The forthcoming article “National identity after conquest” by Christopher Carter and Daniel W. Gingerich is summarized by the author(s) below.
Throughout history, occupying powers have often tried to reshape the identity of the people in the territories they control by encouraging them to adopt the occupier’s national identity. They typically use policies that reward those who align with this new identity while discriminating against those who resist. However, these strategies don’t always work as intended. A key factor in determining whether such policies succeed or fail is how long people believe the occupation will last. If the occupation is viewed as short-term, discrimination may backfire. Parents may become more determined to pass on the marginalized (non-occupier) identity to their children, believing that maintaining it won’t harm their children’s future economic prospects. This makes it harder for the occupying power to achieve its goal of erasing the local identity, even if the policies it espouses are economically harmful. On the other hand, when the occupation is perceived as long-lasting, parents are more willing to have their children adopt the occupier’s identity because it becomes essential for survival and success in the new social system. In these cases, discrimination can be more effective, as the occupier’s identity becomes ingrained over time. We further demonstrate that institutions, such as credible plebiscites and treaties, play a critical role in shaping public perceptions around how long occupation will last. Historical examples like the Chilean occupation of Tacna, Peru, and the Prussian occupation of Northern Schleswig show how the perceived duration of occupation plays a crucial role in whether these identity-shaping policies succeed or fail.
About the Author(s): Christopher Carter is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Politics and John L. Nau III Assistant Professor of the History and Principles of Democracy at the University of Virginia and Daniel W. Gingerich is a Professor of Politics specializing in comparative politics and the Director of the Quantitative Collaborative at the University of Virginia. Their research “National identity after conquest” is now available in Early View and will appear in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Political Science.
Speak Your Mind