The concept of nationalism and national identity
Nationalism and themes on identity give rise to issues of crucial theoretical and practical importance in the social sciences and the humanities. The first intention of my thesis is to explore and contribute in the field of nationalism and national identity (focusing on modern Europe ). Theorists argue that some identities like nationality are no longer relevant; instead multiple narratives and new identities are emerging (bauman, 1996 in hall and gay: questions of cultural identity. Even with the changes that are happening in our multi-faced society, the mutual interdependence of groups all over the world, the education and access to technology and scientific invention and growth, all these will not reduce the tendency towards protection and autonomous development of a group's unique identity. Of course, there will be the analogous transformation – under various circumstances - that leads to new-nationalism and a changed-national identity.
Secondly, my aim is to explore these concepts within or throughout the three main perceptions, which include cultural, psychological and political; and to establish their interconnection.
I will explore the transformed continuation of the nation. By this, I mean that nation could not be created ex nihilo; there must have been some elements before a nation can be created. Nations could be regarded to a certain extent, as the building blocks of humanity, which find their place in the oppositions between empires and states, tradition and modernity, individual and collective identity.
This study will attempt to look at the social exercise of nationalism, as an ideology through the avenues - as I have already mentioned - of culture, psychology and politics. The role of myths and intellectual influences of nationalism will also be mentioned but not deeply discussed.
My choice to write about these issues is based on my belief that the identity of a nation, itself, was never in question. All that was in question was the content of its ideology and how it could be incorporated into the system of state, especially in our multi-cultural society. Therefore, to lead into the conclusion that in order to have a successful international-global society we have to respect the national one.
For the purpose of my assessment, I will attempt to give a kind of classification of the main concepts that I will use such as nation, nation-state, nationalism, and national identity.
The concept of nation comes from a people with a common culture, race and beliefs. It is perhaps more difficult to define exactly, what is a nation than what is nationalism itself. That is because a nation is predominantly an entity, which could be considered by its members. These members may share a cultural history, an ancestry, a language or just a common interest in the welfare of the state. The state (or nation-state) is a modern political institution, which claims to be the legitimate force within a territory.
Nationalism is a very significant concept (Angell cited in Snyder, 1990) and there is not a clear agreement on the definition of it among the scholars; as a result it is difficult to have an unmixed answer. According to Kohn (1944), nationalism is characterized principally by a feeling of a community among a people, based on common descent, language and religion. Concerned with clan, tribe, village, or province, people rarely extended their interests nationwide. Most modern nations have developed gradually on the basis of common ties of descent, religion and language.
Furthermore, Kohn sees nations as modern, dating back to the mid-eighteenth century. His major argument is that nations are first and foremost the result of history and as such modern nations have their roots in the distant past. He states "Nationalism is first and foremost a state of mind, an act of consciousness, which since the French Revolution has been more and more common to mankind." Nations are constantly changing, making them exceptionally complex and difficult to define.
He moreover states that groups become nationalized by the rise of print capitalism, public education systems, growth of population, increased influence of the masses, and new information and propaganda techniques.
David (1995) discusses nationalism as the 'the principle of nationality', a principle which he believes can offer a rational guidance when, as individuals or as citizens, have to respond practically to some national question. Miller groups these questions of this kind into four main categories: (i) questions about boundaries, (ii) questions about national sovereignty, (iii) questions about nationality's relation to states' internal policies, and (iv) questions about the ethical weight that should be assigned to nationality.
Smith (1986) contrasted nation against nationalism. Accordingly, there are four core debates, which permeate the study of nations and nationalism. First among these is the question of how to define the terms "nation" and "nationalism." Second, scholars argue about when nations first appeared. Nationalists argue that nations are timeless phenomena. When a man climbed out of the primordial slime, he immediately set about creating nations. It should not be surprising that the third major debate centers on how nations and nationalism developed. If nations are naturally occurring, then there is little reason to explain the birth of nations. On the other hand, if one sees nations as constructed, then it is important to be able to explain why and how nations developed. Finally, many of the original "classic" texts on nationalism have focused on European nationalism at the expense of non-western experiences. This has sparked a debate about whether nationalism developed on its own in places like China , or whether it merely spread to non-western countries from Europe .
McCrone (1998, p. 3) stated that like most concepts in social sciences, conceptual definitions and difference are theoretically rooted. What is emphatic, at that point, is the significance of nationalism as a conceptual theory that sways practical activity of life. This refers probably to the co-constitutive relationship between nationalism as theory and practice.
