Nationhood is a concept that has throughout the years been notoriously difficult to define. Ideas on this have varied along lines of culture and politics. Cohen, in his article titled Personal Nationalisms: a Scottish view on some Rites, Rights and Wrongs has presented a concept of ‘personal nationalism’, that nationhood cannot completely construct individual identity; it is the individuals themselves that construct the meanings of what the nation is on a personal scale. This essay will argue that the strength of Cohen’s approach to nationhood is in his distinction between cultural and political nationalism that previous work in this field have glossed over and in his leaving room for interpretations of nationalism on a personal scale allowing modern notions of multiculturalism to flourish. Despite these strengths, however, his viewpoint does have some weaknesses; mainly, that his ideas on locality are outdated and overly simplistic in their accounts of globalization, that national sentiments are felt by diasporas and sub-nations within larger nations despite being away from the home nation, that he fails to account for the creation of a national person embodying and internalizing national values and culture as expressions of self-identity, and on his overly Western leaning discourse on individualism and rights.
Cohen's approach to nationhood is one in which he states that individuals, through their own agency, construct their views on nationalism and membership to a nation as one of the resources used, whether consciously or unconsciously, to create a coherent sense of self-identity. By inscribing and intertwining the sense of individual agency and nationalism, along with his ideas of the ‘rights’ of persons to construct their o...
... middle of paper ...
...56). Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.
Papastergiadis, N. (2000). Introduction: The Turbulence of Migration. In Globalization, Deterritoralization, and Hybridity. (pp. 1-10). Malden, Massachusets: Polity Press.
Scheuerman, W. E. (2004). Social Acceleration. In Liberal Democracy and the Social Acceleration of Time. (pp. 1-25). Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.
Seagrave, S. A. (2011). How old are Modern Rights? On the Lockean Roots of Contemporary Human Rights Discourse. Journal of the History of Ideas, 72(2), 305-327.
Strathern, M. (1988). The Gender of the Gift: Problems with Women and Problems with Society in Melanesia. (p. 13). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Rahami, M. (2005). Development of Criminal Punishment in the Iranian Post Revolutionary Penal Code . European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 13(4), 585-6
"The Nationalism Project: Ernest Renan Defining the Nation." The Nationalism Project. http://www.nationalismproject.org/what/renan.htm (accessed April 4, 2014).
Nationalism has been a potent force for change since the development of human civilization. However, opinion about the extent to which nationalism may be appropriately pursued is highly diverse, a factor that has led to immense tragedy and suffering in countless regions worldwide. While it is both appropriate and sometimes encouraged to take pride in being part of a nation, it is of the utmost importance that it is done without harming or subjugating people of another. Uniting a people by force and potentially eliminating or destroying those who may oppose it or not belong to it is unacceptable ethically, morally, and socially.
Throughout the years, humans have constructed many unique civilizations; all which follow a distinct social, economic, and political structure. Even so, there is one characteristic that prevails among these societies, the concept of nationalism. In short, nationalism refers to the feelings people have when identifying with their nation. This simple notion possesses the ability to divide or unite collective groups, and has played an important role in many historical events.
Refuting in a few pages most of the recent human rights historiography, Moyn contends that modern human rights discourses exploded as late as in 1970s as opposed to the eighteenth century as argued by Hunt and early periods as many historians have said. Indeed, Moyn makes an important distinction between natural rights, which is what he believed the enlightenment project was concerned with and modern human rights. Moyn understands natural rights to be deeply bound to a state-structure power (Moyn, 20) and these were the rights the American, the French and even the insurgents in Saint-Domingue were defending. Natural rights had to do with rights which were guaranteed by a state thus were closely linked to the question of citizenships. Human rights, as it is today understood by various international lawyers and the general public transcend the state. Today’s human rights are (in theory) truly self-evident because they are possessed by all humans, everywhere irrespective of any other variables and exist (again in theory) beyond the state (Moyn, 27). This new understanding of rights came about in the 1970s when figures such as U.S. president Jimmy Carter made use of them in a political platform (Moyn, 154). In this sense, as other world “utopias” had failed by the 1970s, human rights appeared to be the “last hope” of humanity for a better
The importance of a perceived common descent to the self-definition of some groups as nations requires a differentiation between nation and ethnic group. [. . .] A common distinction made between the two is that the term ‘nation’ carries the connotation o...
