Transnational Manifesto

This week in class we were asked to brainstorm how we would construct a transnational handbook. After a short five minutes, we soon found there seemed an endless list of terms and concepts that could fall under the historical discipline of transnationalism. Reflecting back on the readings and discussion we have had this semester, I would argue there is no consensus on what exactly constitutes as transnational history. However, I do not find this problematic. Though I am a stickler for clean and concise definitions, I do not think anything is added but “straight jacketing” the term transnational to the confines of a set definition.  By leaving the discipline up for interpretation, transnationalism is allowed legs, raising the subject as starting point for larger conversations regarding migration, identity, and cross border initiatives. While I have already listed three areas of exploration that come as symptomatic subsections of transnational history, this is merely a truncated list of the larger implications transnationalism could have on other fields of study.

With this in mind, I would construct a “manifesto” or historical handbook of transnational history as such:

1. Include a vague meaning of transnational: a cross border initiative. I would then continue highlighting all the ways this can be done such as studying transnational actors, movements, or ideas. Next, In this same section I would outline some of the disagreements within the field, showing where historians disagree on the current definition and future of transnational history.
2. I would define transnational actors, giving a rough overview of what transnational actors are, and what role they play in cross border initiatives. I would make sure to include examples from all periods of history, from merchants in the early modern period to European Parliament members in 2019.
3. Next, I would go on to discuss transnational commodities such as ideas, human rights movements, and political ideologies. For example, there could be a transnational history conducted on the breath of Communism globally in the 1900s. Additionally, there could be a transnational history done on the assembly line and its global impact. It is important to include this section to show that not only people and nations can be transnational, but commodities and ideas count as well.
4. It is also important to acknowledge how to measure transnational history, referencing a global, local or even “glocal” approach. Here I would include a few articles as examples and a testament of how differently historians categorise transnationalism through the use of scales/measures.
5. I would also include a section on transnational organisations. Organisations such as the EU are sometimes thought of as international or supranational but very rarely referred to as transnational. In other words, most people know what the EU is but not what transnational organisations are.  If the EU was introduced as a transnational organisation, showing how its policies and legislation affect citizens and nations across borders and EU member states, then the general public might gain a greater appreciation and understanding for “transnationalism.” For example, many European understand that they are EU citizens and that the EU somehow regulates their national government, however they might not understand why this is transnational. By introducing it as a transnational, a foundation is laid to make further connections between international and supranational organisation to the discipline of transnational history.

Lastly, I would include a list of the top ten leading historians practicing transnational history. By citing a collection of each historian’s articles, showing how the studies vary from each other, the true magnitude of the discipline can be felt. This will drive home the point that transnational history is ever changing, cutting edge, and widespread. It is not a concept easily defined or caged into a specific category.