The 18th lecture in the Youth Salon series hosted by the Institute of Area Studies, Peking University (PKUIAS) was held on November 21, 2025.

This salon invited Liu Qi, research fellow and PhD supervisor at the Shanghai Academy of Global Governance and Area Studies, Shanghai International Studies University, as the keynote speaker. Zhang Yongle, deputy director of PKUIAS and tenured associate professor at the School of Law, Peking University moderated the event. Participants in the discussion included Zhang Xiang, dean and professor at the School of Literature, Minzu University of China, Yuan Jian, professor at the School of Ethnology and Sociology, Minzu University of China, Li Pai, postdoctoral research fellow of PKUIAS, and Shan Siping, assistant research fellow at the School of Marxism, Peking University.

Zhang Yongle first outlined the background of the salon. Historically, nationalism, which originated in the West, expanded to other countries and regions through colonial expansion. Many ideas and concepts that had not undergone sufficient reflection and critique influenced practical applications, leading to numerous contemporary disputes. Therefore, it is necessary to reflect on and critique the internal dilemmas of Western nationalism theory from the perspective of intellectual history, thereby achieving transcendence.

Liu Qi first traced the historical background of the emergence of Western nationalism. She views nationalism as a knowledge construct that emerged during the process of modernization, which has profoundly influenced modern people’s ways of understanding and imagining the world. The theory of nationalism, in turn, needs to be traced back to the wave of secularism arising from the separation of church and state in the West. After the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment, the subjectivity of the secular state was established, no longer needing to rely on God for value and meaning.

Liu dissected several typical forms of nationalism within Western countries and their theoretical dilemmas. Nationalism is considered to have two prototypes, French and German. The former is called “civic nationalism,” while the latter is termed “ethnic nationalism.” France’s “civic nationalism” emerged from the political legitimacy crisis following the execution of King Louis XVI. In the historical context of that time, its members explored a form of political community where individuals united based on a free contract, and attached eternal significance to this community.

Germany’s “ethnic nationalism” broke through the individual value standard of French nationalism, reversing the relationship between the individual and the nation. German nationalism has two characteristics. First, it emphasizes the uniqueness, sense of mission, and superiority of different nations. Second, it emphasizes the role of emotion rather than reason.

In German nationalism, only by integrating one’s life into the great cause of the nation can one obtain value. The nation, which ideally should be a community that sustains individual values, becomes a community that required individuals to sacrifice their self-interest and even their lives to maintain it. Modern nationalism thus reached its peak. This type of nationalism also became the origin of a series of subsequent historical events in Germany.

The US has blended these two nationalist prototypes, exhibiting a character of “French exterior and German interior.” At its founding, the US borrowed French-style nationalism and extended it to an idealized state, creating an ideal nation for Americans—the so-called “city upon a hill.” With the rise of multiculturalism, the US has had to acknowledge the persistence of cultural diversity, and the national imagery has shifted from a “melting pot” to a “salad bowl.” Multiculturalism has proven unsuccessful today, and US nationalism faces a contradiction between ideal and reality, outwardly advocating for pluralistic integration while in reality exhibiting systemic racial discrimination.

Overall, Western theories of nationalism are also plagued by the same dilemma as Western modern thought in general—namely, the “theological illusion.” Western thought has always sought to find the “true nature of “reality” above the individual, from Plato to Christianity to nationalism. The practical significance and diversity of the individual are constantly denied, while values transcending the individual are continuously emphasized. This makes it difficult for a contractual, rational union based on the individual to truly take hold.

Liu summarized several reflections on alternative possibilities from a Chinese perspective. First, during the “rebuilding of the old state,” when debates over the state system and political system were still unclear, Liang Qichao had already proposed the idea of taking Zhonghua minzu (the Chinese nation) as a national community.

Second, in the 1920s, several early Communist thinkers engaged in a debate on nationalism with the statism faction. In response to the spread of German nationalism in China, Communists introduced Marxist class analysis and cosmopolitan perspectives, criticizing abstract nationalism and German-style ethnic supremacy, and emphasizing the class nature and global characteristics of nationalist theory. This can be seen as an important attempt by Chinese nationalist theory to overcome the dilemmas of Western nationalism.

Third, the reflections of scholars such as sociologists and anthropologists on ethnic issues also offer valuable insights, including Fei Xiaotong’s pluralistic unity theory, Wu Wenzao’s concept of a civilized state, and Wu Zelin’s advocacy of unity over uniformity.

In the discussion session, the participants expressed their high appreciation of Liu’s explorations. Yuan Jian noted that the construction of overall nationalist theory must also take into account the cultural differences among various ethnic groups within China.

Zhang Xiang affirmed the importance of tracing the origins of nationalism from the perspective of intellectual history and suggested that more research could be conducted on the intersection of nationalist theory and religious theory.

Shan Siping, from the perspective of popular culture studies, argued that future efforts should aim to dismantle Western essentialized notions of ethnicity and develop literary and artistic works that are more inclusive and forward-looking.

Li Pai analyzed the inheritance of the sacredness of monarchy in the European concept of the nation from the perspective of political theology, compared the differences in nation-state building between France and Germany, and emphasized the importance of the political dimension of community consciousness.

Zhang Yongle explored the theoretical form of the US nationalism, arguing that its unique mode of expression often leads to its neglect in the genealogy of nationalist theory.

Liu responded to the above questions and concerns. She argued that China’s ethnic theory needs to clarify the relationships between the individual, ethnic group, state, and world and on this basis, build an independent knowledge system of ethnology, which can then be extended to the self-expression of the Global South, ultimately breaking through the discursive constrains imposed by the US and the West.