Regionalism in Western Europe: Conceptual Problems of a New Political Perspective

A conceptual discussion of regionalism in western Europe should bear in mind that we are confronted by a novel dimension of societal conflict unforeseen until recently by the analysis and prognoses of modem social science. Also, a new political perspective of territorial fragmentation can be observed in all advanced industrial democracies. One recent survey of regionalism in western Europe lists some fifty active regional movements,' while another account refers to no less than 187 ethnic activist associations in France alone.2 A rapidly expanding body of literature has been focusing on ethnic conflict in the western world, territorial politics in industrial nations, the impact of center-periphery conflict on nation-building and spatial variations in politics, and the overall trends of decentralization in western democracies.3 Critical observers have noted, however, that due to a centralist Weltanschauung both politicians and political scientists have been slow to recognize decentralization as a general trend. Consequently, they have failed to anticipate the impact of regional movements on politics in western Europe.4 Regionalism is used as a common denominator in order to understand such diverse and yet overlapping concepts as territoriality, ethnicity, and socioeconomic disparity as components of the same general phenomenon. The concept focuses on the objective existence of regional differences within and across the boundaries of nation-states and on the subjective perceptions of these differences. It is important to note that subjective perceptions, while often serving as the driving force of regional movements, may not accurately reflect objective conditions.5 Regional differences can be political, economic, sociocultural, or, most likely, a combination of these. Regionalism can then be defined as the persistence of subnational and transnational differences, identities, and commitments. In the context of the modern centralized nation-state, the main characteristics of regionalism and its perception are geopolitical distance, sociocultural difference, and socioeconomic dependence.6 It will be argued here that in these terms regionalism is an inevitable product and consequence of the uneven development of the modern capitalist state. Why, then, has the recognition of this fact been so late and reluctant? The analytical endeavors of modem social science are much too focused on the explanation of existing sociopolitical phenomena and therefore lack a more anticipatory dimension. Lijphart cites an impressive list of reasons for this failure, with modernization and integration theories and their emphasis on the irreversible process of homogenization as the most ones. Consequently, the conceptual efforts of catching up with anunexpected reality are described as a move from falsified predictions to plausible postdictions.7 Apart from the persistence of modernization ideologies there is another major cause for