Suchergebnisse

Ernest Gellner's is the best-known modernist explanatory theory of nationalism. This article summarizes its expression and development before considering its strengths and weaknesses. Discussion centres on Gellner's functionalist mode of explanation, the place of nationalism in his philosophy of history, the predictive and retrodictive nature of his theory, and the merits of his typology of nationalism. The apolitical character of his writings is emphasized: in particular, though Gellner established the connections between nationalism and egalitarianism in modern societies, he did not emphasize the mutually reinforcing relationships between nationalism, egalitarianism and democratization; moreover, his contempt for nationalist doctrines is not something liberals, socialists and conservatives need share. (British Journal of Political Science / FUB)

FIVE CONTRADICTIONS IN THE NORTHERN IRELAND CONSERVATIVE STEWARDSHIP ARE IDENTIFIED: 1) THE INTEGRATIONIST-DEVOLUTIONIST; 2) THE SOVEREIGNIST-INTERGOVERNMENTALIST; 3) THE UNION; 4) THE TALKING AND NOT TALKING TO TERRORISTS; AND 5) THE DEFENSE OF CAPITALISM AND SOCIAL JUSTICE CONTRADICTIONS. AN ATTEMPT IS THEN MADE TO EXPLAIN OR TO EXPLAIN AWAY THE CONTRADICTIONS. THE CONSERVATIVES ARE DESCRIBED AS SLOW LEARNERS AND IT IS NOTED THAT IT WILL BE INTRIGUING TO SEE WHEN THEY GO INTO OPPOSITION WHETHER THE CONSERVATIVES' POLICY LEARNING WILL BE MAINTAINED.

Ernest Gellner's theory of nationalism, as presented in Thought and Change (1965) & Nations and Nationalism (1983), is sketched, criticized, qualified, & defended. Gellner offers an explicitly functionalist argument in which industrialization explains the genesis & maintenance of nationalism. Gellner's theory is defended against many inferior theories that either fail to provide the analytic distinction between nations & nationalism, or fail to account for the relations between power, education, & cultural community. The primary defect of Gellner's theory is its largely apolitical nature. Successful nation-building depends much more on political innovation, & is more intimately linked to democratization, than Gellner allows. The political doctrine of nationalism is defended against the criticisms that it is either dangerous or meaningless & argued to be compatible with liberal, democratic consciousness. 44 References. H. von Rautenfeld

An editor's introduction to a symposium (see abstracts of related articles) that considers David Miller's On Nationality (1995). Miller's book is described as an excellent opportunity to reflect on the contributions of political philosophy to the study of nationalism. The core arguments of the book are first presented by Miller; comments follow. While representing a range of national, ethnic, & religious backgrounds, it is observed that respondents largely reflect the tacit assumptions of anglophone political science & political theory. Issues such as the relation between nationalism & national self-determination, the notion of ethical universalism, & the nature of the modern state are raised. Further, Miller is taken to task for erroneous interpretations concerning specific ethnonational conflicts, his decidedly domestic viewpoint toward nationalism, & his insufficient liberal & nationalist logic & prescriptions. However, given the narrow range of voices represented by this symposium, it is hoped that future debate can be broadened to include other viewpoints. D. M. Smith