The Geographical Codes of Nationalism: The Mutual Construction of National Identity and Space
Özet Görüntüleme: 13
/ 
PDF İndirme: 5
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15773018Anahtar Kelimeler:
Nationalism- geography- national identity- discourse analysis- critical geographyÖzet
The relationship between nationalism and geography plays a critical role in analyzing the spatial foundations of nation-state imaginaries. National identities are not confined to political discourses but are profoundly shaped by geographic practices such as the demarcation of borders, narratives of sacred territories, and the construction of symbolic spaces. While nationalist ideologies instrumentalize geography, geographic elements simultaneously reinforce myths that sustain a sense of national belonging. This reciprocal interaction reveals how collective memory is encoded and reproduced through space. Existing literature on the geographic underpinnings of nationalism has largely remained confined to theoretical debates, with insufficient attention to how discourses and practices intertwine through concrete examples. Aiming to address this gap, this study investigates the strategies through which nationalist discourses naturalize space and the active role of geography in constructing national identity, adopting a comparative perspective. Within this framework, cases selected from diverse geographic and cultural contexts are analyzed through an interdisciplinary lens. The research employs qualitative methods, focusing on case studies from Turkiye, Israel-Palestine, and Hungary. Discourse analysis of official documents and political texts deciphers the spatial representations embedded in nationalist ideologies, while visual geography methods—examining maps, monuments, and symbolic landscapes—expose how these representations resonate within societal perceptions. For instance, border policies emphasizing territorial integrity or historical monuments rendering collective identity visible exemplify the politicized instrumentalization of geography. The study seeks to build an interdisciplinary bridge between critical geography and nationalism studies. Central to this dialogue is the dynamic interplay through which nationalist discourses both produce and derive legitimacy from geography. The transformation of sacred territorial narratives into spatial practices or the use of symbolic spaces as tools of political legitimacy underscores the constructed nature of national identity. These findings demonstrate that space is not a static backdrop but an active component of political struggle. Within the context of globalization and border politics, the transformation of nationalist geographies constitutes a significant area of inquiry. Contemporary examples, such as nation-states’ border security policies or historical territorial claims, illustrate how geography is reinterpreted through nationalist imaginaries. This analysis reveals how nationalism’s spatial strategies are shaped by both local and global political dynamics. By doing so, the study contributes innovative theoretical and practical insights to the literature, advancing our understanding of the interplay between space, power, and identity in a globalized world.
Referanslar
Ablonczy, B., 2020. After one hundred years: the “trianon 100” research group of the momentum program of the hungarian academy of sciences. Hungarian Studies Review, 46(1): 75-88.
Abu El-Haj, N., 2001. Facts on the Ground: Archaeological Practice and Territorial Self-Fashioning in Israeli Society. University of Chicago Press.
Agnew, J., 2017. Globalization and sovereignty: Beyond the territorial trap. Rowman and Littlefield.
Anderson, B., 2020. Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. In The new social theory reader (pp. 282-288). Routledge.
Appadurai, A, 1996. Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalization. University of Minnesota Press.
Azaryahu, M., 1996. The Power of Commemorative Street Names. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 14(3): 311-330.
Azaryahu, M., 2020. Tel Aviv: Mythography of a City. Syracuse University Press.
Balcı, A., Yıldırım, S., 2023. Sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde harita okuryazarlığı. lnternational Journal of Geography and Geography Education, (50): 146-163.
Barlas, B., 2023. Çatışma çözümünde üçüncü tarafların zafiyeti: rusya-ukrayna savaşı örneği. Barış Araştırmaları ve Çatışma Çözümleri Dergisi, 11(2): 186-224.
Batuman, B., 2017. New Islamist Architecture and Urbanism: Negotiating Nation and Islam Through Built Environment in Turkey. Routledge.
Benvenisti, M., 1996. City of stone: The hidden history of Jerusalem. University of California Press.
Billig, M., 2017. Banal nationalism and the imagining of politics. Everyday nationhood: Theorising culture, identity and belonging after banal nationalism, 307-321.
Bozdoğan, S., 2001. Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic. University of Washington Press.
Brubaker, R., 1996. Nationalism reframed: Nationhood and the national question in the New Europe. Cambridge University Press.
Buttu, D., 2007. The accidental empire: ısrael and the birth of the settlements. Journal of Palestine Studies, 36(2): 97.
Calliess, C., Van der Schyff, G., 2020. Constitutional identity in a Europe of multilevel constitutionalism. Cambridge University Press.
