Civilization state

A civilization state, or civilizational state, is a country that aims to represent not just a historical territory, ethnolinguistic group, or body of governance, but a unique civilization in its own right. It is distinguished from the concept of a nation state by describing a country's dominant sociopolitical modes as constituting a category larger than a single nation. When classifying states as civilization states, emphasis is often placed on a country's historical continuity and cultural unity across a large geographic region.
China and India have been described as civilisation states but the term has also been used to describe countries such as Egypt, Russia, Iran. The category of the civilization state has further been criticized as setting up a false binary in service of political ulterior motives of both the proponents and the opponents of these states, and for emphasizing an oppositional relationship with the category of nation states as opposed to recognizing a combination of nation-state and civilization-state characteristics in contemporary states.

China

The term "civilization-state" was first used by American political scientist Lucian Pye in 1990 to categorize China as having a distinct sociopolitical character, as opposed to viewing it as a nation state in the European model. The use of this new term implies that China was and still is an "empire state" with a unique political tradition and governmental structure, and its proponents asserted that the nation state model fails to properly describe the evolution of the Chinese state. Proponents of the label describe China as having a unique historical and cultural unity, derived from a continuous process of cultural syncretism. The term was further popularized by its use in When China Rules the World by British political scientist Martin Jacques.
According to Li Xing and Timothy M. Shaw, the central feature of analyzing China as a civilization state is the view that the Chinese state derives its legitimacy from the continuation of a sociopolitical order which posits that the state maintains natural authority over its subjects, and that it is the "guardian" of both its citizens and their society, a view of the state that is completely distinct from the Westphalian nation-state model. Other scholars make the case that the key features of a civilization-state are the maintenance of an ethos of cultural unity despite displaying significant cultural diversity, across centuries of history and a large geographic space. Some specifically draw attention to the longevity of the Chinese writing system, or describe China's existence as being uniquely and inexorably tied to the past.
Guang Xia pushes back on the idea of the uniqueness of a Chinese civilization-state. Xia argues that civilization-state discourse in China studies is an important and positive development, as it allows for characteristics of the modern Chinese state to be properly analyzed in the context of their history. However, Xia concludes that ultimately, all civilizations must reinvent themselves in the context of their history, and that it is a mistake to view China as a static entity or to portray it as being more tied to its past than the rest of the world.

Other proposed civilization states

Egypt

Mohamed Soliman has argued that by celebrating its pharaonic tradition, Egypt under Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has pivoted to a civilization-state identity, in opposition to the Western Westphalian system of nation states.

India

Jayati Srivatsa describes two distinct views of India as a civilization: a pluralistic view of Indian civilization as a bridge between the cultures of the Indian subcontinent, and an exclusive view of Indian civilization that is centered on religious identity and Hindutva. Proponents of the latter, exclusivist model have gained prominence alongside the rise of the Bharatiya Janata Party, applying the concept to simultaneously celebrate past glories, marginalize internal minorities, and assert India's prominence on the international stage.

Russia

's administration has at times embraced the rhetoric of portraying Russia as a distinct Eurasian civilization-state.

Criticism

argues that "the civilization state concept sets up a false binary between the East and the West" focusing on the purportedly anti-liberal values of a small set of non-Western countries to the exclusion of traditional values in these same countries that would undermine this characterization, and calls the concept an "analytical straitjacket". V. V. Naumkin agrees that proponents of the discourse of civilization states tend to use it as a simplistic "weapon of ideological and political struggles", but asserts that it also provides a lens for more thoughtful analysis of differences between states, noting that China, India and Russia have significant differences among themselves and incorporate aspects of both transhistorical civilizations and a modern nation states. Jayati Srivatsa similarly notes that in its pursuit of internal homogeneity on the basis of Hindu identity, proponents of India as a civilization state ironically end up reinforcing its character as a nation-state representing a homogenous national group.