Thus, a "civic nation" defines itself not by culture but by political institutions and liberal principles, which its citizens pledge to uphold.
[14] Some authors criticize that definition used by Renan, based on a "daily referendum", because of the ambiguity of the concept and its idealization.
It also supports the reunification of Cyprus and the end of foreign interference by Greece, Turkey, and the United Kingdom.
[citation needed] Yael Tamir has argued that the differences between ethnic and civic nationalism are blurred.
She posits: "By waving the civic flag, Western democracies pretend to be more peaceful and inclusive than they really are, fostering a self-image that allows them to exonerate themselves, leaving them unprepared to deal with internal conflicts".
[24] The distinction between ethnic and civic nationalism has also been criticized by scholars like Bernard Yack[25] and Umut Özkırımlı.
[26] Yack rejects Renan's notion of "voluntary" civic nationality as an illusion, arguing this "misrepresents political reality as surely as the ethnonationalist myths it is designed to combat", going on to state how cultural memories form an inseparable part of every national political identity.
Because supposed civic values are abstract, universal and thus open to all, "they cannot be related to a specific place – the national homeland.