What do you think?
Rate this book
Ο εθνικισμός
Η δ’ έκδοση της ελληνικής μετάφρασης του έργου του Έλι Κεντούρι (από την τέταρτη, συμπληρωμένη και αναθεωρημένη, αγγλική έκδοση) προσφέρει στον Έλληνα αναγνώστη την ευκαιρία να γνωρίσει την κλασικότερη ίσως ανάλυση της εθνικιστικής ιδεολογίας στο πλαίσιο της Ιστορίας των Ιδεών. Με τον στοχαστικό αλλά σαγηνευτικό του λόγο, ο συγγραφέας ανασκοπεί τις καταβολές του εθνικισμού στην ευρωπαϊκή φιλοσοφία, εκθέτει τις ιστορικές συνθήκες που επέτρεψαν την εξάπλωσή του και επισημαίνει τις εγγενείς λογικές αντιφάσεις του. Πρόκειται για έργο, το οποίο, όπως σημείωνε ο Isaiah Berlin στη βιβλιοπαρουσίαση της πρώτης έκδοσης (1960), αποτελεί «υπόδειγμα σαφήνειας, ευρυμάθειας και αμεροληψίας».
«Ουδείς μετά το 1945 έχει αναλύσει με τέτοια διορατικότητα τον εθνικισμό όπως ο Έλι Κεντούρι». Alvin Rubinstein, University of Pensylvania.
«Το έργο του Κεντούρι Ο εθνικισμός είναι ένα από τα ελάχιστα βιβλία των τελευταίων δεκαετιών που κατέκτησε τον τίτλο του κλασικού, αποτελώντας αναγκαίο ανάγνωσμα για τους μελετητές όχι μόνον της Πολιτικής Θεωρίας και της Ιστορίας των Ιδεών, αλλά επίσης της Πολιτικής Επιστήμης και της Κοινωνιολογίας». Noel O’Sullivan, University of Hull.
«Το έργο του Κεντούρι αποτελεί τη σπουδαιότερη μελέτη του εθνικισμού από τη σκοπιά της Ιστορίας των Ιδεών και έχει ασκήσει τεράστια επίδραση σε διαδοχικές γενιές μελετητών του φαινομένου». Harold James, Princeton University.
«Ουδείς μετά το 1945 έχει αναλύσει με τέτοια διορατικότητα τον εθνικισμό όπως ο Έλι Κεντούρι». Alvin Rubinstein, University of Pensylvania.
«Το έργο του Κεντούρι Ο εθνικισμός είναι ένα από τα ελάχιστα βιβλία των τελευταίων δεκαετιών που κατέκτησε τον τίτλο του κλασικού, αποτελώντας αναγκαίο ανάγνωσμα για τους μελετητές όχι μόνον της Πολιτικής Θεωρίας και της Ιστορίας των Ιδεών, αλλά επίσης της Πολιτικής Επιστήμης και της Κοινωνιολογίας». Noel O’Sullivan, University of Hull.
«Το έργο του Κεντούρι αποτελεί τη σπουδαιότερη μελέτη του εθνικισμού από τη σκοπιά της Ιστορίας των Ιδεών και έχει ασκήσει τεράστια επίδραση σε διαδοχικές γενιές μελετητών του φαινομένου». Harold James, Princeton University.
214 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1960
4 people are currently reading
287 people want to read
About the author
Elie Kedourie
39 books16 followersElie Kedourie, CBE, FBA was a British historian of the Middle East. He wrote from a liberal perspective, dissenting from many points of view taken as orthodox in the field. He was at the London School of Economics (LSE) from 1953 to 1990, becoming Professor of Politics.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
November 10, 2023
I found this a very difficult book to rate. If it were just the last two chapters (Nationalism and Politics I & II), I would likely have given it a 4 as this part of the book is extremely effective. The rest of the book, however, is dense and likely uninteresting to non-academics (and to many academics too!). This work remains hugely influential in the field and Kedourie is a talented writer, however I doubt most people would find this book interesting at all.
July 31, 2018
Este libro te abre la mente ante ese virus que es el nacionalismo. Una ideología que aunque nos parezca increíble no tiene más de 200 años y que deriva directamente del romanticismo.
El libro analiza mediante historia de las ideas ese nuevo concepto "nacional" que va invadiendo europa basado en la lengua y la etnia, que poco a poco va colapsando la convivencia y la integración de las personas que había en estados supranacionales y provoca la I y II guerras mundiales.
200 años despues seguimos tristemente con lo mismo ... No somos capaces de ver que lo multicultural debería prevalecer, y que una nación no es un estado. Un estado es una forma de organizarnos políticamente, una nación es un grupo de personas unidas por un sentimiento supremacista basado en la etnia, la lengua o la historia común.
El libro analiza mediante historia de las ideas ese nuevo concepto "nacional" que va invadiendo europa basado en la lengua y la etnia, que poco a poco va colapsando la convivencia y la integración de las personas que había en estados supranacionales y provoca la I y II guerras mundiales.
