Teaching
"Constitutionalism and National Pluralism," seminar taught at UPenn, Spring 2013 semester.
Courses taught at UPR in 2014: European Politics, Migration and Citizenship, Nationalism and Imperialism, Public Law, Political Parties
Visiting Profesor of Law, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, third trimester of 2011-2012 academic year
Course title: Constitutional Law and Litigation
3rd Term Workshop at EUI, June 9, 2009.
This Workshop proposes to focus on three closely related and interconnected forms of political identity: race, ethnicity, and nationhood. As recently noted: “Race, ethnicity, and nation are not things in the world but ways of seeing the world. They are ways of understanding and identifying oneself, making sense of one’s problems and predicaments, identifying one’s interests, and orienting one’s action. They are ways of recognizing, identifying, and classifying other people, of construing sameness and difference, and of “coding” and making sense of their actions” (Brubaker, Loveman, and Stamatov 2004).
This Workshop aims to bring together political and social theorists, comparativists, and legal theorists to reflect on the intersection between race, ethnicity, and nationhood. In political theory, normative theorizing on ethnicity and nationhood has benefited from cross-fertilization, but very few attempts to theorize all three forms of identity have been successful. In comparative politics, there are a few examples of works that incorporate race and nationhood or ethnicity and nationhood, but there is a dearth of works that aim to present a synthetic perspective on the mechanisms underlying group identity.
This Workshop is premised on the idea that race, ethnicity, and nationhood are interconnected forms of political identity, and the time is ripe for bold, synthetic, and pan-identities perspectives in political and social theory, comparative politics, and legal theory. Thus, theorists should be interrogating the intersection between race, ethnicity, and nationhood and theorizing the commonalities and dissimilarities between these three fundamental forms of group identity.
This Workshop will encourage its participants to theorize across cultures, across state borders, and across geographic areas, and to think about the preferences, behavior, cultural specificities, historical legacies, and institutional contexts of various types of racial, ethnic, and national groups.
» Interrogating the Intersection between Race, Ethnicity, and Nationhood (PDF, 80.45 Kb)
The Management of Ethnic and Nationality Conflict, Spring 2008
The seminar will examine the genesis and management of ethnic and nationality conflicts, with particular reference to Europe. We will consider theories of ethnic and nationality conflict, and historical approaches to the relationship of state and nation in Europe. We will then critically engage with the main approaches to conflict management and accommodation, including territorial decentralization, consociationalism, non-territorial autonomy and integration. Attention will be paid to the European and international dimensions of the issue, as well as to the theory and experience of external intervention in nationality conflicts. The theories will be examined by reference to comparative experience in western and eastern Europe.
» The Management of Ethnic and Nationality Conflict (DOC, 49 Kb)
Nationalism and its Discontents
Nationalism is one of the most powerful and malleable political forces of the last 100 years. It seems to be a nearly universal phenomenon, whether it is sponsored by an established state, or whether it is agitated against a state. Yet, it is a phenomenon that generates many discontents, both internal and external. This course aims to be a multidisciplinary introduction to the study of nations and nationalism. It will incorporate both normative and empirical, historical and contemporary, and single case and comparative approaches. It aims to provide undergraduates with an engaging and stimulating forum in which to think about nations and nationalism. It is also particularly well suited for a Freshperson Seminar because it will integrate social science readings with readings drawn from the humanities.
Course outline. Here is a schematic outline of the course, followed by a narrative description.
I- Nations and Nationalism: History and Politics
A. Origins of Nationalism
-modernism, ethnosymbolism, and primordialism
B. Expressions of Nationalism: Discourse (from Literature and Politics)
II- The Discontents
A. The state against nationalists
B. Nationalists against the state (a look at nationalist movements)
C. Normative critiques of nationalism
D. Postmodern discontents.
D. Globalization against nationalism?
III- The Prospects for Nationalism
The first part of the course is a reflection on the origins of nationalism, and the contending theories about this matter. This will serve as a vehicle for exploring the nature of nationalism. Then, we will look more closely at nationalism, and its many varieties, by examining expressions of nationalism. The discourse to be examined in this section could come from literature as well as from the more articulate political leaders, academic treatises, etc. The aim is to get students acquainted with the varieties of nationalist discourse, to understand its sub-types, and to appreciate its ubiquity.
The second part of the course will look at nationalism’s discontents. First, we will examine state-centric critiques of nationalism. Second, we will look at the obverse side: the critique of the state made by minority nations’ nationalist movements, and thus, the critique of majority nation nationalism made by these movements. Third, we will explore normative and theoretical critiques of nationalism. Fourth, we will look at the postmodern critique of nationalism. Fifth, we will examine the debate on the effects of the current phase of neoliberal globalization on nations and nationalism. The final part of the course will evaluate the prospect for nationalism in this century.
