Narratives of Civic Duty

The term nationalism has always been valued in American political narratives. Politicians, pundits, and the public tend to associate this concept with nondemocratic governments manufacturing an artificial emotion with the ultimate purpose of justifying regime legitimacy. Accordingly, countries like China and Russia have nationalism while America (as a liberal democracy) has spontaneous, authentic patriotism. Even to political scientists who view nationalism as present in democracies as well, many may agree that nationalism, due to its discriminating and xenophobic qualities, is a challenger to democracy. For a healthy, tolerant democracy to thrive, this challenger needs to be tamed.It is in this context that one should appreciate the intellectual contribution that Aram Hur's book Narratives of Civic Duty: How National Stories Shape Democracy in Asia offers to democratization studies. Hur points out that eradicating nationalism is neither possible nor desirable. Instead, one should focus on what kind of nationalism to foster. If a country has “good” nationalism that views a democratic state as a natural extension of nation, then citizens’ commitment to democratic values will be enduring. In contrast, if one's perception of a democratic state stands for a national “other,” then people's commitment to democracy will be thinner and fragmented. Hur further contends that “national stories”—the folklore and legends passed down through the generations—are vital building blocks for people's sense of civic duty.To support this argument, Hu's book has eight chapters organized in three parts. The first two chapters constitute part 1, where the author introduces the puzzle of civic duty and presents the theoretical argument: national stories signal whether a state is inclusive or exclusive to the boundaries of national obligation. Stories that link national people and democratic states as one help democracy. Stories that pit people in opposition to a democratic state harm democracy. Part 2, which comprises chapters 3, 4, and 5, is the empirical backbone of the book. These chapters compare and contrast the role of national stories in South Korean and Taiwanese democratization processes. Hur contends that contrasting national stories have shaped these two East Asian democracies’ different nation-state relations. In South Korea, citizens exhibit a “thick” sense of civic duty. They vote and pay taxes out of a genuine commitment to their nation. In Taiwan, by contrast, people's civic duty is “thin.” Political interest and income are stronger predictors of civic duty than intrinsic commitment to a democratic state. In part 3, the author goes beyond East Asia and tests the argument's generalizability in Germany. Despite more than three decades since reunification, people from the eastern part of Germany have consistently lagged behind their western counterparts in participating in voting. The eastern part of the country is also home to several extreme right-wing political forces that support a more exclusive, xenophobic version of German nationalism. Hur finds that, like that in East Asia, the stronger national identification in the western part of Germany is associated with greater civic duty. However, for many East Germans, the reunification was abrupt and one-sided, creating a fractured linkage between nation and state.Thematically, this book's most significant contribution lies in its call for a more careful and balanced study of nationalism. According to Hur, scholars who are trying to do away with nationalism are misplacing their efforts. Nationalism is a historicized, emotive identity that links nation and state. The real goal, then, becomes how to construct a “healthy” nationalism that integrates civic duty. Another strength of this book lies in its methodological rigor. It chooses South Korea and Taiwan as a “most similar” pair due to the two countries’ colonial past, rapid industrialization, and democratization. Despite their similarities, though, the two countries depart significantly on how their citizens interpret their civic duties. The author utilizes both qualitative and quantitative methods to test the validity of the national theory on civic duty and examine the impact of diverging civic narratives on the quality of South Korean and Taiwanese democracies.As with every project of academic inquiry, this book has its limits. The author rightfully emphasizes the importance of contextualization. However, this emphasis did not always materialize in empirical analysis. China is a far greater and credible danger to Taiwan compared to North Korea and its threat to South Korea. America has no legally binding obligation to help Taiwan, unlike the security assurance it offers to South Korea. The cross-strait imbalance and the American ambivalence are certainly factors shaping Taiwanese people's reluctance to join the military. South Korea and Taiwan are therefore not similar in the security risks they face. While the Taiwanese reluctance to joining military service is more than a civic protest to the Mainlander-dominated bureaucratic apparatus, it is also a rational, risk-averse decision. Some evidence offered by the author is unconvincing. For example, the author cites a popular proverb—“Good iron does not make nails; good men do not make soldiers”—to support the argument about Taiwanese reluctance to join the military. The problem, though, is that this proverb has been popular with people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait for ages. It is more a lament for the career and educational opportunities that one's military service may make one miss. The nationalist undertone is contrived. A bigger problem is the confusing thematic connection between the state and the forging of “national stories.” At the book's beginning, the author suggests that the state provides raw materials for people to generate their unique national stories. The concluding chapter, though, points to a more activist state in the “sponsoring” of national stories. To this reviewer, the book made a thematic transition from a Lockean to a Hobbesian interpretation of the state's role in shaping popular beliefs. This transition needs more explanation.Despite such caveats, this book contributes to the democratization scholarship by calling for examining nationalism's positive role in fostering civic duty. Its arguments are bold and insightful. It should serve as a stepping-stone for fellow political scientists in exploring the complicated interactions between nationalism and democratization

Art · Democracy · Duty · Literature · Narrative · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Asian Studies and History · Law · Southeast Asian Sociopolitical Studies

• Varieties of Nationalism

  Open Access•Harris Mylonas, Maya Tudor•Varieties of Nationalism•2023

  Add to list

• When Authoritarian Legacies Matter

  Open Access•Gidong Kim, Jae Mook Lee•Journal of East Asian Studies•2023

  Add to list

• Can Encounters With the State Improve Minority-State Relations? Evidence From Myanmar

  Open Access•Jangai Jap•Comparative Political Studies•2024

  Add to list

• Democratic Ceilings

  Open Access•Aram Hur, Andrew Yeo•Comparative Political Studies•2024

  Add to list