Postcolonial nationalist challenges respond to discourses of colonial exclusion

Evidence

At the same time, slowly increasing literacy (by 1869 one third of the adult population), the spread of print-Magyar, and the growth of a small, but energetic, liberal intelligentsia all stimulated a popular Hungarian nationalism conceived very differently from that of the nobility. This popular nationalism, symbolized for later generations by the figure of Lajos Kossuth (1802–1894), had its hour of glory in the Revolution of 1848. The revolutionary regime not only got rid of the imperial governors appointed by Vienna, but abolished the supposedly Ur-Magyar feudal Diet of Noble Counties, and proclaimed reforms to put an end to serfdom and noblemen’s tax-exempt status, as well as to curb drastically the entailment of estates. In addition, it was decided that all Hungarian-speakers should be Hungarian (as only the privileged had been before) and every Hungarian should speak Magyar (as only some Magyars had hitherto been accustomed to do). As Ignotus drily comments, ‘The “nation” was, by the standard of that time (which viewed the rise of the twin stars of Liberalism and Nationalism with boundless optimism), justified in feeling itself extremely generous when it “admitted” the Magyar peasant with no discrimination save for that relating to property; and the non-Magyar Christians on condition they became Magyar; and eventually, with some reluctance and a delay of twenty years, the Jews.’ Kossuth’s own position, in his fruitless negotiations with leaders of the various non-Magyar minorities, was that these peoples should have exactly the same civil rights as the Magyars, but that since they lacked ‘historical personalities’ they could not form nations on their own. Today, this position may seem a trifle arrogant. It will appear in a better light if we recall that the brilliant, young, radical-nationalist poet Sándor Petófi (1823–1849), a leading spirit of 1848, on one occasion referred to the minorities as ‘ulcers on the body of the motherland.’ — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 386 (#complicates, via linked claim)

The speeches and writings of Kämil and his imitators shows an effort to twist through the narrow parameters by which civilization was gauged in the 1890s. But by using the measurements and instruments of the master, Kämil in important ways offered his submission to British hegemony. — Eve M. Troutt Powell, A Different Shade of Colonialism_…, 753 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Hybridity discourse symbolically excluded non-European diasporas from national claims; Karifuna autonomy struggle responds to colonial practices of symbolic exclusion; Colonial exclusion categories sedimented into the national identity of the colonized — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on…, 463 (+10 more)

Broader Connections

• Popular nationalism reproduced exclusion by demanding linguistic uniformity #complicates (0.86) — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 386
• Resisting colonial discourse using its own terms constitutes silent submission #complicates (0.78) — Eve M. Troutt Powell, A Different Shade of Colonialism_…, 753
• Creole nationalism conceals racial capitalism beneath a discourse of cultural difference #complicates (0.76)