Comparative Perspectives on Race, Ethnicity, and Nationhood
Political identities are among the most normatively significant and politically meaningful dimensions of modern politics.
A political identity can be conceived as the collective label for a set of characteristics by which persons are recognized by political actors as members of a political group. There are many sources of such recognition, such as party affiliation, nation, race, ethnicity, class, gender, sexual orientation, religion, language, etc. All these possible sources, however, are only political identities when political actors treat them as such. “Political actors” and “political groups,” in turn, can be defined as those people who determine how governing power will be created, distributed, exercised, and ended, in ways that partly decide, among other things, who gets what, when, and how. Individuals have multiple group memberships, and they usually possess more than one identity.
This course proposes to focus on three closely related and interconnected forms of political identity: race, ethnicity, and nationhood. As recently noted: “Race, ethnicity, and nation are not things in the world but ways of seeing the world. They are ways of understanding and identifying oneself, making sense of one’s problems and predicaments, identifying one’s interests, and orienting one’s action. They are ways of recognizing, identifying, and classifying other people, of construing sameness and difference, and of “coding” and making sense of their actions.”
This course aims to bring together perspectives from comparative politics, political theory, and comparative constitutionalism to reflect on the intersection of race, ethnicity, and nationhood. In political theory, normative theorizing on ethnicity and nationhood has benefited from cross-fertilization, but very few attempts to theorize all three forms of identity have been successful. In comparative politics, there are a few examples of works that incorporate race and nationhood or ethnicity and nationhood, but there is a dearth of pan-identity works that aim to present a synthetic perspective on the mechanisms underlying group identity. In law and comparative constitutionalism, the study of identity seems to be compartmentalized into those who focus on race and ethnicity (antidiscrimination law, bills of rights, equal protection clauses) and those who study the intricacies of constitutional design to accommodate ethnic and national groups, often with a territorial base.
This course is premised on the idea that race, ethnicity, and nationhood are interconnected forms of political identity, and the time is ripe for bold, synthetic, and pan-identity perspectives in political theory, comparative politics, and legal theory.
A number of guiding questions can be suggested for the seminar participants. The seminar seeks to ask what are the formal and informal rules that define group membership based on race, ethnicity, or nationalism. What are the constitutive norms that determine the putative characteristics of such groups? What are the social purposes and the goals pursued by members of groups formed on the basis of race, ethnicity, or nationhood? Can legal theory resist the natural tendency to compartmentalize, and instead theorize about the common challenges presented by the effort to design remedies and institutions to address claims made on the basis of race, ethnicity, or nationhood?
What is the cognitive content of political identities based on race, ethnicity, or nationhood? In other words, what is the worldview or framework that allows group members to make sense of social, political, and economic conditions?
The content of a political identity is also relational to the extent that it is composed of comparisons and references to other collective identities from which it is distinguished. In-group identity creation by necessity requires, or leads to, the devaluation of out-groups. What are the relational characteristics between groups that identify on the basis of race, ethnicity, and nationhood? What is the relation between race, ethnicity, and nationhood? Are they mutually exclusive and clearly distinguishable political identities? What can comparative constitutionalism learn from the perspectives offered by comparative politics and political theory on these issues?
Nationalism and Federalism
“Federal political systems,” in contrast to unitary systems, have two (or more) levels of government, which thus combine elements of shared-rule through common institutions and regional self-rule for the governments of the constituent units. This broad genus includes a spectrum of species, including unions, constitutionally decentralized unions, federations, confederations, “federacies,” associated states, condominiums, leagues, and joint functional authorities.
Nationalism is one of the most powerful and malleable political forces of the contemporary period. It seems to be a nearly universal phenomenon, whether it is sponsored by an established state, or whether it is agitated against a state. Federal political systems are ubiquitous in the contemporary period and one or another of the many modalities of federal political systems has been adopted by a considerable proportion of modern states. In fact, for example, there are 25 contemporary federations, covering 40% of the world’s population.
This course is an exploration of how nationalism (both state-promoted and state-opposing) can be accommodated within federal political systems. The course will incorporate both empirical and normative approaches, and will be global and comparative in its scope. The course aims to stimulate students to think about the varieties of federal political systems, and how these are institutional shells that are quite malleable and that are in principle quite adaptable. The course also aims to expose students to the diversity of nationalisms that exist within federal states in the contemporary period, and, in general, to reflect on the linkages between the state and the political expression of a collective sense of identity that we call nationalism. The last third of the course will introduce students to the normative values represented by federalism, in an effort to understand how nationalism (both state-promoted and state-opposing) and federalism may be reconciled.