To a certain extent nationalism exists in all countries and states, but it does so in many different forms with a wide range of results.
Modernist theories, such as those of Gellner, John Breuilly, and Michael Mann, explain the rise of nationalism by a unique configuration of modern social, political and economic forces.
Walker Connor believes that an essential ethnic core lies at the heart of most nationalist movements. In his chapter, he explores the power of 'homeland psychology' and links it to the emergence of several ethno-national movements.
Connor does not shy away from examining the darker side of homeland psychology by pointing to the many instances (world wars, wars of liberation, racism and xenophobia) in which homeland psychology has led to acts of social exclusion and in extreme cases to ethnic violence. John Hutchinson theory also falls squarely within the ethno-symbolist framework. He too maintains that nations need an ethnic base to survive and explore the various ways in which nationalists mobilize ethnic loyalties in new and innovative ways. Hutchinson
Historian John Breuilly defends the modernist position in his chapter on the relationship between the state and nationalism. For Breuilly, nationalism has very little to do with ethnic mobilization and everything to do with political mobilization. The rise of the modern state system provides the institutional context within which an ideology of nationalism is necessary. Breuilly argues that the process of state modernization provides an important key to understanding a variety of historical manifestations of nationalism. In a word, nationalism is a form of politics. Michael Mann also utilizes a state-centered approach and therefore falls within the modernist camp as well.
Mann does not concentrate on nationalism per se but instead investigates what he calls 'murderous ethnic cleansing'. For Mann the struggle over political sovereignty is the major motivating factor pushing those who have control over the state to use violence against certain ethnic groups. Mann provides an excellent typology with which to study incidents of nationalist violence, to which he adds a five-stage model for understanding the history of ethnic cleansing.
Peter Taylor (1989) epitomizes the world as seen by nationalists, at three levels (approximately the global, national and individual). The world is, for them, a mosaic of nations, which find harmony when all are free nation states. Nations themselves are natural units with a cultural homogeneity based on common ancestry or history, each requiring its own sovereign state on its own inalienable territory. This standard nationalist thought says more about nationalism than the immediate goals of any one nationalist group.
Peter Taylor (1989) epitomizes the world as seen by nationalists, at three levels (approximately the global, national and individual). The world is, for them, a mosaic of nations, which find harmony when all are free nation states. Nations themselves are natural units with a cultural homogeneity based on common ancestry or history, each requiring its own sovereign state on its own inalienable territory. This standard nationalist thought says more about nationalism than the immediate goals of any one nationalist group.
Another opposition recurrent in theory on nations is that between the national and the global (Arnason 1990). The nation state and national culture, it is often said, are being eroded by, for instance, global communication, that is, the Internet will dissolve nations.
Nation states are still here. Yet few people are skeptical about "globalization" (Cox 1992; Smith 1990), and in a sense there is no reason to be.
Nationalism is 100 percent global: a world order cannot logically be further globalized. Although nationalism is often viewed as a kind of natural or primordial form of human self-identification, most experts on the subject have maintained that nations and nationalism are a fairly recent phenomenon, despite their call to history and origins.
Many experts believe, however, that nationalism has emerged out of the shift from agrarian to industrialized society. In agrarian society, there was a complex division of labor, with power located at the top, and an emphasis on informality and intimacy. With modernity, however, agrarian workers moved to urban centers and a universalized and impersonal culture replaced that of agrarian culture. Nationalism, according to these experts, occurs when the modernized people find their roots in the folk culture of the past, and draw upon the romantic stories of such past to form the nation. Certainly, 19th century nationalism seems to reflect this model.
Some thinkers have suggested that the rise of nationalism is sometimes due to some form of political, social or economic crisis (whether real or imagined) and generally provides the impetus for people to respond to nationalistic sentiments.
Conversely, however, dissenting voices argue that nationalism is not simply a by-product of industrialization and capitalism, but the very essence of modernity; it is about creating social cohesion, which then engenders industrialization, societal improvements and economic progress. In this model, nationalism should be championed as an agent of emancipation and development for the less advanced and oppressed peoples of the world. This understanding of nationalism is quite distinct from the view that nationalism is the root of the violent episodes of balkanization and genocide, since it advances a modality of nationalism that is not defined by cultural, ethnic, linguistic or religious identities. Instead, in this civic model, nationalism – as a central feature of contemporary politics – acts as the mechanism that mobilizes the masses, and allows them to effectively deal with the ongoing transition into modernity.
