The Nation and the Legitimacy of Violence –The Need for the Concept of “Non-Competitive Nation-Building

Understanding the connection between state-building (equated with nation-building) and violence promises to identify existing paradigms that need to be altered if a resolution of the “longest rebellion in Asia” (Damazo 2003) is intended. Several authors such as Hannah Arendt (Arendt 2009b; Arendt 2009a) and Charles Tilly (Tilly 1985) link nation-building with the legitimization of violence either to subdue threats from the outside or to ensure internal group coherence by eliminating potential competitors. Under the banner of nationhood, violence is used as an instrument of ensuring cohesion in a context where the universality of the nation applies. Universality however means that existing norms and actual practices should fit into the worldview of the national group. Cohesion is perceived to be important because it ensures a system’s stability. Understanding violence as an instrument for cohesion, however, requires the analysis of what is meant by ‘violence’. Is violence simply the application of force, e.g. weapons to achieve something? Violence requires an analysis of the notion of legitimacy.