not have a state to worship or serve, the emphasis was placed on a "pure" national language and culture rather than a State. There was a strain of fantastic romanticism, in which the unsophisticated Ukrainian rejection of reason was more spontaneous and genuine than the cynical rejection of reason by German or Italian integral nationalists.[4]
The OUN viewed the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church as a rival and condemned Catholic leaders as police informers or potential informers; the Church rejected integral nationalism as incompatible with Christian ethics. The conflict between the OUN and the Church eased in the late 1930s.[5]
References
- ↑ Trevor Erlacher (2014). "The birth of Ukrainian "active nationalism": Dmytro Dontsov and heterodox Marxism before World war I, 1883–1914". Modern Intellectual History 11 (3): 519–548. doi:10.1017/S1479244314000171. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/modern-intellectual-history/article/abs/birth-of-ukrainian-active-nationalism-dmytro-dontsov-and-heterodox-marxism-before-world-war-i-18831914/51C1E543D5D2B1B5D4624782E2CF3F1E.
- ↑ "The term "integral nationalism" has emerged as the most accurate and least tendentious label for "active nationalism" in the scholarly literature on Dontsov and the OUN", p. 523.
- ↑ Orest Subtelny. (1988). Ukraine: A History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. pp.441–446.
- ↑ Armstrong, John (1963). Ukrainian Nationalism. New York: Columbia University Press, 20–22.
- ↑ Myroslav Shkandrij.(2015). National democracy, the OUN, and Dontsovism: Three ideological currents in Ukrainian Nationalism of the 1930s–40s and their shared myth-system".Communist and Post-Communist Studies 1–8