Based on Kohn's account, the tendency toward nationalism was historically fostered by various technological, cultural, political and economic advances. Improvement in communications extended the knowledge of people beyond their village or province.
Through education, people learned of their common background and tradition and began to identify themselves with the historical continuity of the nation. The introduction of national constitutions and the struggle for political rights gave people the sense of helping to determine their fate as a nation and of sharing responsibilities for the future well-being of that nation. At the same time the growth of trade and industry lays the basis for economic units larger than the traditional cities or provinces.
In the meantime, I will consider the term national identity as the collective and practical aspect of nationalism that helps people locate themselves within a society. Nationalism, national identity and nation are essentials and inseparable and not one is possible to mention without the other.
During my analysis, I have come to understand that nationalism is the expression of the nation, which is an amalgam of political and cultural manners, and national identity takes the form of ethos and sentiments.
i) Nation: a modern model with ancient heredity.
There were entities in pro-modernist, that were never called "nations" and while the discourse of nationhood reoccurred, with modernity the content just to explain the role of modernity in nation concept.
Modernism gave rise when Perrenialism was challenged. Modernism tended to concentrate upon the political aspects of Nations and Nationalism.
Mass education, employment and citizenship are all seen as key factors within a nation, as they are modern conditions available to all, no longer only available to the elite. Such modern factors would increase political participation, and in turn help define the Nation and Nationalism. "Only in a modern society was a high level of political participation by the masses possible".
That Nation as a creation of the Elite is viewed by Modernists. Unlike Perennialism, the Nation is seen as divided. Different social groups representing religion, gender and class have different needs, and therefore split off into separate groupings (Smith, 1986).
The emergence of the nation -according to many scholars' opinions- varies and this has a direct implication to national identity. A general typology for the different categories of theorists of nationalism were given by Smith: A) nationalists who believe that the nation has always been there, and they remark the remembrance of a glorious past. B) Perennialists who give credence to the immemorial nation, although for them some national forms may change; the task, here, is to build an appropriate submerged past. C) Modernists for whom the past is mainly irrelevant; the ethnic past has little to do with a modern nation, so it is more useful to look for the modern conditions, however it is freely accepted to use ethnic heritages. D) Post-modernists who think that the past is not a simple task; the nations are modern but there is a mixed tradition from the ethnic past, which is created mostly by the present. Moreover, he adds that the challenge is to draw the connection of ethnic past to modern nation more accurately (Smith, 1993, p 3 – 23).
In elucidating some of the main categories, Smith argued that there is a high degree of continuity between certain historical ethnies and modern nations. He challenges the modernization school's assumption that nations are entirely modern. While Smith does not argue that nations are modern formations, he claims that modern nations are based on a longer development than many scholars are willing to admit. Smith argues that modern nations are based on much older cultural groups, which he calls ethnie. According to Smith, ethnie defines the boundaries within which modern nations can be formed. Ethnies are constructed of "more permanent cultural attributes" such as memory, value, myth and symbolism. The first half of his book focuses on the development of ethnie while the second half focuses on the development of nations from their pre-modern roots. Smith addresses memory to a greater degree than do most other scholars. "The wave of industrialization also generated social conflicts in the swollen cities."
The second category, which is the concept of Perenialism, Smith argued that nationalism concentrates heavily on the History of Nations, which are seen as stretching back for centuries. Nations could therefore be described as ancient and immemorial. The Perrenialist perspective "regarded national sentiments and consciousness as fundamental elements of historical phenomena". Historians specialising in this theory would recall such events as the activities of past leaders in antiquity and the medieval era, the decline and rebirth of their nation, and the glorious future, when highlighting the importance of history within the framework of nationalism. It saw the Nation as a popular community that reflected the needs and the ideals of the people, and saw the nation as a seamless whole with "a single will and character". Ancestral ties and culture were of huge importance to the advocates of this theory.
Smith (1986) highlighted the continuity between modern nations and pre-modern ethnic communities. Gellner (1983) emphasised the degree to which nationalism is linked to modernisation, and in particular to the process of industrialisation. Although, Gellner's theory suggests that nations came together in response to particular social conditions and circumstances, it also implies that the national community is deep-rooted and will be enduring, as a return to pre-modern loyalties and identities is unthinkable.
