Suchergebnisse

Prikaz knjige:

Yael Tamir, Why Nationalism, Princeton University Press, 2019., стр. 224.

Analyzes the reappearance of a nationalist movement and the implications of the extreme right.

Containing Nationalism by Michael Hechter is reviewed.

'Asian Nationalism' edited by Michael Leifer is reviewed.

Black nationalism has been one of the most mili tant and strident protest movements in the Afro-American com munity since the early nineteenth century. In its earliest mani festations, political nationalism sought to separate black people from the United States; economic nationalism sought to break down racial barriers through developing economic strength in the black community; while cultural nationalism sought the same goal through the development of racial solidarity and black consciousness. The various strands were brought to gether into an integral form of nationalism by Marcus Garvey after World War I. The Nation of Islam continued the empha sis on integral nationalism under the leadership of Elijah Mu hammad but added a significant religious component. Con temporary trends in black nationalism reflect the profound influence of the late El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz. Political na tionalism has been expanded to include a new and unique em phasis upon land, as well as emphasis upon self-determination for black communities and accountability of black leaders. The growing strength of cultural nationalism is seen in the new manifestations of black consciousness. The nature of the cur rent trends indicate that black people see themselves as part of the American society even though they feel very much sepa rated from it. Future trends in black nationalism may be sig nificantly affected by the most persistent racial barrier in America—the color line.

In the article, the author stresses the significance of the external and diasporic origins of nationalism. To illustrate the argument, the author draws on the examples of modern Japan and Korea.

The recent Supreme Court decision in Saenz v. Roe struck down a California welfare law that imposed residency requirements on recent arrivals to the state. In vindicating the mobility rights of migrants, the Court breathed new life into the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause. This Article suggests that, however misconceived the decision might appear from the perspective of welfare law, it usefully serves to promote a common American identity on which nationalist sentiments crucially depend. The core nationalist symbol for Americans is the idea of constitutionally-protected liberties that I call liberal nationalism A liberal nationalist understanding of the Privileges or Immunities Clause has four implications for constitutional interpretation. First, it suggests that the mobility rights the Saenz court upheld deserve the high degree of protection they received in that case. Second, the argument from nationalism offers an explanation for cases where the Supreme Court has been faulted for failing to protect national symbols such as the flag. More than the flag, constitutional liberties are a national symbol for Americans, and in upholding the right to deface the flag on free speech grounds, the Court has merely preferred one patriotic symbol to another. Third, a nationalist perspective suggests that basic liberties should enjoy constitutional protection at the national level and should not be entirely returned to the states. But for the argument from nationalism, a strong case could be made for a very thin set of national constitutional liberties, or even for state opt-out rights. Finally, nationalist concerns suggest a need for caution before removing contentious issues from political deliberation by turning them into constitutional rights. In politics, there are only winners and losers, and there is no great shame in being a loser; but in American constitutional law the losers can be faulted for a want of loyalty to core American values, and this must weaken American nationalism.

This paper examines the intellectual underpinnings of the nationalism articulated by the followers of Marshal Józef Piłsudski (Piłsudskiites), who ruled Poland between 1926 and 1939. Scholarly consensus holds that modern Polish nationalism was solely the domain of the National Democratic movement. Conversely, the Piłsudskiites' conception of the nation is generally seen as anachronistic, poorly articulated, self-contradictory, and lacking a deeper intellectual foundation. Focusing on the formative years of the Second Polish Republic (1918-1922), this paper draws a link between Piłsudskiite political thought and the philosophy of the heterodox Marxist theorist Stanislaw Brzozowski. Re-examining the early writings of Piłsudski's followers in light of Brzozowski's philosophy, the paper presents the argument that "Piłsudskiite nationalism" was in fact deeply constructivist, surprisingly sophisticated, and no less "modern" than the nationalist discourse articulated by the National Democrats. In the process, the article interrogates and problematizes the classic "ethnic" vs. "civic" typology of nationalist movements.