Suchergebnisse

Includes index. ; Most of the essays were originally published in v. 12, no. 2-3, of the journal of the Folklore Institute. ; Includes bibliographical references and index. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Traditional conceptualisations of nationalism focus on the need for intergroup domination. We argue that current politics are rather driven by the need for recognition of the greatness of one's nation. In psychological literature, the need for the nation's appreciation is captured by the concept of collective narcissism—a belief in in-group greatness contingent on external recognition. We demonstrate that collective narcissism is associated with support for national populist parties and policies. We also review the empirical evidence for the intergroup and intragroup concomitants of collective narcissism. We demonstrate that collective narcissism benefits neither out-group nor in-group members. Instead, it helps manage psychological needs of the individual. We conclude that collective narcissism might undermine social cohesion both within and between groups.

The Feeling of love and pride towards the nation one is born in is purelynatural. It is ingrained in almost every human throughout the world. Nationalism hasmany definitions. To be truly patriotic, one must feel a sense of belonging to one's owncountry and its people. To comprehend nationalism, one must comprehend citizenship.Nationalism is rooted in patriotism. Nationalism is based on loyalty. This way of thinkinghas unquestionably existed since the dawn of time. The concept unites citizens throughoutthe country. Patriotism also refers to allegiance to one's country. Nationalism is almostcertainly the most powerful force in global politics. Numerous factors contribute tonationalism's rise. All citizens of a country share these characteristics. All of theseelements are shared: language, history, culture, traditions, mentality, and territorialboundaries. As a result, a sense of community would develop among the populace. It willoccur regardless of your wishes. As a result, countrymen would feel more connected andaffectionate toward one another. Thus, patriotism fortifies the nation's citizens. The presentaim of the study is to analyse the Indian Nationalism: Redefined in Today's time.

This is an annotated playlist on the topic of music and nationalism. It can be used to accompany the World Music Textbook article "Music and Nationalism."

Rabindranath Tagore is often referred to as a 'nationalist poet' or a 'nationalist leader'. This presents problems both historical and historiographical, since by the end of the first decade of the twentieth century Tagore had explicitly rejected nationalism. At the same time, Tagore's legacy is further complicated by certain trends in Indian postcolonial historiography. Work emerging from the Subaltern Studies Collective has often put forward a more complex historical analysis, moving beyond a straightforward dichotomy between nationalism and anti-nationalism. In this version of Tagore's place in India's past, he is simultaneously both inside and outside: a Bengali intellectual deeply marked by his 'cosmopolitanism', 'modernism' and other derivative tropes of western bourgeois intellectual and cultural life. But in this mode of analysis, Tagore too often suffers from simplistic application of various Western classifications, for example as a 'romantic modernist' or 'liberal humanist'. In fact Tagore, like Hegel, Tagore saw World History as the steady unfolding of an idea. The marked distinction was that, unlike Hegel, he placed India at the centre of that process. In this regard, Tagore developed an alternative conception of modernity which saw the ideas, politics and technology of the West as only one aspect of a developing historical process, rather than its core movement. This not only challenges the spatial dimensions of modernity but also challenges us to think more critically about 'modernities' and the kinds of categories we deploy to make sense of the 'modern' and 'counter-modern'. In this respect, the Tagore-Gandhi debates become a crucial historical and textual source for an interpretation of Tagore's thinking on nationalism. These debates centred on the freedom struggle and India's stance towards the West; and towards Britain as the colonial power. They point towards a complicated engagement with the West, its position in the world, its relationship to India and the political and intellectual ...

The emergence of nationalism in India and the crystallisation of antagonism between Hindus and Muslims at the end of the 19th century were often interpreted in the light of 'instrumentalist' and 'diffusion' theories of nationalism, which neglected the weight of ideology and the ambivalence of cultural 'diffusion'. Indeed, it seems that it was the negative judgement of the colonisers of Indian society that prompted the elite to reform it; in doing so, she returned to the sources of her tradition which, reinterpreted, provided new identity and pride, the foundations of Indian nationalism to the Hindou cultural foundation. Although Gandhi is keen to involve Muslims in the national movement, Gandhi will complete this process — in line with A.D. Smith's model of nationalism — by completely rehabilitating national identity by putting Hindu "traditional" values into practice. ; L'émergence du nationalisme en Inde et la cristallisation de l'antagonisme entre Hindous et musulmans à la fin du 19e siècle ont souvent été interprétées à la lumière de théories « instrumentalistes » et « diffusionriistes » du nationalisme, qui négligeaient le poids de l'idéologie et l'ambivalence de la « diffusion » culturelle. Il semble en effet que ce soit le jugement négatif porté par les colonisateurs sur la société indienne qui a incité l'élite hindoue à la réformer ; ce faisant elle est retournée aux sources de sa tradition qui, réinterprétée, a fourni une identité et une fierté nouvelles, bases d'un nationalisme indien au fondement culturel hindou. Bien que soucieux d'associer les Musulmans au mouvement national, Gandhi achèvera ce processus — conforme au modèle du nationalisme d'A.D. Smith — en réhabilitant tout à fait l'identité nationale par la mise en pratique de valeurs « traditionnelles » hindoues.

