Extensions of Appadurai

            One of the key features of the modern world is the process of deterritorialization.  At its most basic definition, deterritorialization is the process by which identities and symbols are disassociated and removed from a physical place.  For example, the removal of many Palestinians from their traditional lands following the creation of the state of Israel (and the various resulting conflicts) has led to reconsideration of labels such as “Arab”, “Palestinian”, or “Israeli”.  The argument made by anthropologist Arjun Appadurai is that the process of deterritorialization itself has lead to an increase in nostalgia.  One can see this quite clearly with the aforementioned Palestinian example where there are examples of Palestinians feeling special connections with their home villages/cities despite the fact that some are at least three generations removed from said places.  Yet, this statement is a little confusing by itself.  How can the modern world, a world defined largely by an increase in globalization, have as a natural result of modernity an increase in nostalgia for nationalist and regional values?

            The concept of deterritorialization resulting in nostalgia is in fact reflective of a new globalized world.  At first glance, this statement appears contradictory.  After all, one of the chief criticisms leveled towards globalization is that it has exported an extremely domineering Western (and often more specifically American) culture.  Old ideologies such as modernization theory are often rooted in the assumption that modernity and progress could only be achieved through imitation of the West.  The concept of the West as being the apex of modernity or even the aim of typical “modernizers” is slowly changing.  Until recently, the general tone of the discourse about modernity was written in terms of polar opposites.  There were the labels of modernity vs. traditionalism, East vs. West, and democracy vs. communism simply to name a few.  Any reformer who tried to steer a middle road such as Nehru or Nasser ended up having to play a delicate balancing act.  This world has come to its natural conclusion with the end of the Cold War.  Today, countries such as India, China, and Brazil have searched for and discovered their own modernity that does not reflect that seen in the United States or Britain.  Countries can borrow ideas from South Korea, Chile, and Sweden in addition to those traditionally advocated by American policy wonks.  The ideal modern has changed significantly.  As a result, there is a new globalized modern.

            Once again, this may sound contradictory to Appadurai.  If there is a new globalized modern that each country is striving for, then how is nostalgia being built within these communities?  The answer to this question may be something as simple as the word practicality.  A globalized world has allowed for the greater spread of ideas.  In the same way a 20^th century conservative Islamic intellectual such as Qutb can be influenced by thinkers such as Marx, new modern ideals are readily accessible.  Policymakers have a wide and diverse range of examples and case-studies at their disposal and can pick and choose which ones they implement.  Instead of a Cold War style attitude of “my way or the highway”, there is a theoretical ability for politicians to choose what they think works best for their country.  Whether or not it came from Turkey, Brazil, China, India, or the United States is in some ways irrelevant.  The question may be raised what does this have to do with fostering nostalgia for tradition?  After all, countries in this example are simply borrowing from each other.  The aforementioned question however misses the point that a strong element of cultural reproduction is borrowing from one another.   The elimination of Cold War style polarization allowing for a more free-market of modern ideas shows the individuality of the nation-state.  No longer is there a simple kit for modernity.  Instead, each nation is its own unique case which reflects a nationalistic pride in its culture.  As seen through modern history, a sense of nationalism invariably leads to some sense of nostalgia for a “heroic” and/or “mythical” past. 

BDF