Public Opinion Splits On Whether Ethnonationalism Is Dead Today

The resurgence of ethnonationalism in the 21st century has sparked a heated debate: is it a fleeting relic of the past, or a structural force quietly reshaping global politics? Public opinion, far from unified, reveals a fractured landscape—where polls show declining support in Western democracies, yet explosive growth in regions where identity is weaponized. The question isn’t whether ethnonationalism persists, but whether it has become obsolete in an era supposedly defined by globalization and cosmopolitanism.

In Western Europe and North America, rising independence movements and populist appeals hinge on ethnic or national purity—often couched in civic language but rooted in shared ancestry or cultural heritage. Yet, in polls conducted by Eurobarometer and Pew Research, support for exclusive national identity has dropped by 15–20 points since 2010, particularly among younger, urban demographics. This decline isn’t merely attitudinal; it reflects a strategic recalibration. Political actors once reliant on ethnonational appeals now deploy hybrid narratives—framing immigration bans or cultural preservation as “defense of tradition,” not exclusion. The result is a paradox: ethnonationalism persists, but its overt forms have evolved, hiding in policy, rhetoric, and even tech-driven echo chambers.

Meanwhile, in Eastern Europe, South Asia, and parts of the Middle East, the opposite trend unfolds. In Hungary, Poland, India, and Turkey, ethnonationalist ideologies are not just tolerated—they’re institutionalized. Hungary’s Fidesz party, for instance, has embedded ethno-cultural criteria into citizenship law, redefining belonging through bloodlines and language. India’s BJP has transformed national identity into a Hindu-majority narrative, altering public discourse in ways that reshape social contracts. These aren’t isolated cases; they’re part of a broader pattern where exclusionary identity politics gain legitimacy through democratic processes. The danger lies in mistaking institutional entrenchment for decline—ethnonationalism isn’t fading; it’s adapting.

Beyond the surface, the divide reflects deeper cognitive and structural shifts. Cognitive psychology reveals that in times of economic uncertainty or demographic change, people gravitate toward in-group cohesion—a primal heuristic that ethnonationalism exploits with precision. But data from the World Happiness Report and global conflict indices show that societies with high ethnic polarization experience 30% higher rates of civil unrest, even when overt violence remains suppressed. The “soft” mechanisms of ethnonationalism—cultural policing, educational curricula, media narratives—now operate with unprecedented subtlety, evading traditional anti-radicalization frameworks.

Polarization vs. Suppression: While Western democracies suppress overt ethnonationalist movements, they fail to address their underlying drivers—inequality, cultural anxiety, and perceived loss of status—fueling underground support.
Demographic Time Bombs: In aging societies, declining birth rates and immigration have triggered identity crises, making ethnonational narratives more compelling to segments seeking stability.
Digital Reinforcement: Social media algorithms don’t just amplify bias—they engineer identity-based ecosystems, turning localized sentiment into global movements within hours.
The Role of Myth: Ethnonationalism thrives not on factual claims alone, but on mythic narratives—shared histories, ancestral ties, collective trauma—tools that resonate across generations, even in secular states.

What emerges is a fractured public consciousness: in some corners, ethnonationalism is a dying ideology, a cautionary tale of the past. In others, it’s a living framework, quietly redefining citizenship, belonging, and the boundaries of the political. The real challenge for policymakers and journalists isn’t to declare its end, but to map its evolution—how it hides in plain sight, how it adapts to democracy’s constraints, and how it exploits the very ideals of freedom and self-determination that gave it life. The silence isn’t peace—it’s preparation.

As global identity becomes both a battleground and a currency, one truth remains: ethnonationalism hasn’t vanished. It has become more complex, more embedded, and far more difficult to define—or defeat.