200 años despues seguimos tristemente con lo mismo ... No somos capaces de ver que lo multicultural debería prevalecer, y que una nación no es un estado. Un estado es una forma de organizarnos políticamente, una nación es un grupo de personas unidas por un sentimiento supremacista basado en la etnia, la lengua o la historia común.
September 6, 2016
More along the lines of 2.5 stars, but I bumped it up because of its shortness and relative clarity. Kedourie's arguments are interesting and not entirely unconvincing, but his conception of nationalism is so narrow and place specific that I honestly find it mostly irrelevant to understanding modern nationalism (or even the nationalism present when he was writing the book in the 1960s). It's interesting, but I don't know that I think it deserves its status as a seminal work on nationalism.
November 7, 2022
Expone muchas ideas interesantes sobre las bases sobre las que se asientan las ideas nacionalistas y los muchos autores que poco a poco influenciaron esta doctrina. Es una lectura a ratos algo filosófica y un tanto confusa pero si que introduce conceptos muy interesantes. Sin embargo, me hubiese gustado que tratase algo más el conflicto nacionalista aplicado a la Segunda Guerra Mundial ya que apenas toca el tema a pesar de ser un evento bastante reciente cuando se publicó la obra. Aunque ahora que lo pienso, quizás por su cercanía el autor decidió no adentrarse demasiado en el tema, todavía humeante.
January 12, 2021
Nationalism by Elie Kedourie is probably the best place to start in order to understand the intellectual roots of nationalism. It is a pioneering work in the field and, as a consequence, far from the last word on the matter. However, unlike some other books about this topic it is self-contained and does not assume a background in political science. Very much a book for what used to be called 'the intelligent layman'.
The opening chapters trace the genealogy of the concept of nationalism by breaking it down into a set of constituent ideas: self-determination, the relationship between state and man, the role conflict, etc. and tracing their path through Enlightenment and German Romantic philosophy. Indeed, it is to the major figure that links these two schools of thought, Immanuel Kant, that Kedourie points as the foundational figure in the development of Nationalist thinking. He even goes so far as to dismiss the relevance of the frequently cited Hegel in a footnote. The short overview of Kant's ideas, particularly those found in the first two critiques, is surprisingly clear and the account of the transformation of abstract philosophy into a political creed is convincing.
The later chapters are a wide-ranging discussion of the difficulties faced by these ideas when put into practice. There is much here that has dated (the book is 60 years old, after all, and very much a product the post-war liberal worldview) and its arguments have been challenged and extended by many since including Ernest Gellner, Eric Hobsbawm, Benedict Anderson, and Anthony Smith, just to name a few. But that's just one more reason to begin with Kedourie: so much of the subsequent scholarship is responding to arguments first made here.
Highly recommended.
The opening chapters trace the genealogy of the concept of nationalism by breaking it down into a set of constituent ideas: self-determination, the relationship between state and man, the role conflict, etc. and tracing their path through Enlightenment and German Romantic philosophy. Indeed, it is to the major figure that links these two schools of thought, Immanuel Kant, that Kedourie points as the foundational figure in the development of Nationalist thinking. He even goes so far as to dismiss the relevance of the frequently cited Hegel in a footnote. The short overview of Kant's ideas, particularly those found in the first two critiques, is surprisingly clear and the account of the transformation of abstract philosophy into a political creed is convincing.
The later chapters are a wide-ranging discussion of the difficulties faced by these ideas when put into practice. There is much here that has dated (the book is 60 years old, after all, and very much a product the post-war liberal worldview) and its arguments have been challenged and extended by many since including Ernest Gellner, Eric Hobsbawm, Benedict Anderson, and Anthony Smith, just to name a few. But that's just one more reason to begin with Kedourie: so much of the subsequent scholarship is responding to arguments first made here.
Highly recommended.
September 13, 2018
National Dreams
A useful exploration into the romantic European notions of what constitutes a national identity. Kedourie pegs modern Nationalism emerging as an all inclusive idea requiring the consent of the governed as an outgrowth of the French Revolution but, in an interesting fashion, credits Napoleon's rhetoric which accompanied his conquests for its spread. (pp94-96) However, given his mid 20th century perspective, following two world wars, he's rather disdainful of the outcome. In Kedourie's view, the problem with using unitary definitions such as language, culture or religion as the basis for the state is that inevitably there will be conflicts with geography - the physical boundaries of a country almost always include more than one group. A state that insists on a single identity will inevitably be exclusionary. He's also critical of a style of totalitarian nationalism that erases the boundaries between public and private.
Nationalism, argues Kedourie, is neither a creature of the left or the right, arising from both. In the 19th century nationalism was considered to be highly progressive, and indeed, Woodrow Wilson 14 Points underlining the Paris 1919 Peace Conference emphasized the acquisition of a national status for subject peoples to be amongst its highest ideals. However as they achieved power, men such as Pilsudski, Mussolini and Chiang Kai-shek who were perceived as initially being on the left, were now viewed as being on the right. This became instrumentalized as a propaganda device in the Soviet toolbox - if nationalism was against capitalism and imperialism it was progressive; when it was deemed to go against the tenets of the Politburo, it became right wing and regressive.
