John Coakley Nationalism

1064 Words3 Pages

In Chapter 10 of John Coakley's Nationalism, Ethnicity, & the State, the relationship between the state and national groups is closely examined. Coakley argues that there are four ways in which states can interact with minority groups. First, the state may choose to remove minorities, creating an "ethnic monopoly". Similarly, the state may choose to constrain a minority group's influence by excluding them from politics. This leads to the creation of an "ethnic hegemony". On the other hand, states may choose to incorporate minority groups into society and political life as opposed to eliminate them. If the state does not acknowledge minority groups, there is an "ethnic homogeneity" present. If a state does acknowledge minority groups, however, …show more content…

This is an interesting point, and makes one consider whether or not all states have ulterior motives in recognizing multiple nationalities within their borders. By examining the examples provided by Coakley, however, he provides an overall convincing argument regarding the four ways in which states and minority groups interact, as well as the intentions of the state in protecting minority groups' rights. The first two types of state and minority interactions that Coakley mentions are aimed at limiting the rights of minority groups (220). States may limit the rights of minority groups by either getting rid of them within the state's borders or by politically excluding them. The first technique, which is often conducted by means of genocide or population expulsion, is …show more content…

An example of the first technique can be seen in Belgium, where both Dutch and French speakers are provided equal opportunities at the government level (229-232). For the latter, Coakley provides the example of the millet system during the Ottoman Empire. This system allowed non-Muslim countries to practice autonomy in the realms of education and religion, for example (233). However, this is not an example of territorial autonomy, a phenomenon that Coakley explains later in the chapter. If a state refuses to give a particular region autonomy, there is a "concentration of power" (235). If a state does give formal autonomy to a particular region, there is a federal system in place (236). Coakley provides the example of Switzerland, which is a federation of several different "cantons" or provinces, divided based on language (237). In between the concepts of federal governments and independent states lies the idea of a confederation (238). Coakley mentions several examples of confederations that have existed in the past, such as that of the United States from 1781-89

Open Document