Class 2: The Genesis of Nations (1) Klasse 2: Die Entstehung der Nationen (1) Class 2: The Genesis of Nations (1) Clase 2: La génesis de las naciones (1) Classe 2 : La genèse des nations (1) クラス2：国家創世記(1) 수업 2: 국가의 기원 (1) 2 klasė: Tautų genezė (1) Les 2: Het ontstaan van naties (1) Aula 2: A génese das nações (1) Занятие 2: Генезис наций (1) Sınıf 2: Ulusların Yaratılışı (1) Заняття 2: Походження націй (1) 第二课：万国的起源（一） 第二課：萬國創世紀（一）

- But today is a kind of second introductory lecture - Aber heute ist eine Art zweiter Einführungsvortrag - 但今天是第二次介绍性讲座

where we're gonna be thinking about wo wir darüber nachdenken werden 我们要考虑的地方

the origins of the nation in particular, as with last time, insbesondere die Ursprünge der Nation, wie beim letzten Mal, в частности, о происхождении нации, как и в прошлый раз, 特别是国家的起源，和上次一样，

I'm gonna toss you some what I think are softballs, Ich werde dir ein paar Softbälle zuwerfen, denke ich, Я собираюсь бросить вам несколько, как мне кажется, мягких мячей, 我要扔给你一些我认为是垒球的东西，

but also feel free to raise your hand and interrupt, но также не стесняйтесь поднимать руку и перебивать, 但也可以随时举手打断，

because that can help me when I understand

that something's really not coming across dass etwas wirklich nicht rüberkommt что что-то не доходит 真的没有发生什么事

or something is unclear. 或者有什么不清楚的。

So just feel free to interrupt

and ask a question anytime you want.

So this lecture is called The Genesis of Nations,

and it's about a question, which I raised last time, und es geht um eine Frage, die ich letztes Mal gestellt habe,

which has kind of been a question puzzling philosophers Das war eine Frage, die Philosophen verwirrte 这一直是一个困扰哲学家的问题

from the beginning of philosophy,

which is how do you get from something to nothing? Wie kommt man von etwas zu nichts? 这是如何从有到无的？

At some point there wasn't a Ukrainian nation Irgendwann gab es keine ukrainische Nation В какой-то момент украинской нации не стало. 在某个时候没有乌克兰国家

and at some point there is a Ukrainian nation.

How does that happen?

How do you get social forms to come into existence Wie bringt man soziale Formen zustande? Как заставить социальные формы существовать 你如何让社会形式出现

that didn't exist before?

It's a really interesting question.

And you can ask it with other social formations as well. Und man kann es auch bei anderen Gesellschaftsformationen fragen. И это можно спросить и у других общественных формаций.

There didn't used to be classes, Früher gab es keinen Unterricht, Раньше классов не было,

but now we don't have any difficult-- но теперь у нас нет никаких трудностей...

I don't mean the classes that you're in. Я не имею в виду занятия, которые вы посещаете. 我不是说你所在的班级。

I mean, social classes, right? Economic classes. Я имею в виду социальные классы, верно? Экономические классы. 我的意思是，社会阶层，对吧？经济类。

Those didn't use to exist either, Раньше их тоже не было,

but now we don't have much trouble identifying, но теперь у нас нет особых проблем с идентификацией, 但现在我们不难识别，

oh, he's middle class.

Actually we're in America, so everybody's middle class. Вообще-то мы в Америке, поэтому все относятся к среднему классу.

Thinking that everyone's middle class

is part of the class struggle, I'm sure you know that. 是阶级斗争的一部分，我相信你知道。

So if you all think you're middle class, Так что если вы все считаете себя средним классом,

that means you're already in, okay. это значит, что вы уже в деле, хорошо.

Sorry that wasn't our subject today at all. Жаль, что это совсем не наша сегодняшняя тема. 抱歉，这根本不是我们今天的主题。

We're gonna move back to nations.

Although the Marxists Obwohl die Marxisten

are gonna get a little shout out later on werden später ein wenig hervorgehoben. vão ter um pequeno destaque mais tarde в дальнейшем будут немного освещены 稍后会大声喊叫

because actually Marxists were some of the first people

to think about the nation.

But when we're thinking about this social form Но когда мы думаем об этой социальной форме.

of the nation, what makes it particularly tricky нации, что делает его особенно сложным 是什么让它变得特别棘手

is that the nation, once it exists, lays claim to the past. ist, dass die Nation, sobald sie existiert, Anspruch auf die Vergangenheit erhebt. полягає в тому, що нація, як тільки вона існує, претендує на минуле. 是国家一旦存在，就对过去提出要求。

So the nation didn't always exist

but once it comes into existence,

it tells a story about the past

and the story that the nation tells about the past is wrong. und die Geschichte, die die Nation über die Vergangenheit erzählt, ist falsch.