International audience ; American economic nationalism was not born in 2018. Although the United States is often rightly presented as the sanctuary of capitalism, its government has been a staunch supporter of free trade only in rhetoric and not in practice. Today, Donald Trump at least partially breaks with this unspoken and engages in a policy of protection of national firms, including developing protectionist weapons, renegotiating international agreements and calling for a focus on domestic productions. A proponent of "benign neglect" and "beggar thy neighbour" (America first), he clearly unveils a nationalist economic policy, which calls into question the very idea of an economic science capable of defining and leading the optimal solutions for the economic development of all nations. ; Le nationalisme économique américain n'est pas né en 2018. Si les Etats-Unis sont souvent présentés, à juste titre, comme le sanctuaire du capitalisme, son gouvernement n'a été un ardent défenseur du libre-échange qu'en rhétorique et non en pratique. Aujourd'hui, Donald Trump rompt au moins partiellement avec ce non-dit et s'engage dans une politique de protection des firmes nationales, notamment en développant des armes protectionnistes, en renégociant les accords internationaux et en appelant à privilégier les productions nationales. Partisan du « benign neglect » et du « beggar thy neighbour » (America first), il dévoile clairement une politique économique nationaliste, qui remet en cause l'idée même d'une science économique capable de définir et de conduire les solutions optimales pour le développement économique de toutes les Nations.

International audience ; American economic nationalism was not born in 2018. Although the United States is often rightly presented as the sanctuary of capitalism, its government has been a staunch supporter of free trade only in rhetoric and not in practice. Today, Donald Trump at least partially breaks with this unspoken and engages in a policy of protection of national firms, including developing protectionist weapons, renegotiating international agreements and calling for a focus on domestic productions. A proponent of "benign neglect" and "beggar thy neighbour" (America first), he clearly unveils a nationalist economic policy, which calls into question the very idea of an economic science capable of defining and leading the optimal solutions for the economic development of all nations. ; Le nationalisme économique américain n'est pas né en 2018. Si les Etats-Unis sont souvent présentés, à juste titre, comme le sanctuaire du capitalisme, son gouvernement n'a été un ardent défenseur du libre-échange qu'en rhétorique et non en pratique. Aujourd'hui, Donald Trump rompt au moins partiellement avec ce non-dit et s'engage dans une politique de protection des firmes nationales, notamment en développant des armes protectionnistes, en renégociant les accords internationaux et en appelant à privilégier les productions nationales. Partisan du « benign neglect » et du « beggar thy neighbour » (America first), il dévoile clairement une politique économique nationaliste, qui remet en cause l'idée même d'une science économique capable de définir et de conduire les solutions optimales pour le développement économique de toutes les Nations.

International audience ; American economic nationalism was not born in 2018. Although the United States is often rightly presented as the sanctuary of capitalism, its government has been a staunch supporter of free trade only in rhetoric and not in practice. Today, Donald Trump at least partially breaks with this unspoken and engages in a policy of protection of national firms, including developing protectionist weapons, renegotiating international agreements and calling for a focus on domestic productions. A proponent of "benign neglect" and "beggar thy neighbour" (America first), he clearly unveils a nationalist economic policy, which calls into question the very idea of an economic science capable of defining and leading the optimal solutions for the economic development of all nations. ; Le nationalisme économique américain n'est pas né en 2018. Si les Etats-Unis sont souvent présentés, à juste titre, comme le sanctuaire du capitalisme, son gouvernement n'a été un ardent défenseur du libre-échange qu'en rhétorique et non en pratique. Aujourd'hui, Donald Trump rompt au moins partiellement avec ce non-dit et s'engage dans une politique de protection des firmes nationales, notamment en développant des armes protectionnistes, en renégociant les accords internationaux et en appelant à privilégier les productions nationales. Partisan du « benign neglect » et du « beggar thy neighbour » (America first), il dévoile clairement une politique économique nationaliste, qui remet en cause l'idée même d'une science économique capable de définir et de conduire les solutions optimales pour le développement économique de toutes les Nations.

