Description
According to the traditional constructivist understandings, international norms emerge through a “life cycle” model, involving the emergence of the norm, a ‘cascade’ process whereby adoption of the norm becomes widespread, and internalization of the norm. This process, described by Finnemore and Sikkink (1998) has been used to describe the emergence of international norms surrounding ozone depletion and climate action (Hoffmann, 2005); abolition of the death penalty (Manners, 2002); gender equality (Krook and True, 2012); and regional integration (Acharya, 2004). However, these approaches collectively suggest that norms emerge and develop in a linear, socially progressive manner, bringing the world broadly from a series of ‘bad’ local practices, towards ‘good’ international practices. This article critiques this idea by examining the proliferation of xenophobic and nativist rhetoric in several countries in Europe and North America. Using Mudde’s definition of nativism, we argue that this ideology is beginning to coalesce into an emergent nativist ‘bad’ norm of hostility and antipathy towards immigrants and ethnic and racial minorities. Particularly, we pay attention to the recent global diffusion of an increasingly prominent brand of white nationalism, characterised by an apparent normalization of the “Great Replacement” theory in modern politics. Finally, we argue that nativism is a particularly “bad” norm because it represents the negative image of other, ostensibly “good norms,” such as in this case with the normative co-optation of “indigeneity” as a political identity associated with indigenous rights discourse.
