Revolutionary regimes retroactively adopt dynastic national identities as state power

Evidence

By this I mean that such leaderships come easily to adopt the putative nationalnost of the older dynasts and the dynastic state. In a striking retroactive movement, dynasts who knew nothing of ‘China,’ ‘Yugoslavia,’ ‘Vietnam’ or ‘Cambodia’ become nationals (even if not always ‘deserving’ nationals). Out of this accommodation comes invariably that ‘state’ Machiavellism which is so striking a feature of post-revolutionary regimes in contrast to revolutionary nationalist movements. The more the ancient dynastic state is naturalized, the more its antique finery can be wrapped around revolutionary shoulders. — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 627

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to the Islamophobia scaffolding: this is the same mechanism as colonial ‘official nationalism’ Anderson defined earlier — state power retroactively constructing national legitimation, a model for how postcolonial states naturalize their own exclusions. — connects to: Cultural identity shifts can outstrip and outlast political revolutions.; Official nationalism is a copyable state-serving policy with a Janus-headed legacy — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on…, 625; Successful revolutions ground themselves in inherited national territory — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on…, 31 (+1 more)
  • DEFINE: ‘Official nationalism’ is defined here as post-revolutionary leaderships adopting the putative nationalnost of older dynasts — a key concept term.

Broader Connections