Suchergebnisse

International audience ; The international news during the summer of 2004 was full of ethnic fighting and a 'war on terrorism' that reached around the world. These events raise again the topic of nationalism. Using examples of rhetorical nationalism from two cases, Finland and the United States, this article examines these two distinct expressions of nationalism, how they are based on differing systems of valuation and on whether the message is directed to internal or external relations. Internally-directed nationalism may result in ethnic fighting but it is usually territorial, while externally-directed nationalism has global repercussions.

The resurgence of nationalism in the shape of neo-nationalism and right-wing political parties in Europe and the United States at the end of the twentieth century, followed by similar tendencies in other parts of the world, raises the question of why nationalism is regaining favor again. According to classical nationalism viewpoint, the nationalism term is used to conceptualize the nation-state as the modern state formation that emerged since the 18th century. Though it retains the same ambiguity as classical nationalism, the rise of neo-nationalism in contemporary politics is intriguing and increases interest in studying nationalism, which fails to distinguish between state-nationalism (statist nationalism) and cultural-nationalism (cultural nationalism), each with its own vision and ideals It is also necessary to define the differences between the two types of nationalism, including the debates over Geerzt and Sidel about the future of nationalism in post-colonial countries.KEYWORDS: Nationalism, nation-state, contemporary culture, Indonesia

International audience ; Le nationalisme méthodologique est la tendance à prendre l'Etat-nation pour l'unité naturelle de l'analyse des phénomènes sociaux. Mais comment ce biais affecte-t-il les théories de la justice distributive? Pour répondre, on distingue d'abord trois versions de nationalisme méthodologique, pour montrer ensuite que la théorie de Rawls endosse les trois versions. Les arguments fondés sur la justice en pâtissent.

International audience ; Le nationalisme méthodologique est la tendance à prendre l'Etat-nation pour l'unité naturelle de l'analyse des phénomènes sociaux. Mais comment ce biais affecte-t-il les théories de la justice distributive? Pour répondre, on distingue d'abord trois versions de nationalisme méthodologique, pour montrer ensuite que la théorie de Rawls endosse les trois versions. Les arguments fondés sur la justice en pâtissent.

International audience ; Le nationalisme méthodologique est la tendance à prendre l'Etat-nation pour l'unité naturelle de l'analyse des phénomènes sociaux. Mais comment ce biais affecte-t-il les théories de la justice distributive? Pour répondre, on distingue d'abord trois versions de nationalisme méthodologique, pour montrer ensuite que la théorie de Rawls endosse les trois versions. Les arguments fondés sur la justice en pâtissent.

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.

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.

What is often described today as neo-nationalism or nationalist-populism today arguably looks like the old nationalism. What is emerging as genuinely new are the identity-based nationalisms of the centre-left, sometimes called 'liberal nationalism' or 'progressive patriotism'. I offer my own contribution to the latter, which may be called 'multicultural nationalism'. I argue that multiculturalism is a mode of integration that does not just emphasise the centrality of minority group identities but argues that integration is incomplete without re-making national identity so that all can have a sense of belonging to it. In this respect, multiculturalist approaches to national belonging have some relation to liberal nationalism and a majoritarian interculturalism. It makes not just individual rights but minority accommodation a feature of acceptable nationalism. Importantly, however, unlike cosmopolitanism it is national-focused and is not against immigration controls (subject to certain conditions). For these reasons multicultural nationalism unites the concerns of some of those currently sympathetic to majoritarian nationalism and those who are pro-diversity and minority accommodationist in the way that liberal nationalism (with its emphasis on individualism and majoritarianism) or cosmopolitanism (with its disavowal of national belonging and championing of open borders) does not. It therefore represents the political idea and tendency most likely to offer a feasible alternative rallying point to monocultural nationalism.