This is the introductory chapter to the book Food Heritage and Nationalism In Europe which is going to be published 2019-11-28. This introductory chapter focuses on the construction of food as heritage, and on the powerful entanglements of food, heritage and nationalism of the 19th and 20th centuries. Drawing on the rich, interdisciplinary, global scholarship of the last twenty years, it provides a broad European picture. It covers the recent food wars, the uses and misuses of food in banal nationalism, as well as its abuses in the mixophobic nationalism by European populist movements. Food nationalism has been marked by ethnicity and is highly gendered. Women wrote cookery books which provided an all-pervasive approach, widely upheld by middle-class families, leading to national styles of cooking. Yet writing about national cooking tended to be based on the invented traditions of an unreflective nationalism, failing to acknowledge the long entangled history of exchanges and transfers in food and the way it was cooked. The Columbian exchange was but one of many instances of translation, connection and hybridization. Empires, migrations, diasporas and exiles, as well as globalization brought not only new produce but also new ideas of cookery reshaping ways of cooking and eating all over Europe and beyond. ; CoHERE received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 693289.

This introductory chapter focuses on the construction of food as heritage, and on the powerful entanglements of food, heritage and nationalism of the 19th and 20th centuries. Drawing on the rich, interdisciplinary, global scholarship of the last twenty years, it provides a broad European picture. It covers the recent food wars, the uses and misuses of food in banal nationalism, as well as its abuses in the mixophobic nationalism by European populist movements. Food nationalism has been marked by ethnicity and is highly gendered. Women wrote cookery books which provided an all-pervasive approach, widely upheld by middle-class families, leading to national styles of cooking. Yet writing about national cooking tended to be based on the invented traditions of an unreflective nationalism, failing to acknowledge the long entangled history of exchanges and transfers in food and the way it was cooked. The Columbian exchange was but one of many instances of translation, connection and hybridization. Empires, migrations, diasporas and exiles, as well as globalization brought not only new produce but also new ideas of cookery reshaping ways of cooking and eating all over Europe and beyond ; This is the introductory chapter to the book Food Heritage and Nationalism in Europe edited by Ilaria Porciani. This book is a result of the European Union- funded Horizon 2020 research project CoHERE (Critical Heritages: performing and representing identities in Europe). CoHERE received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 693289.

As Robert Jervis famously argued, to look at political events without the help of psychological theories is a "drunkard's search", a search whose "logic" is that of easiness and not of pertinence. In this paper, we make ours this statement and consider that the recent political crisis in Belgium has to be understood – among others, of course – in psychological terms. More precisely, we argue that the psychological dynamics of Flemish nationalism impede the good resolution of the enduring political instability that recurrently handicaps Belgium. ; Comme l'ironisait le célèbre politologue Robert Jervis, se passer de la psychologie pour comprendre un événement politique revient à effectuer une «recherche d'ivrogne»; tel l'ivrogne qui cherche ses clefs là où le lampadaire éclaire plutôt que là où il est susceptible de les avoir égarées, le politologue a souvent tendance à lire les événements politiques avec ses seuls outils parce qu'ils lui sont immédiatement disponibles, et non avec les approches les plus pertinentes. En l'espèce, nous pensons que la crise de formation gouvernementale qu'a connue la Belgique en 2010-2011 peut être abordée sous l'angle psychologique. Plus spécifiquement, nous tentons ici de considérer certaines dynamiques psychologiques du nationalisme flamand, à travers une exposition de ses manifestations durant la crise.

National audience ; Traditionnellement, les anthropologues étudient les ethnies, les tribus, les castes, la parenté ou les communautés. Aujourd'hui, il sera pourtant question du nationalisme, du nationalisme appréhendé à travers des schèmes culturels et émotionnels fort anciens qui alimentent la conviction tempérée ou fanatique des Indiens. Ce choix en réalité n'en fut pas un. Permettez-moi donc de sacrifier à l'ego-histoire pour vous raconter comment un anthropologue fut saisi par le nationalisme sur le « terrain » — brutalement.

What makes a 'nation' and what makes peoples strive for nationhood? This unit will provide you with an introduction to studying political ideas by looking at how people who see themselves as nations challenge the existing order to assert their right to a state of their own. After studying this unit you should be able to: grasp the concepts of nation, nationalism and self-determination; have a better understanding of the role they play in current political disputes; think about the problem of how to take democratic decisions about secession; relate political theory to political practice more rigorously; take a more informed and active part in debates about national and international politics.

The steady rollout of Covid-19 vaccines comes attached with a series of difficult questions. Are vaccines a human right? Should patents be enforced in a way that puts people in the global South behind in a global queue? These questions are not new; the world struggled with these ethical dilemmas during the HIV-AIDS pandemic at the end of the twentieth century, when global South governments led by Nelson Mandela fought multinational pharmaceutical corporations for the right to essential life-saving drugs. Can the same strategies be mobilized to deal with inequalities in the distribution of the Covid-19 vaccine? This article demonstrates a technological and geopolitical shift in the last two decades that hinder global South solidarities actualized during the HIV-AIDS pandemic. Instead, Banerjee argues that in the present, multinational corporations and Euro-American governments are trying to reverse some of the key political visions and victories of HIV-AIDS internationalism, exploiting the urgency of the Covid-19 crisis to put in place a new vaccine apartheid.