That's the short version.

It tells a story which clears out the past Sie erzählt eine Geschichte, die mit der Vergangenheit aufräumt

and that story calls itself history.

Although it's not really history, it calls itself history.

And so this new social form has a story

about how it's very old and that confusion is confusion

that basically everyone lives their whole life with.

Unless you're American.

If you're American, then your national story

is that you're new and you're fresh

and you're all about the future,

which is ironic because the American nation

is actually comparatively speaking, quite old. ist, vergleichsweise gesehen, ziemlich alt.

It's funny, right?

It's actually older than most of the European nations,

but don't tell the Europeans and don't tell the Americans,

'cause that would mess everybody up. denn das würde alle durcheinander bringen.

So the trick though is that the nation is modern, Der Trick dabei ist, dass die Nation modern ist,

but it lays claim to the past

in a way which if we ourselves are at all nationally minded auf eine Art und Weise, die uns, wenn wir überhaupt national eingestellt sind de uma forma que, se nós próprios tivermos uma mentalidade nacional

and many of us probably are, feels comfortable and right.

And that makes it very hard to answer this question

of where the nation came from

because the nation is already giving you an answer.

The nation comes equipped with an answer.

It comes equipped in the most banal

and obvious practical sense,

which you've already encountered in your lives probably,

which is that as you're educated, und das ist, dass man in der Ausbildung ist,

as you go through elementary school,

middle school, high school,

if you're in anything like a national educational system,

you're given answers to these questions,

which seem self-evident as to where the nation came from.

But of course, there's a circular phenomenon here,

which is that once there's a national consciousness,

once there's a national identity,

then the educational system takes on a national character

and then reproduces that national consciousness and identity

in a way which then starts to seem unproblematic

and commonsensical. und vernünftig.

So there's a circular quality about this, Es handelt sich also um eine zirkuläre Qualität,

which is very hard to break out of

when you're seven years old.

I mean, I'm sure all of you are smarter than average

and each one of you is smarter than the person next to you.

I'm aware of this, you're Yale students,

but when you were seven, you pro--

Okay, six.

When you were six, you probably weren't raising your hand

and talking about the constructed character of national--

Right? You probably weren't.

You were probably, I don't know.

Correct me, but I imagine

that what they told you about the past in your schools,

you were probably either ignoring it

or somehow taking it in to some extent, right? oder sie in gewissem Maße aufzunehmen, richtig?

Thank you for those nods. That's very affirming. Ich danke Ihnen für Ihr Nicken. Das ist sehr ermutigend.

So the obvious way that this happens

is the institutional way.

The nation takes over the state, Die Nation übernimmt den Staat,

the state takes over the education,

the education takes over the kids

and then the kids believe the things

which are commonsensical and 99 times out of a hundred

and I say this as a historian

who gets trapped in cocktail parties all the time in corners кто все время попадает в ловушку на коктейльных вечеринках в углах

with people who know what really happened in the past, с людьми, которые знают, что на самом деле произошло в прошлом,

99 times out of a hundred, you never break free, right? 99 раз из ста ты никогда не вырвешься на свободу, верно?

99 times out of a hundred, 99 раз из ста,

you're basically trapped where they pinned you down вы в основном в ловушке, где они прижали вас

when you were seven.

The less obvious way that the nation gets hold of the past Die weniger offensichtliche Art und Weise, wie sich die Nation der Vergangenheit bemächtigt

has to do not with the institutions, hat nichts mit den Institutionen zu tun,

but with the form of the story.

And I'm gonna tell you a couple forms of the story

and try to make them seem less commonsensical und versuchen, sie weniger vernünftig erscheinen zu lassen

or less obvious, less natural than they are.

I called this maybe a little bit too preciously,

I called this lecture The Genesis of Nations,

because now I'm gonna talk about Genesis.

A great story about the nation

is that there once was innocence and the innocence was lost.

That is a big story about the nation,

especially nations that emerge out of empires. insbesondere Nationen, die aus Imperien hervorgegangen sind.

Especially nations like the Russian.

I'm not gonna talk about too much about America,

but it's certainly true of America too.

There's an American imperial story

about how things were at some point,

the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, 1950s.

At some point, things were fine.

At some point, things were good.

And then somehow the immigrants got in and we lost control Und dann sind die Einwanderer irgendwie reingekommen und wir haben die Kontrolle verloren.

and now things aren't so good.

That's a story of innocence. Das ist eine Geschichte der Unschuld.

If you're about making the country great again,

like a cycle.

You go back to a cycle where there's a point Man kehrt zu einem Zyklus zurück, bei dem es einen Punkt gibt

or the founders are another good example of this.

