Abstract

Insofar as traditional nationalism scholarship broadly defines civic nationalism as political/Western/good and ethnic as cultural/Eastern/bad, the central argument of this thesis contends that such a dualistic approach to the study of nationalism is fundamentally flawed. Moreover, the argument that civic nationalism functions as an open political community--transcending the ethno-cultural elements of nationalism--is both simplistic and misleading. An examination of the historical development of the nation-state in Western Europe indicates that all nations--regardless of how they are labeled--are traditionally perceived as ethno-culturally homogenous. However, immigration since World War II has challenged the cultural homogeneity of Western European nation-states. The success of New Populist Parties in Western Europe, and their political influence on issues pertaining to immigration, national identity, citizenship laws and assimilation policies, challenges the civic/political conception of nationalism. France and the Netherlands serve as crucial case studies as they are defined and examined as paradigmatic "civic" nations within nationalism scholarship. Traditionally defined as "civic" cases, both countries use cultural values, traditions and histories to differentiate their native "French" and "Dutch" citizens from their immigrant communities, rendering the civic conception of nationalism unconvincing and empirically problematic.