![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
Nationalism is a notoriously complex, slippery notion that has been the subject of much scholarly debate and scrutiny. The last two decades, however, had seen a proliferation of methodological orientations which emphasized the socially constructed nature of national phenomena. The conception of nation as an ‘imagined community’ highlights the active role of discourse through which notions of national homogeneity, historic continuity and shared present and destiny are constituted, re-constituted and inculcated in and through discourse, often by a nationalist and engaged intelligentsia. Informed by the work of Wodak and colleagues [(1999). The discursive construction of national identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; (2007). Commemorating the past: The discursive construction of official narratives about the rebirth of the second Austrian republic. Discourse & Communication, 1(3), 337–363], the present study examines the construction of the ‘homeland’ in Palestinian nationalist discourses. Drawing on a corpus of Palestinian constitutive documents, including political speeches and national tracts, this article probes into the constituent themes of Palestinian national identity as expressed and consistently presented in Palestinian official secularist and Islamist discourses. In particular, the study draws attention to the discursive processes through which a common Palestinian identity is forged and the similarities and ideological tensions between secularists and Islamists in the construction of the ‘nation’.
Notes
I use the term ‘Islamist’ broadly as an ideologically explicit concept designating political groups holding an Islamically-oriented political agenda which seeks to Islamize their societies in outlook, discourse and practice and ultimately to establish an Islamic ‘state’. The term ‘secular’ refers to groups which do not take religion as the basis of political and social life. Unlike Islamists, secularists are generally married to the idea of establishing non-religious, civic society and state.
It is commonly acknowledged that Fateh's affiliates come from a wide spectrum of ideologies, from the ‘secular’ and ‘the Marxist’ to the ‘right-wings’ and the ‘Muslim Brotherhoods’, hence its adoption of the notion of ‘movement’ rather than ‘party’ or ‘front’. But one can safely argue that Fateh espouses a fundamentally secular and nationalist ideology.
It is important to acknowledge that the analysis does not also delve into the contexts of production and consumption of each text given that this is a lengthy and complicated process which goes beyond the aims and word limit of the paper. Take, for example, Arafat's speech at the UNGA in 1974 whose processes of production and consumption are quite complicated to be dealt with in this study.