So some people think that the moment of 1776 or 1789

is a kind of moment of innocence. ist eine Art Moment der Unschuld.

The founders got it basically right.

That's a very attractive idea.

The founders thought of everything,

they're kind of demigods. Sie sind so etwas wie Halbgötter.

They walk the earth, leaving huge footprints behind them

and the footprints were filled with the water

and residue of righteousness. und der Rest der Gerechtigkeit.

And that's all you have to know.

That's a very attractive view.

Somebody got everything right at one point in time.

Most of the Supreme Court now

pretends to believe this at this point.

By the way, you know what the problem with originalism is?

I realize this is not our subject at all

so you don't have to take notes.

But there's a school of thought called originalism

about the American Constitution,

which says that you have to take the Constitution

only in terms of what it actually says.

But you know what the Constitution doesn't say?

It doesn't say that you have to take the Constitution

the way that the Constitution actually says.

That is to say the originalist position

is self-contradictory because the originalist position

is not actually in the Constitution, right?

Okay. I've blown your minds, right?

All right. (students laughing)

But I'm only saying this by way

of this general imperial nation problem

of wanting to go back to a moment

where somehow we got everything right.

In Russia today, this is very evident

in the thought of a character called Ivan Ilyin,

who for several years Putin read

and who takes a view like this, that the world is flawed.

The world itself is flawed, but Russia has a kind of mission

of restoring the innocence of the world.

I mean, it's kind of ironic,

but very often it's the imperial nations,

the post-imperial nations that are focused on innocence.

They're focused on a time when everything was all right.

Nations that are peripheral

or are anti-colonial, anti-imperial

very often have a different structure of story,

which I wanna try to make seem

both familiar and unfamiliar to you if I can.

And that's a three part story. And again, it's biblical.

So the story of lost innocence is of course,

the story of Adam and Eve, the garden of Eden.

There's also a longer story in the Hebrew Bible,

the Old Testament about a people which had a state,

but then that mistakes were made

or bad people came and they lost their state.

But at some point they're gonna get their state back.

And when they get their state back,

everything's gonna be fine.

That's a structural story that's inside the Bible.

People have different views

about how it's gonna be right again.

The Christians say Jesus came and then everything was fine.

Zionists might say we made Israel, then everything was fine.

You can be in disagreement about when everything is fine,

but there's still the basic three part story

of everything was once good, then we lost it somehow.

Probably not our fault, probably somebody else's fault, Wahrscheinlich ist es nicht unsere Schuld, sondern die Schuld von jemand anderem,

but we lost it.

But then there will be a moment of redemption.

So the nation takes over this story very easily.

You've probably heard phrases Wahrscheinlich haben Sie schon die folgenden Sätze gehört

like national renaissance, a rebirth.

The whole idea of rebirth

is if you think about it just for a second,

in some kind of literal way, it's a very weird idea.

It's very weird.

If you just think for a quarter of a second,

what it would be like to be reborn,

wouldn't that be strange, right?

Okay, this may be a little too Freudian,

you just left home, I know.

But a rebirth is a strange idea

if you think about it at all.

So the idea of a national rebirth

is that you're going back to that time

when everything was right.

You're going back to that golden age.

Usually the nation says we're in some kind of middle period

where things have gone wrong,

but everything used to be right.

And if you're an anti-colonial or a post-colonial nation,

the story usually has to do with the people.

The people were right and good.

They're still somehow basically right and good

and we're gonna restore that rightness and goodness

by giving them a state and then things are gonna be fine.

There's been a middle period,

which involves a diaspora or an empire

or something messing things up.

But in the future, things are gonna be good.

So notice the three part story.

The three part story is very widespread. Very widespread.

Classical examples are the Jewish national story,

the Greek national story.

And I mentioned in the last lecture, the Jews and Greeks

are actually the oldest documented inhabitants

of the territory of Ukraine.

But basically, every national story

has cottoned onto this, has followed this pattern. já se apercebeu disso, já seguiu este padrão.

So I'm gonna say the obvious thing now.

It's not that this is true.

It's not that there ever was a pure nation.

It's not that there was an ethnicity Não é que houvesse uma etnia

which existed a thousand years ago and still exists today. que existia há mil anos e continua a existir atualmente.

I hope I'm not shattering anybody's illusions, Espero não estar a desfazer as ilusões de ninguém,

but that never actually happens. mas isso nunca acontece de facto.

I know I'm breaking something to you now, Sei que estou a quebrar algo para ti agora,

but somebody has to at some point. mas alguém tem de o fazer a dada altura.

Relationships are a lot more complicated than that, right?

Fatherhood and motherhood and sex.

It's a lot more complicated than a straight line