Charlesworth, A., 2017. Contesting places of memory: the case of Auschwitz. In The Political Nature of Cultural Heritage and Tourism (pp. 71-86). Routledge.
Connerton, P., 1989. How societies remember. Cambridge University Press.
Çınar, A., 2001. National history as a contested site: The conquest of Istanbul and Islamist negotiations of the nation. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 43(2): 364-391.
Elçi, İ.H., 2022. Türkiye’nin entegre sınır yönetim modeli kapsamında iran sınırına inşa ettiği modüler beton duvarın düzensiz göçe etkisi. Asya Studies, 6(21): 317-332.
Enlil, Z.M., 2011. The neoliberal agenda and the changing urban form of Istanbul. International Planning Studies, 16(1): 5-25.
Ercan, A., 2024. Alternatif bir dış politika okuması: popüler kültür. Journal Of Socıal, Humanıtıes And Admınıstratıve Scıences (Joshas), 8(57): 1415-1420.
Ergin, M., Karakaya, Y., 2017. Between neo-Ottomanism and Ottomania: navigating state-led and popular cultural representations of the past. New perspectives on Turkey, 56: 33-59.
Feischmidt, M., 2020. Memory-politics and neonationalism: Trianon as mythomoteur. Nationalities Papers, 48(1): 130-143.
Foote, K.E., 2003. Shadowed ground: America’s landscapes of violence and tragedy. University of Texas Press.
Foucault, M., Miskowiec, J., 1986. Of other spaces. Diacritics, 16(1): 22-27.
Gambetti, Z., Jongerden, J., 2015. The Kurdish Issue in Turkey. A Spatial Perspective. (pp. 1-24). Abingdon, UK.
Gellner, E., 2015. Nations and nationalism. In Conflict after the Cold War (pp. 378-389). Routledge.
Ghertner, D.A., 2015. Why gentrification theory fails in “much of the world”. City, 19(4): 552-563.
Gyáni, G., 2013. Memory and discourse on the 1956 Hungarian revolution. In Challenging Communism in Eastern Europe (pp. 11-20). Routledge.
Halbwachs, M., 2020. On collective memory. University of Chicago Press.
Hammond, T., 2020. Making memorial publics: Media, monuments, and the politics of commemoration following Turkey’s July 2016 coup attempt. Geographical Review, 110(4): 536-555.
Handelman, D., 1998. Models and mirrors: Towards an anthropology of public events. Berghahn Books.
Harley, J.B., 2002. The New Nature of Maps: Essays in the History of Cartography. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Harvey, D., 2002. Spaces of capital: Towards a critical geography. Routledge.
Jones, R., 2009. Geopolitical boundary narratives, the global war on terror and border fencing in India. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 34(3): 290-304.
Kaiser, R.J., 2003. Homeland making and the territorialization of national identity. In Ethnonationalism in the contemporary world (pp. 229-247). Routledge.
Kovács, É., 2016. Overcoming history through trauma. The Hungarian historikerstreit. European Review, 24(4): 523-534.
Kurt, M., 2020. Filistin’deki işgale meşruiyet üreten bir yöntem olarak israil arkeolojisi. Tarih İncelemeleri Dergisi, 35(1): 213-242.
Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, 2025. (https://www.ktb.gov.tr/TR-96392/anitkabir.html), (Erişim Tarihi: 10.01.2025).
Lefebvre, H., 1991. The production of space. Blackwell.
Massey, D., 2005. For space. Sage.
Bilgili, M., Kocalar, A.O., 2023. Mekân ve materyal odaklı mekânsal bakış açısı. lnternational Journal of Geography and Geography Education, (50): 184-200.
Morris, B., 2008. 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War. Yale University Press.
Navaro-Yaşın, Y., 2002. Faces of the State: Secularism and Public Life in Turkey. Princeton University Press.
Newman, D., 2006. The lines that continue to separate us: Borders in our borderless world. Progress in Human Geography, 30(2): 143-161.
Nora, P., 1989. Between memory and history: Les lieux de mémoire. Representations, 26:7-24.
Oláh, G., 2015. Imagined map of national and cultural identity: Deterritorialization, reterritorialization and village signs in Hungarian villages in South Slovakia. The Electronic Journal of Central European Studies in Japan, 1(1).
Öktem, K., 2011. Between emigration, de-Islamization and the nation-state: Muslim communities in the Balkans today. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 11(2): 155-171.
