| Contemporary nationalism is typically framed as an oppositional ideology that legitimates the struggles of ethnic minorities for political sovereignty or, alternatively, justifies the xenophobic claims of nativist fringe groups. The emphasis on nationalism's incendiary varieties has led to the neglect of everyday popular nationalism---the routine and tacit acceptance of the nation-state as a primary object of identification and loyalty as well as a fundamental unit of political organization. My dissertation develops a theory of popular nationalism and empirically investigates the multiple manifestations of this phenomenon in modern democracies. I argue that popular nationalism is a pervasive cognitive orientation that structures people's perceptions of the legitimacy of their political institutions, the appropriate criteria of membership in their nations, and their countries' standing in the global political and economic system. Because of the extensive institutionalization of the nation-state system, this orientation is widely diffused and deeply internalized. Yet, the specific manner in which particular nation-states are imagined by their citizens varies, both within national populations and between them.;Using representative survey data from thirty countries, I identify four varieties of popular nationalism: liberal, critical, populist, and ultranationalist. My results demonstrate that all four types of popular nationalism are found in all thirty countries in the sample. Their relative prevalence, however, varies from country to country. These cultural models are strongly associated with a range of political attitudes, including cultural and economic protectionism, isolationism, and anti-immigrant sentiments. Moreover, their content is stable, while their distribution within countries changes over time. A qualitative case analysis of historical evidence reveals that these changes are produced by major events that increase the public salience of the nation-state, including economic booms and recessions, fluctuations in government social expenditures, national security threats, and upswings of anti-immigrant rhetoric in public discourse. |