Course outline. This course may have four sections. In Part I, we will address “Nationalisms and the State.” We will explore the varieties of nationalisms and their relations with the state: some are state-sponsored and others are state-opposing. In Part II, we will address “Political Institutions: Federal Political Systems.” Students will be exposed to the wide diversity of federal arrangements possible, culminating in an examination of the various models of federations, which cover 40% of the world’s population. Part III will address “Federalism and Nationalism.” In this last part, we will focus on actually existing multinational federations, and combine empirical analysis with normative approaches. We will first look at a series of key political values: democracy, recognition, stability, and seek to understand how contemporary multinational federations perform in terms of promoting these values. We will then look at federalism and nationalism in contemporary multinational federations. What are the values of inclusion and accommodation that federalism promotes, and how have these in actual practice worked out in contemporary cases? What kind of political culture of federalism promotes accommodation, stability, and mutual recognition? What institutional modifications need to be made to promote accommodation, stability, and mutual recognition?
3rd Term Workshop, May 30-31, 2008 This workshop aims to understand the political dilemmas presented by sub-state nationalist movements within states with multi-level systems of governance. We are interested in exploring both the nature of the nationalist actors involved, i.e., the political parties and social movements that identify as “nationalist” or “national,” and the varieties of institutional responses that are usually formulated to accommodate the sub-state nationalist demands of these actors. With respect to the institutional responses, the workshop will explore the theory and practice of actually-existing autonomy and federalarrangements in Europe and the Americas, etc. In regards to the nationalist actors, the workshop will deepen the participants’ understanding of the interaction between majorities and minorities in plurinational states with multi-level political systems, and the varieties of nationalisms that tend to evolve in these polities.
» Nationalism and Multi-Level Governance 3rd Term Workshop (PDF, 20.47 Kb)
Teaching statement
My views on the philosophy and method of effective teaching have been critically shaped by my experience as an undergraduate at Brown, and more recently, as a teacher at Yale College and at the European University Institute. I think the classroom is a wonderful laboratory for innovation and creativity. Some of the best seminars I took at Brown were led by energetic and committed teachers that had a passion for learning and research. I wish to emulate these teachers, and have the same passion and energy for my discipline and for the research area I work on. My experience as a teaching fellow at Yale College and the recent opportunity to co-teach a graduate level seminar to PhD students at the European University Institute have helped to make me a better teacher. I think the classroom is a venue where we as teachers and researchers can develop our ideas and theories in dialogue with our students, and by making our students active participants in the learning process.
Five principles are central to my teaching. First, I have an uncompromising commitment to excellence and intellectual depth. I want my classes and seminars to be informed by the latest research, to exhibit methodological diversity and sophistication, and to be at the cutting edge of my discipline.
Second, I am a scholar working on nationalism, nationalist and ethnic conflict, nation-state formation processes, ethnicity/race and multiculturalism, and national self-determination. I want my classes and seminars to be globalized, and to be multilingual, multiethnic, and multinational in content and in approach. I eschew all forms of methodological nationalism and favor instead a global and cosmopolitan approach to the research questions we address.
Third, my classes and my seminars seek to integrate normative, institutional, and empirical (quantitative and qualitative) perspectives. As a social scientist and comparativist, I am attentive to the techniques for gathering and analyzing empirical evidence, but I am equally interested in presenting in my classes and seminars the perspective of normative political theory on the questions we address. In addition, I am also interested in exploring the enduring impact of political and legal institutions on the questions we address in class.
Fourth, I want my students to develop as critical and independent thinkers, and to be able to evaluate arguments and ideas based on their own notions of what is rational, just, and socially desirable. At the same time, I want to encourage students to think of the real world relevance of the ideas and theories discussed in the classroom, and to link up their experiences in the classroom with the hands-on perspective offered by real world engagement and a commitment to social responsibility.
Fifth, I am a teacher and I am therefore also a mentor and advisor. These roles are inseparable from each other. Becoming a scholar and a teacher is an apprenticeship as well as a vocation. For those of my students that are inclined to become teachers, I am prepared to become their mentor and advisor. For those of my students that are inclined to become professionals, I can also become an advisor to them, given my professional experience as a lawyer. I earned my J.D. at Yale Law School and worked in law before earning my Ph.D. in Political Science at Yale in 2007.