Özey, R., Bilgili, M., Kocalar, A.O., 2018. Coğrafyada peyzaj teorisi. lnternational Journal of Geography and Geography Education, (38): 127-141.
Özışık, F.U., 2023. Kamu Politikası analizinde referans çerçeveleri ve türkiye örneği: “yerli ve milli” yeni türkiye’de yükselen milli savunma sanayii politikaları. Akademik Hassasiyetler, 10(23): 523-559.
Özyürek, E., 2004. Miniaturizing Atatürk: Privatization of state imagery and ideology in Turkey. American Ethnologist, 31(3): 374-391.
Paasi, A., 2003. Territory. In J. Agnew, K. Mitchell and G. Toal (Eds.2008), A companion to political geography (pp. 109-122). Blackwell.
Penrose, J., 2011. Designing the nation: Banknotes, banal nationalism and alternative conceptions of the state. Political Geography, 30(8): 429-440.
Peteet, J., 2005. Landscape of Hope and Despair: Palestinian Refugee Camps. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Portelli, A., 2010. The death of Luigi Trastulli and other stories: Form and meaning in oral history. SUNY Press.
Rev, I., 2005. Retroactive justice: Prehistory of post-communism. Stanford University Press.
Rose, G., 2022. Visual methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials. Sage.
Said, E., 2000. Invention, Memory, and Place. Critical Inquiry, 26(2): 175-192.
Sakmyster, T., 2004. The Dismantling of Historic Hungary: The Peace Treaty of Trianon, 1920.
Sassen, S., 2008. Territory, authority, rights: From medieval to global assemblages. Princeton University Press.
Skey, M., 2011. National belonging and everyday life: The significance of nationhood in an uncertain world. Palgrave Macmillan.
Smith, A.D., 1991. National Identity. University of Nevada Press.
Székely, J., 2019. Fences and defences: Matters of security in City Park, Budapest. In Securing Urban Heritage (pp. 133-152). Routledge.
Şahin-Mencütek, Z., Gökalp-Aras, N.E., Kaya, A., Rottmann, S.B., 2023. Syrian refugees in Turkey: Between reception and integration (p. 160). Springer Nature.
Tan, A., Armutcu, B., 2020. Türkiye'de dijital politik pazarlama. International Journal of Business and Economic Studies, 2(1): 1-14.
Tawil-Souri, H., 2022. Speculation on infrastructural ecology: Pigeons, Gaza, and internet access. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space.
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2025. United Nations Resolution 181. Encyclopedia Britannica.
Tilly, C., 1984. Big structures, large processes, huge comparisons. Russell Sage Foundation.
Toal, G., 2016. Near abroad: Putin, the West, and the contest over Ukraine and the Caucasus. Oxford University Press.
Tuan, Y.F., 1977. Space and place: The perspective of experience. University of Minnesota Press.
Tuathail, G.Ó., 1996. Critical geopolitics: The politics of writing global space. Routledge.
Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1920. https://ttk.gov.tr/misak-i-milli-beyannamesi/
Üngör, U.Ü., 2012. The Making of Modern Turkey: Nation and State in Eastern Anatolia, 1913-1950. Oxford University Press.
Vardy, S.B., 1997. The Trianon syndrome in today’s Hungary. Hungarian Studies Review, 24(1-2): 73-79.
Varga, B., 2016. Symbolic Politics in Fin-de-siècle Hungary, Berghahn Books, New York and Oxford, 286 pp.
Waterbury, M.A., 2006. Internal exclusion, external inclusion: Diaspora politics and party-building strategies in post-communist Hungary. East European Politics and Societies, 20(3): 483-515.
Weizman, E., 2024. Hollow Land: Israel’s Architecture of Occupation. Verso.
Wodak, R., 2009. The discourse of politics in action: Politics as usual. Springer.
Yacobi, H., 2019. Israel and Africa: A Genealogy of Moral Geography. Routledge.
Yıldırım, S., Bilgili, M., 2024. Yer üzerine: Felsefi hermenötik bir yaklaşım. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, 114: 119-138.
Yoltay, E., 2024. Production of representational spaces as the political construction of “New Turkey”: Re/naming public spaces after the coup attempt. In Space-Time (Dis) continuities in the Linguistic Landscape (pp. 325-348).
İndir
Yayınlanmış
Nasıl Atıf Yapılır
Sayı
Bölüm
Lisans
Telif Hakkı (c) 2025 ISPEC Uluslararası Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi
Bu çalışma Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License ile lisanslanmıştır.