The Marxist historian Hobsbawm (1983) pointed out the degree to which nations are 'invented traditions'. Rather than accepting modern nation has developed out of long-established ethnic communities, he argued that a belief in historical and cultural continuity is a myth created by nationalism itself.
But for Gellner (1983), he argued that nations are completely modern constructions borne out of nationalism, which is "primarily a political principle, which holds that the political and national unit should be congruent". Nations were the result of pressures created by the demands of the industrial revolution.
Gellner defines nation as a sharing of the same culture and artifacts of men's convictions and loyalties. In the question, "Why does nationalism arise? Gellner has two macro-theories 1) a theory of history and modernity 2) a theory of the structure of society.
According to Gellner, nations are mainly based on consent (consent is determined by the limited choice no other possibilities exist. What Gellner means when he qualifies nationalism as a weak force is that, not all potential nations or cultures become nation states.
He sees nationalism as an ideology and as a feeling felt by individuals. According to him, states and intellectuals mobilize campaigns of assimilation through public education and the culture industries. Nationalism occurred in the modern period because industrial societies, unlike agrarian ones, needed homogenous languages and cultures in order to work efficiently.
Some scientists, however, say he should have taken into account political culture, identity and collective action as well and emphasize less on the materialistic side of nationalism. The culture of Industrialization was a theory discovered by Ernest Gellner in the 7th chapter of "Thought and Change". The idea is that as industrialization spread over the globe, it had a huge effect upon the spread of Nationalism. As people left their towns and villages to move into the developing cities, the traditional social roles held by communities were lost, along with many lifestyles and beliefs. Peasants in the new cities would often group together according to their cultural backgrounds and beliefs. The different groups would then create their own communities, grouped together where they could live according to their own particular lifestyles, small Nations created through the spread of Nationalism.
Gellner therefore argued that, "Nations do not in fact create Nationalism, Rather Nationalist movements define and create Nations. According to Jusdanis (2001, p. 21) nations are indeed, modern. Forms of ethnic identification have been recorded since early antiquity (Jusdanis). The pure modernist position implies that nations emerges from nowhere and have no history. Both of them exist and integrate under various circumstances each time; it could be an ethnic identity next to the national one (Horowitz, 1985, P: 52) ; Note: that all pasts are selective that only usable bits of the past are relied or for naratives of nationhood.
Nations are socially constructed and though this has validity it is easier to perceive how society is constructed. There are various elements like language, religion, institutions, democracy, economy etc. that formulate nowadays society; further, society is a concoction of civil, ethnicity and state, as Schopflin demarcated this threefold interactive relationship (Schopflin, 2000, P: 35).
The origins of such nations must therefore be traced far back, since their ethnic features, through ancient traditions.
Gellner supported that nations are "not a universal necessity. Neither nations nor states exist at all times and in all circumstance"; (1983, P:6). In his latest book, he stated once again, the modernity of nation's and nationalism's identification. Yet, he marked the differentiation for other social phenomena, like culture and power as perennial, although they can be related to each other in a new way in the modern age, a way that then brings forward nationalism (1997, P:90-93).
The beginnings of modern nationalism may be traced back to the disintegration, at the end of the middle aged of the social order in Europe and of the cultural unity of the various European states. The cultural life of Europe was based on a common inheritance of ideas and attitudes transmitted in the West through Latin, the language of the educated classes. All western Europeans adhered to a common religion, catholic Christianity. The breakup of feudalism, the prevailing social and economic system, was accompanied by the development of larger communities, wider social interrelations and dynasties that fostered feelings of nationality in order to win support for their role. National feeling was strengthened in various countries during the Reformation, when the adoption of either Catholicism or Protestantism as a national religious became an added force for national cohesion.
The great turning point in the history of nationalism in Europe was the French Revolution. National feeling in France
The rise of nationalism coincided generally with the spread of the industrial Revolution, which promoted national economic development, the growth of a middle class, and popular demand for representative government. National literature arose to express common traditions and the common spirit of each people. New emphasis was given to nationalist symbols of all kinds; for example, new holidays were introduced to commemorate various events in national history.
The revolution of 1848 in central Europe marked the awakening of various people to national consciousness. In that year both the German and the Italians originated their movements for unification for the creation of nation-state.
After much political agitation and several wars, an Italian kingdom was created in 1861 and a German empire in 1871. The events in Europe between1878 and 1918 were shaped largely by the nationalist aspirations of these people and their desire to form nation-states independent of the empire of which they had been participants.
