Mind the gap: The nation form and the Kohn dichotomy

Abstract The dichotomy between civic Western nationalism and ethnic non‐Western nationalism (also known as “the Kohn dichotomy” after the historian of nationalism Hans Kohn) remains one of the most influential frameworks for understanding nationalism. It is also one of the most controversial: The binary schema has been criticised not only for its conceptual inconsistencies but also for entrenching an ethnocentric hierarchy that depicts Western nations as fountains of civic virtue. This article enriches these longstanding debates by excavating the neglected inverse side of the Kohn dichotomy. Since the late nineteenth century, the idealised Western nation is imagined not only as a civic polity united by common political traditions but also as an organic community blessed with natural boundaries. In short, Western nations are depicted as both civic and ethnic. Meanwhile, non‐Western nations are denied the privilege of being contradictory and deemed to suffer from a perennial mismatch between civic and ethnic elements: Non‐Western nations are depicted either as ethnic communities lacking civic traditions or as artificial political constructions lacking organic roots. Without taking into account this intricate dialectic between the civic and ethnic poles of the nation form, critics of the Kohn dichotomy will struggle to fully grasp its ideological functions or historical longevity.