Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

• Ali Akbar Gorji Azandaryani ¹
• Shahriar Hoseini ²

¹ Associate Professor, Department of Public Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

² M.A, Department of Public Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Extended Abstract
Introduction
Ethnic and cultural diversity has always been a fundamental aspect of social reality across the world. However, these diversities become particularly significant when they intersect with the process of nation-building. Diversity can either contribute to national stability or ignite the flames of civil war. In the early stages of nation-building, states often adopted culturally homogeneous policies, seeking to resolve diversity through ethnic and cultural assimilation in the name of national unity and integration. They perceived ethnic and cultural diversity as an obstacle to the formation of a nation–state. In ethnically and linguistically diverse societies, cultural issues must be addressed in a pluralistic manner, reflecting the society’s inherent characteristics. Yet, during the nation-building process, cultural matters are sometimes narrowly defined to accelerate the process and secure political legitimacy, with their scope limited to the cultural components of the majority. In such cases, because the driving force behind nation-building relies heavily on the support of the majority, cultural matters become subsumed under political concerns. As a result, culture is often overshadowed by the hegemony of power, leading to the marginalization or erasure of minority cultures. In this model of nation-building, leaders attempt to maintain the internal cohesion of the group they claim to represent by politicizing cultural matters. To advance their political goals, they may alter or even fabricate cultural markers, ultimately subordinating culture to politics. Drawing a clear boundary to prevent cultural matters from being overshadowed by political agendas during nation-building is an extremely difficult and complex task. The process of nation-building in Switzerland since the early 19th century has puzzled researchers, raising the question of how a country with such cultural and linguistic diversity managed to survive at the heart of Europe, surrounded by more homogeneous nation-building efforts. For those who view linguistic and cultural homogeneity as essential to nation-building, Switzerland represents a significant anomaly. Given Switzerland’s linguistic, cultural, and religious diversity, the question arises as to what path its nation-building process has taken to accommodate these differences without allowing one language or culture to dominate. Has the cultural dimension been separated from the political in the formation of the Swiss nation? What constitutes the identity of the Swiss nation? Considering its internal diversity, should Switzerland be considered as a single-nation or a multi-nation state?
Materials and Methods
The present study adopted a legal, historical, and interpretive approach to explore the complexities of nation-building in Switzerland. It relied on a collection of texts obtained through library research.
Results and Discussion
First, the study examined the historical development of the concept of nation, categorizing nation-building processes as either democratic or non-democratic—in relation to the function of cultural matters. In democratic nation-building, efforts are made to define ethnic, linguistic, and religious diversities alongside one another. In contrast, non-democratic nation-building tends to subsume cultural issues under political matters, often resulting in conflicts among various ethnic, cultural, and religious pluralities. This approach frequently leads to the marginalization of minority rights. While non-democratic nation-building may yield short-term success, it ultimately fails to foster long-term political stability and social cohesion. Instead, it leads to the construction of a highly fragile nation, one that is somewhat incompatible with the ideals of democracy.
Non-democratic nation-building typically involves the strategic selection of specific segments of the population—usually those belonging to the ethnic or linguistic majority—for the purpose of identity construction. From a scholarly perspective, Switzerland’s nation-building process can be analyzed through three main theoretical frameworks: the liberal–multinational model, the postnational–liberal model, and the liberal–nationalist or single-nation theory. Interestingly, despite their differing viewpoints, proponents of all three theories often cite Switzerland as a distinctive and exemplary case. However, according to the findings of this study, Switzerland’s experience does not align with traditional nation-building processes based on objective criteria such as shared language, culture, or religion. In Switzerland, the political is defined by the cultural rather than the other way around. Therefore, the Swiss nation-building process cannot be reduced to a shared or dominant language, race, culture, or religion. Instead, it reflects a more subjective conception of nationhood rooted in self-awareness. Throughout Switzerland’s nation-building journey, cultural matters were neither sacrificed nor politicized. The formation of the nation process was never monopolized by a privileged class with specific ethnic, linguistic, or religious concepts. On the contrary, the Swiss elites explicitly framed nation-building as a non-ethnic endeavor, consistently acknowledging and incorporating the country’s pluralism into every stage of defining the political.
Conclusion
The Swiss nation is the product of a classical process, one that did not involve the state apparatus, political parties, or individual will—


unlike most nation-building projects. In other words, most nation-building processes follow a top-down approach where the cultural characteristics of the majority group are treated as political instruments. However, in the Swiss case, cultural aspects such as ethnicity, language, or religion were not used as political instruments by the state to satisfy the majority or to forcibly retain minorities. The findings indicated that Switzerland’s nation-building process developed from the bottom up, following a democratic path. Therefore, the classical understanding of Swiss national identity is, to some extent, a political understanding based on shared conception of republicanism, federalism, direct democracy, and neutrality. Importantly, these political matters are not rooted in the cultural matters of any majority ethnic group. However, this does not mean that cultural factors were absent in shaping national identity or completing the nation-building process in Switzerland. On the contrary, both cultural and political elements played a role. The key lies in how the boundaries between them were drawn, ensuring that neither was sacrificed for the sake of the other. As a result, Swiss national identity is two-dimensional. At the cantonal and local levels, there are shared ethnic and cultural elements, but when the Swiss nation is considered as a whole, there is a political and neutral understanding of linguistic, ethnic, and religious diversity. This suggests that nationhood does not require a uniform or homogeneous conception of the elements involved in the nation-building process. In conclusion, the democratic nation-building process defines the political under the cultural, accepting and incorporating existing differences within society. Though this process takes time, it leads to the creation of a stable and enduring nation and national identity.

Keywords

• Nation-building
• The cultural
• The political
• Multicultural nation-building
• Multilingualism
• Switzerland

Main Subjects

• Political Science