A resynthesis of the primordial and circumstantial approaches to ethnic group solidarity: Towards an explanatory model

Abstract

Social scientists who have attempted to explain ethnic group solidarity have tended to use either the primordial or the circumstantial approach. The first approach accounts for strong ethnic attachments on the basis of their ineffable affective significance. Moreover, this affective significance most often surrounds images of the group's distinctive past, thus giving a historical dimension to the concept of primordialism. The second approach views ethnic group solidarity as resulting from certain social circumstances, both internal and external, under which the members of the group exist. It is argued that neither approach alone offers a sufficient explanation ‐ i.e., that the primordial approach cannot readily account for fluctuating ethnic group solidarity and that the circumstantial approach tends to ignore the affective significance of ethnic ties ‐ and that previous attempts to synthesize them have been inadequate as explanatory models. Such a synthetic model is offered, which is based on the oppositional approach originated by Edward Spicer and which maintains that fluctuating ethnicity, along with fluctuating primordial sentiments, can be best explained on the basis of the circumstance of fluctuating opposition.