The interaction between the immigrant and the citizens of the receiving country varies on whether or not their introduction into the new country is seen as a loss or something positive. These differing stances serve as a buffer for an immigrant’s desires, as they can either advance or stagger depending on how far their new situation allows them to advance. For this reason, the likely success of the individual depends on the descending community’s desire to embrace them. This acceptance or denial presents itself in the form of the resources available to “the other.” If these outsiders are not given the tools with which to function properly they will likely find solace in the ethnic specific networks that provide them with a means to survive.
In Figure 4.4 (Raghuram and Erel, 2014, p. 144) shown that the inflow and outflow from 1966 to 2005 almost mirror each other. Migration is a way of connecting people and places to each other in various ways and is not just about movement from one place to another. According to (Catriona Harvard, 2014, p. 68 – 71) Bushra Fleih a migrant family from Iraq that now live on City Road in Cardiff maintain their existing family connections through Skype, although they are very far from their family and home in Iraq. On other hand it shows how Nof Al-Kelaby has lost his connections through migration but has remade and established the connections through his new
Nationalism is more than just a sense of pride in one’s country. Nationalism is what makes you feel like part of something bigger. In order to be a nation, its people should willingly make sacrifices to benefit the country, not just the individual. Many factors like common culture, language, geographic location, and shared history are all important contributors to nationalism. Nationalism can possess great power, that is capable of either uniting or dividing nations. As nationalism flourished in Europe during the 1800’s, it unified separate Italian and German city-states, and divided previously great powers like the Ottoman Empire and Austrian Empire.
Cohen, Jeffrey H, and Sirkeci Ibrahim. Cultures of Migration the Global Nature of Contemporary Mobility. Austin Texas: University of Texas Press, 2011.Print
Nationalism is the idea that a people who have much in common, such as language, culture and geographic proximity ought to organize in such a way that it creates a stable and enduring state. Nationalism is tied to patriotism, and it is the driving force behind the identity of a culture. Nationalism had many effects in Europe from 1815, The Congress of Vienna and beyond. In the following essay I will describe many of the consequences of nationalism on European identity, as well as some of the conflicts that it created.
Migration is the geographical movement of people in order to settle in other places for longer periods of time. It has been extensively analyzed by historians and social scientists. Philosophers however have thought little and have said even less about it. The migration policies involve highly consented normative judgments in all phases; the gap is quite astonishing. The political philosophers and the political theorists rarely discuss about migration. They have never ever developed a coherent ethics of migration. The theorists have started thinking about this issue from the last thirty years and still we do not have any comprehensive and systematic treatment.
113-117 Human Rights: Politics and Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Nationalism is self identification with one’s country. Nationalism is similar to religion in that it gives a person their self worth and sense of community. One source describe nationalism as as a bond and “awareness shared by a group” who feel “attached to not only the land, but also the culture, language, and history the people share (Brown). Nationalism is accompanied by loyalty and devotion of the people to a nation. Nationalist find great gratification in their history and traditions. With this sometimes comes the feeling that their nation is special and set apart from other nations, creating an atmosphere of superiority. Furthermore, through out history, the idea of nationalism has been the driving force behind those wanting to overthrow governments that are thought to be oppressive
The debate about British Identity has been prominently featured in recent years as a public concern. The foundation of British Identity was based on the act of union in 1801 between England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland that created Great Britain. Heath and Roberts describe this identity as “a relatively recent construct and was gradually superimposed on earlier national identities of English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish” (2008:4). The four nations were unified mainly because of the political and economic project of the British Empire that developed a shared agenda and The Second World War which melted the distinctive differences between the constituent nations (Ward, 2004). According to Colley, the interests that unified the nations do not exist and even if they do” they are less distinctive” (1992). Although there is identification with Britishness, it is noticeable that Britons hold a stronger allegiance to their primary nation. The British Identity is decreasing as many writers suggested, and this is due to many different trends and influences such as globalization, immigration and communication (Heath and Roberts, 2008). This essay highlights some of the reasons of the decline in the British national identity and the rise of the consentient nation’s sentiment. This is approached by firstly considering the internal factors of the devolution of power to Scotland and Wales, and secondly the external factor of immigration and will analyze the relationship between age and identification with a nation.
Simmons, A. John (1992). The Lockean Theory of Rights. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 127.