Suchergebnisse

Defence date: 7 October 2013 ; Examining Board: Professor Rainer Bauböck, European University Institute (Supervisor) Professor Mauricio Tenorio, University of Chicago (Co-supervisor) Professor Pavel Kolář, European University Institute Professor Stephan Leibfried, University of Bremen. ; First made available online: 07 September 2021 ; Despite their immense potential as information sources, postage stamps have been virtually ignored in academic research. Therefore, in this thesis I study how official national imaginaries have been promoted through iconographic and written messages in postage stamps; how such messages are linked to the ideology, interests and goals of political elites; and how competing elites and groups with relative power within the state try to influence such official ideas about the nation. The thesis is divided in three sections. The first presents a theoretical framework for the study of national imaginaries. It also presents the properties of stamps that made them ideal 'carriers' of ideological propaganda. The second section analyses a random sample of 1,000 stamps by means of a typology of ideological messages. It was found that the vast majority of stamps are carrying messages related to the features, composition, and historical development of the nation that issued the stamp. Then, these 'nationalist' stamps were further studied by means of a second typology, in order to differentiate the particular aspects of the nation that were promoted in each stamp. The third section analyses the political goals and processes behind nationalist messages in stamps. For that, both the United Kingdom during 1950-1970 and post-revolutionary Mexico were studied using process-tracing methodology. It was found that, while the most important actors are still the ruling elites, other actors such as competing elites, local authorities, pressure groups or social organizations will also try to influence the messages about the nation in stamps. A relevant finding is that intermediate structures, such as middle-range public officers in postal institutions, can have a key role not only in the promotion, but also in the shaping of official national imaginaries.

AbstractThe year 2010 in Mexico marked both the 200th anniversary of the start of its independence movement and the 100th anniversary of its revolution. Besides several public events, a number of items including commemorative coins, banknotes, and stamps were produced to mark the occasion. This article analyses the postage stamps issued to commemorate the Mexican bicentennial. It does so by comparing these stamps with the ones issued for previous independence anniversaries, and then tracking changes and continuities in their messages. It is found that, on the one hand, the bicentennial postage stamps of Mexico promoted a particular narrative regarding the historical, territorial, and ethnic features of the Mexican independence process, which in many ways departs from previous, long‐established nationalist narratives. But on the other hand, bicentennial stamps also demonstrate the influence of traditional interpretations of the national past – particularly those related to the Partido Revolucionario Institucional's (Institutional Revolutionary Party, PRI) revolutionary nationalism doctrine – which are still being reproduced even after the 2000 democratic transition.

Published with the permission of Cambridge Scholars Publishing ; Items like coins, banknotes and political posters have been regarded as useful sources for research on the diffusion of nationalist messages. In contrast, postage stamps have been largely ignored for such purpose. My hypothesis is, stamps are "carriers" of an official national imaginary about the history, features, composition and development of the issuing nation. A first section of the paper develops this argument by presenting some key features and paradoxes of stamps, explaining how states manage and intervene in stamp design, and presenting a typology of messages about the nation that can be found on them. A second section will test my arguments by means of both a synchronic and a diachronic comparison. The first uses a sample of stamps issued by Germany on two contrasting periods (Nazi vs. Federal Republic) to find how the political and ideological changes were presented. The second comparison utilizes a sample of stamps issued by Spain and Mexico to commemorate 500 years of the arrival of Columbus to the American continent. It analyzes if, and how, those stamps offer contrasting visions regarding an episode that is so crucial for the national narratives of each.

In his highly influential work on the "small," stateless European nations, Hroch seems to assume that patriotic movements have a homogeneous view about the core relations or "ties" that constitute and identify their nations. This assumption seems generally correct for the cases Hroch studies. However, is it correct if applied to the study of those patriotic movements developing in comparatively larger, heterogeneous and underdeveloped societies, comprising several ethnic groups bound together by the colonialist rule of an autocratic empire? I argue that, while the colonial experience can lead to the creation of some ties among the dominated populations, it also affects the way patriotic movements perceive their own nations. As a result, the phase of patriotic agitation can involve diverse movements addressing the same nation, but each having a particular view on the features and history of it. Such contested patriotic doctrines can lead to very important variations in the political agendas and goals of those movements, especially when they reach the mass phase. To exemplify this, the nineteenth century movements in New Spain/Mexico will be used as an example.

El pasado 14 de octubre de 2019 se llevó a cabo el primer diálogo de la Iniciativa de Diálogos de Think Tanks México-Unión Europea, organizada por la Delegación de la Unión Europea en México y cuyo objetivo es propiciar un espacio de debate sobre algunos de los temas de actualidad en ambas regiones. El primer diálogo abordó los desafíos modernos a la democracia tanto en la Unión Europea como en América Latina y se dividió en dos paneles temáticos. El primero, titulado "El estado actual de las democracias en América Latina y la Unión Europea", contó con la participación de Héctor Sánchez Margalef (Centro de Estudios y Documentación Internacionales de Barcelona, CIDOB), Alexandra Zapata (Instituto Mexicano para la Competitividad, IMCO), Raúl Benítez (Colectivo de Análisis de la Seguridad con Democracia, CASEDE), Guadalupe González (Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales, COMEXI) y Corina Stratulat (European Policy Centre); moderó Henio Hoyo (CIDE). En el segundo panel titulado "Recobrar la legitimidad y la confianza ciudadana: el camino por delante para las democracias" participaron Alejandro Alday (Instituto Matías Romero), Steven Blockmans (Centre for European Policy Studies, CEPS), Wojciech Bialozyt (WiseEuropa Institute) e Isaak Pacheco (Ethos Laboratorio de Políticas Públicas); moderó Jean François Prud'homme (El Colegio de México). El contenido de este documento no puede ser considerado como la postura oficial de la Unión Europea o sus Estaods Miembros.