Search results

Zef Segal, The Political Fragmentation of Germany: Formation of German States by Infrastructures, Maps, and Movement, 1815–1866 (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019)
Christian Karner, Nationalism Revisited: Austrian Social Closure from Romanticism to the Digital Age (New York: Berghahn Books, 2020)

Ausgehend von der Diskussion westlicher Sinologen (M. C. Wright, J. P. Harrison, R. R. Levenson) über "culturalism and nationalism" in China behandelt der Autor den chinesischen Nationalismus - vor allem im 20. Jahrhundert, insbesondere das Verhältnis der Han-Chinesen zu den nationalen Minderheiten und das Verhältnis zwischen der VR China, Taiwan, Hongkong und Macao sowie deren zukünftige Wiedervereinigung und schließlich das Verhältnis der VR China zu den Nachbarstaaten. (APCh-Kmp)

International audience ; In recent years, it has been a common complaint among scholars to acknowledge the lack of research on Spanish nationalism. This article addresses the gap by giving an historical overview of 'ethnic' and 'civic' Spanish nationalist discourses during the last two centuries. It is argued here that Spanish nationalism is not a unified ideology but it has, at least, two varieties. During the 19th-century, both a 'liberal' and a 'conservative-traditionalist' nationalist discourse were formulated and these competed against each other for hegemony within the Spanish market of ideas. In the 20th-century, these two discourses continued to be present and became backbones of different political regimes. However, after the emergence of the Basque and Catalan nationalist movements, Spanish nationalists unified as a counter-force to these regional sources of identity. In fact, one can see 20th-century Spanish nationalism as a dialectical struggle between the centre and the periphery.

In recent years, it has been a common complaint among scholars to acknowledge the lack of research on Spanish nationalism. This article addresses the gap by giving an historical overview of 'ethnic' and 'civic' Spanish nationalist discourses during the last two centuries. It is argued here that Spanish nationalism is not a unified ideology but it has, at least, two varieties. During the 19th-century, both a 'liberal' and a 'conservative-traditionalist' nationalist discourse were formulated and these competed against each other for hegemony within the Spanish market of ideas. In the 20th-century, these two discourses continued to be present and became backbones of different political regimes. However, after the emergence of the Basque and Catalan nationalist movements, Spanish nationalists unified as a counter-force to these regional sources of identity. In fact, one can see 20th-century Spanish nationalism as a dialectical struggle between the centre and the periphery.

As reflected in responses to Britain's membership in the EEC, support for the Falkland Islands invasion, the "special relationship" with the U.S., and Welsh and Scottish nationalism.

This article explores the history of etatism in Latvian nationalism, in which intellectuals played a dominant role in defining strong statehood as a priority over nationalism. After 1934, in particular, during the regime of Karlis Ulmanis, that Latvian nationalism came to the conclusion that a system which gave individuals power was not sufficient to forge a strong national character. Rather, it was through the establishment of state institutions & the construction of a horizontal power structure that Latvia could achieve statehood on an abstract level, whereby ideals did not reflect the will of individuals alone, but more importantly, the growth of an interventionist & centralized state. It is argued here that this political doctrine, espousing bureaucracy with unlimited power, became the ultimate solution to national identity questions not only in Latvia, but also through all of Central & Eastern Europe. References. C. Brunski

Nationalism has been one of the fuzziest and elephantine concepts which does not belong strictly to any specific social discipline. In theorizing about the issues of nation and nationalism, Ernest Gellner stood apart from the rest of his generation of post-war social scientists. During the period when the subject of nationalism was most disparaged, Gellner produced many remarkable writings on nationalism. This paper will explore the theoretical underpinnings of nationalism developed by Ernest Gellner in his famous book Nations and Nationalism. He is known to have provided a most logical and thorough explanation of the existence of nationalism as a corollary of modernity. Many issues emerge from his perspectives on nationalism. This paper attempts to explore a few of them. Firstly, it seeks explanations for Gellner's single-minded obsession with the issues of nations and nationalism. Secondly, his ideas about modernity and nationalism are revisited. And finally, the dissection of the strengths and weakness of his project of nations and nationalism is done to understand the underpinnings of his overall perspective. The paper concludes that despite a few inconsistencies in Gellner's theory about nationalism, it remains one of the most potent and plausible accounts in the modern perspectives on nationalism. His argument about the association between nationalism and modernity has a universal appeal and empirical promise.

This article reviews research on the relationship between property rights and nationalism. A property rights perspective to the study of nationalism is relevant to understanding the origins and development of nationalism and nation states. Yet, key theorists of nationalism have mostly ignored the relationship between property rights and nationalism, or looked at it only indirectly. There are a variety of ways in which ownership or possession more generally can be related to nationalism, for instance through colonialism, racism, and dispossession (Bannerji et al. 2001; Bhandar 2016; Bhandar & Toscano 2015). This review, however, in order to build a consistent perspective on the historical emergence of nation states and nationalism, will have its main focus on property rights, property regimes and state-building. The literature on state-building and democratization bears important insights about this relationship which can be applied to the study of nationalism. This review will therefore draw on such literature, in addition to works on nationalism where the topic of property has been mentioned, to show how an integrated property rights perspective to the study of nationalism may yield important insights to our understanding of nations and nationalism. The article is structured as follows. First, it offers a brief discussion of what property rights are and why they are key to understanding the long-term historical development of nations and nationalism. After this, it outlines the links between property regimes and the formation of nation states, followed by a discussion of the conceptual links between nationalism and private property. The final section offers some brief reflections on Marxism, property and nationalism.