Ethnicity

Introduction

The category of nation has ancient roots. Both the term and two of its distinctive modern meanings were in play in the Roman Empire. For the Romans, the term referred to descent groups (usually understood to have common language and culture as well). But the Romans commonly used such ethnic categorizations to designate those who were not Roman citizens (Iacovetta, 30). National origins, in this sense, were what differentiated those conquered by or at war with Romans from those fully incorporated into the Roman state, not what Romans claimed as the source of their own unity.

But in the very distinction, we see two sides of the discourse of nations ever since: first, an attribution of common ethnicity (culture and/or biological descent) and an idea of common membership of a state (citizenship, and more generally respect for laws and standards of behavior, which can be adopted, not only inherited) (Friedman, 73).

These two sides to the idea of nation shape an enduring debate over the extent to which a legitimate people should or must be ethnically defined, or can or should be civically constituted and what the implications of each might be. Ethnic nationalist claims, based on race, kinship, language, or common culture, have been widespread throughout the modern era.

They sometimes extend beyond the construction of identity to the reproduction of enmity, demands that members place the nation ahead of other loyalties, and attempts to purge territories of those defined as foreign. As a result, ethnic nationalism is often associated with ethnic violence and projects of ethnic cleansing or genocide (Fox, 13). However, ethnic solidarity is also seen by many as basic to national identity as such and thus to the notion of the nation-state. While this notion is as much contested as defended, it remains influential.

Discussion

The mass murder of millions of Jews in Nazi Germany bears witness to the persistence of racism and discrimination in modern society. For policy makers and antiracist movements across the world, law is clearly one of the important instruments in the struggle against racism and ethnic discrimination (Distasi, 58).

Many social scientists, however, hold a more skeptical view of law's potential in this regard. One reason for this skepticism is that race and ethnicity, which have been recognized as a central topic of social research since World War II, remain highly neglected areas within legal studies and jurisprudence. Therefore, much social research remains to be done; we still should examine some of the basic aspects of the relationship between law and race and find answers to such questions as the following: “Can or should the law see, or see through, the racial mosaic that constitutes” modern societies? “Can law lead us away from discrimination and racism? Or is it hostage to prevailing sentiments and opinions?”

Germany—equally open to immigration in numerical terms—has generally refused its immigrants German citizenship unless they are already ethnic Germans (Brubaker 1992). Other countries vary on the same dimension (and in Europe, the European Union is developing a mainly civic, assimilationist legal framework), ...