As I try to expand the theory exploring a transmitted concept from a national to a European identity, one question became very obvious. Can the national identity "develop into" a European one? (Maybe there is no need to be "transformed", but as national identity is a changeable social concept needs to "add" a European element into its character).
It is a common sense that for a country to enter the EU, it should adjust its standards to some hegemonic norms. The people – for instance - in East and Central Europe must have a perplexed notion, as they cognize that they belong culturally and historically to Europe , although they are not in the European Union.
It should be mentioned that the South-East-Central Europe –for many reasons that vary from the historical to economical point of view had an absent from the situation of progress and of course, the rest of Europe couldn't wait.
How can the relationship between the particular national identities and a European identity be described? A European identity already exists; although, it has to be formed more accurately.
It is arguable that the analysis of the construction of a national identity would be comparable with the European one. In the same way that each European nation tried to establish their own identity, maybe the European identity could be established, without -at the same time- the national identities to be demolished. The integrity, in the case of the European identity, is that it could not be shaped by one culture but by the diversity of the European panel. European identity has to take into consideration the fact that Europe consists of a variety of cultures and a diversity of national and regional minorities.
An identity consists of 1) memory (e.g. on war, formation of nations, on national cultures, historical experiences, political culture), 2) heritages (monuments, memorials etc), 3) institution (common institutions, for the benefit of the citizens) and 4) a sense of common future.
It could be supported that identity and with its diversity, is manifested on the various levels, such as local, national level and an international-European level. As a result, the coexistence of national cultures leads up to perceive European culture as a multicultural one.
In the new world order of super-national entities like the European Union, national identity and national history appears as just one of many choices, not the prime choice, possible to explain the past.
Schuman, one of the founding fathers of the European Community of Coal and Steel, in 1963 wrote: "Before becoming a military alliance or an economy entity, Europe has to be a cultural community in the highest sense of the word" (in Myths + Nationhood, Hosking-Schopflin, p. 60). Naturally, this assertion is contradicted by the patent reality of political and cultural differences across the continent. Furthermore, as the national identity is concerned it is arguable that it exists in East and West equally, yet the interpretation is quite different.
Small counties are an essential component of Europe…there are small independent states the notion of a small country is rooted in European history, from the Greek Polis to the Italian city-states of the Renaissance, and is part of the continent's identity…a Europe without small states is impossible to imagine….(it is about the enlargement)
Before 1989, Europeans felt themselves to be part either of the West or of the East, according to where they lived, but scarcely took the matter any further….(mine: that's between nation and Europe: retain the distinctive features of nation within the European whole..) www.coe.int/T/E/Communication , p.1 Roman kist, adviser to the Luxembourg
As it was mentioned before the foundations of the national identities of every country is based on a number of considerations including the historical and social experiences of these countries. A common element in the search for a modern national identity is the identification of each country with Europe . Besides the problematic position and clarification of what do we mean by Europe , the East and West concept is raised.
The expansion of a national identity (maybe more modern?) to a more European one (or one to be included in European), has to be found in a combination of historical past, the experiences of the 20th century, geographical position, ethnic composition and cultural heritage. The individual identification for each country with Europe is part of this process.
EXAMPLES OF EACH COUNTRY THAT I IDENTIFY THEMSELVES WITH EUROPE (IN EACH WAY) /
"The Romanian national identity is closely associated with the feeling of the country being a great European nation, not because Romanians necessarily see their country as a future big member state of the Union , but rather because of the resolute identification of Romanian national identity with European culture". (Survey of National Identity, Working paper 1998, europa.eu.int/comm/cdp/working-paper/survey_of_national_identity.pdf. )
The Czech national identity is based on a feeling of a historical belonging to mainstream European developments: "geographically it occupies a central position in Europe and economically it used to be an integrated and dynamic part of Europe . National identity under the Klaus-regime was deliberately constructed on a perception that the Czech Republic was more advanced the other CEECs in terms of macro-economic performance and political stability, ………… (Survey of National Identity, Working paper 1998, europa.eu.int/comm/cdp/working-paper/survey_of_national_identity.pdf.- Dasckalov, Building up ……..).
The Hungarians share the pathos of the Poles that joining the EU is synonymous with regaining the country's (historically) rightful position in Europe . "The general atmosphere in Hungary
(Survey of National Identity, Working paper 1998, europa.eu.int/comm/cdp/working-paper/survey_of_national_identity.pdf.- Dasckalov, Building up ……..).
