Between Herder and Kant: Gokalp on the Aesthetic Origins of Nationhood

• In Event: Origins of Nationalism

Abstract

Gokalp is the intellectual father of Turkish nationalism and he continues to exert significant influence upon the "populism" (halkcılık) of the Turkish left and right alike. His political thought seems to fit neatly into the category of Herderian "romantic nationalism" thanks to his emphasis on common language and homogeneous culture. However, he builds his account of the aesthetic origins of nationhood on Kant's Third Critique. This is quite puzzling, since Kant views aesthetic experience merely as a "disinterested pleasure" divorced from practical action and theoretical knowledge. This Kantian approach sharply contrasts with the later German romantics, who yearned for a "new mythology" that would disclose a new "truth", a comprehensive, total vision of the cosmos. For instance, Schelling tasks the artistic genius with composing a "great heroic poem" that would usher in a new age in which "truth again becomes fable and fable truth". The first, narrower objective of this paper is to resolve this puzzle by explaining Gökalp's innovative inflection of Kantian aesthetics along collectivistic and solidaristic lines. Most importantly, he is attracted to Kant's aesthetics because of its strict separation of truth and beauty (pace the German romantics). Such separation allows Gokalp to give the scientifically trained, "Westernized" elites exclusive authority over the truth-claims concerning the top-down reorganization of the modern Turkish society. In this way, Gokalp philosophically substantiates his own distinctive version of quasi-romantic nationalism that combines "populism" and "expert rule" in a surprising manner that significantly differs from the contemporary "anti-intellectualistic" populisms.

The broader goal of this paper concerns the methodology of scholarship on nationalism. Many scholars have recognized and criticized the role of myth-making and the conflation of "truth and fable" or fact and fiction in "romantic nationalism". Nevertheless, the different ways in which such nationalist discourses are linked with the romantic aestheticization of politics have not been disentangled with sufficient clarity for the following reason. Few people would think that studying Locke, Marx or Burke is irrelevant for understanding liberalism, socialism or conservatism. Yet many prominent scholars of nationalism, such as Gellner, Anderson, Smith, and Hobsbawm, think that the nuances in the doctrines of nationalist intellectuals have no significant bearing upon our understanding of nationalism. An unfortunate consequence of this tendency is the current lack of conceptual clarity about the term "romantic nationalism", which is often vaguely labeled as "emotional", "aggressive", "nostalgic", "mystical", "irrational" etc. I seek to demonstrate that a careful reading of Gokalp's work that straddles Herder and Kant can help us better understand what exactly is and is not "romantic" in various "romantic nationalisms" and what political difference that makes in shaping nationalist policies.

Author

• Umur Basdas, Koc University International Relations