Poles consider themselves as having always been part of mainstream Europe and having contributed to its development. In this sense, joining the EU is seen as a confirma5tion of the European integration could undermine national sovereignty ………… (Survey of National Identity, Working paper 1998, europa.eu.int/comm/cdp/working-paper/survey_of_national_identity.pdf.- Dasckalov, Building up ……..).
Since independence, as national identity came to the forefront, a much higher value was attached to close identification with Europe than identification with the Balkans.
"There is little prospect of a European 'super-state' until each European state surrenders its control over its military forces and arsenals and its claims to exercise the monopoly of violence within its own territory, …. There is equally little prospect of a European 'super-nation' until the majority of each European nation's population becomes infused with a genuinely European consciousness…(Smith, 1991 )
"If the shape of the European project is neither of a 'super-state' nor a 'super-nation', is it a new form of political association that is sui generis?
"New trans-national corporations …with huge budgets, sophisticated technologies and the ability to plan long-term strategies over several continents……:P:154
"While nations were functional for an industrial world and its technological and market needs, the growth of the 'service society' based on computerized knowledge and communications systems overleapt national boundaries and penetrated every corner of the globe. Only continental cultures, ultimately a single global culture, can fulfil the requirements of a post-industrial knowledge-based society. P: 155.
In forming their national identity, Bulgarians stressed the differences in religion, culture and tradition in relation to their Ottoman rulers, but the influence of Turkish Oriental culture left an enduring trace on the Bulgarian culture, in particular in domestic life, tastes and mental attitudes. (Survey of National Identity, Working paper 1998, europa.eu.int/comm/cdp/working-paper/survey_of_national_identity.pdf.- Dasckalov, Building up ……..).
Besides there is the vital question that when it comes in countries like Slovakia
It is easy to blame Communism for everything, when looking into the Central and East European countries. Besides we cannot take democracy as a common memory for Europe , as we will exclude the East. Definitely, these countries need more decentralisation and administrative reform, and maybe some work on the political parties. (The survey of national identity, European Commission - from the internet p.18…. says about the specific problems in politics and society in CE Europe.).
If there is a clear national consciousness then could come to the level of "good Europeans".
CONCEPT: THAT TO BE A EUROPEAN, EACH INDIVITUAL NATION HAS TO BE RECOGNISED IN THE whole-----to be INTERNATIONAL, you have to recognize NATIONAL
The question of national identity is expected to have crucial role in the eastward enlargement of the EU. (if national identity has the characteristic of distinction from the others then European identity something similar….)
MINE: maybe national identity exists only in Europe, not in America or Australia, not in other continent, because of the specific historical circumstances that European nations had.
"The first war destroyed old Empires and brought new states into existence. The second war created no new states and destroyed only Esthonia, Latvia, and Lithuania (Taylor, ).
Bibliography
1. Snyder. "Nationalism is the most important thing in the
world, more important than civilisation, humanity, decency, kindness, pity
more important that life itself". 1990 <Available from:
www.shef.ac.uk/~surc/p…/Definitions_of _Nationalism.htm - Accessed
27/10/2002.>
2. Kohn, Hans. The Idea of Nationalism: A Study of Its Origins and Background.
1st Ed. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1944.
3. Miller, David. On Nationality. Oxford, UK, Clarendon Press, 1995.
4. Smith, Anthony. The Ethnic Origins of Nations. Oxford: Blackwell
Publishers, 1998 (1986).
5. Gellner, Ernest. Nations and Nationalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983.
7. Lecky, William. Democracy and Liberty, 1896
8. Kedourie, Eli. "Nationalism," Oxford UK and Cambridge USA: Blackwell, 1993
9. Survey of National Identity, Working Paper 1998.
<europa.eu.int/comm/cdp/working-paper/survey_of_national_identity.pdf>
10. Ignatieff, Michael. "Blood and Belonging: Journeys Into the New nationalism"
11. Hayes, Carlton. "The Historical Evolution of Modern Nationalism," 1931
12. Garton, Ash. "Is Europe becoming Europe" Sanford S. Elberg Lecture;
Institute of International Studies, UC Berkeley. 2001, <http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/Elberg/GartonAsh/ga-elb04.html>
13. Taylor, J.P. "Origins of the Second World War," 1961
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
No comments:
Post a Comment