A strong argument cited for nationalism is that national power structures are an essential advantage in helping a culture to survive. On the other hand he cites positively the longevity of empires such as the Ottoman who's system of millets allowed a plurality of cultures to co-exist, until broken apart by national ideals. He counters the case of the Poles and the Magyars, that their historic claims to national states with historic boundaries by pointing out that while true, these were not truly nationalist in the modern sense because they were feudal societies ruled by the gentrified few. (pp119) But then so was the Ottoman Empire and Kedourie fails to consider that large portions of the Empire were nomadic, up to 50%, and that the Porte would order the movement of peoples in order to manipulate the mix of ethnicities and maintain order in favour of the State.
National identity is probably weakest at the Borderlands - he cites examples such as Macedonia/Albania where pollsters would switch identities as needed by the week. Kedourie finds plebiscites (the recent referendum on Scottish Independence would be a good example) as problematic as affirmative results are usually thought of a permanent (after all, they are disruptive in a major way) and he would rather that they be more frequent, so as to constantly reflect the changing will the people, like elections. He makes an interesting comment towards the end that the American/British perception of nationalism rests on an article of faith that governance by the people will inevitably lead to good government which is what makes it desirable, whereas the concept elsewhere is that self governance is itself a good, even if it inevitably leads to tyranny - perhaps a fine distinction but an idea worth exploring. Lastly, and no doubt this comes from his own experience as a refugee from Iraq and such events as the massacre of the Assyrians in 1933 which he mentioned passed without consequence for the perpetrators, he's somewhat dismayed that Empires, just like Nations are equally likely to cast aside principles for political expediency.
A useful exploration into the romantic European notions of what constitutes a national identity. Kedourie pegs modern Nationalism emerging as an all inclusive idea requiring the consent of the governed as an outgrowth of the French Revolution but, in an interesting fashion, credits Napoleon's rhetoric which accompanied his conquests for its spread. (pp94-96) However, given his mid 20th century perspective, following two world wars, he's rather disdainful of the outcome. In Kedourie's view, the problem with using unitary definitions such as language, culture or religion as the basis for the state is that inevitably there will be conflicts with geography - the physical boundaries of a country almost always include more than one group. A state that insists on a single identity will inevitably be exclusionary. He's also critical of a style of totalitarian nationalism that erases the boundaries between public and private.
Nationalism, argues Kedourie, is neither a creature of the left or the right, arising from both. In the 19th century nationalism was considered to be highly progressive, and indeed, Woodrow Wilson 14 Points underlining the Paris 1919 Peace Conference emphasized the acquisition of a national status for subject peoples to be amongst its highest ideals. However as they achieved power, men such as Pilsudski, Mussolini and Chiang Kai-shek who were perceived as initially being on the left, were now viewed as being on the right. This became instrumentalized as a propaganda device in the Soviet toolbox - if nationalism was against capitalism and imperialism it was progressive; when it was deemed to go against the tenets of the Politburo, it became right wing and regressive.
A strong argument cited for nationalism is that national power structures are an essential advantage in helping a culture to survive. On the other hand he cites positively the longevity of empires such as the Ottoman who's system of millets allowed a plurality of cultures to co-exist, until broken apart by national ideals. He counters the case of the Poles and the Magyars, that their historic claims to national states with historic boundaries by pointing out that while true, these were not truly nationalist in the modern sense because they were feudal societies ruled by the gentrified few. (pp119) But then so was the Ottoman Empire and Kedourie fails to consider that large portions of the Empire were nomadic, up to 50%, and that the Porte would order the movement of peoples in order to manipulate the mix of ethnicities and maintain order in favour of the State.
National identity is probably weakest at the Borderlands - he cites examples such as Macedonia/Albania where pollsters would switch identities as needed by the week. Kedourie finds plebiscites (the recent referendum on Scottish Independence would be a good example) as problematic as affirmative results are usually thought of a permanent (after all, they are disruptive in a major way) and he would rather that they be more frequent, so as to constantly reflect the changing will the people, like elections. He makes an interesting comment towards the end that the American/British perception of nationalism rests on an article of faith that governance by the people will inevitably lead to good government which is what makes it desirable, whereas the concept elsewhere is that self governance is itself a good, even if it inevitably leads to tyranny - perhaps a fine distinction but an idea worth exploring. Lastly, and no doubt this comes from his own experience as a refugee from Iraq and such events as the massacre of the Assyrians in 1933 which he mentioned passed without consequence for the perpetrators, he's somewhat dismayed that Empires, just like Nations are equally likely to cast aside principles for political expediency.
December 20, 2016
This is a seminal book on the history of the idea of nationalism, working through the ideas of the Enlightenment philosophers and the German Romantics. It is a demanding read, but the effort is worth, as the observations are rich and insightful, and its conclusions often prescient.
July 6, 2013
Sverker Sörlin inleder denna bok med en snabb och överskådlig genomgång av begreppet "nationalism" som bara den är väl värd att läsa. Likaså avslutas det hela med en välskriven genomgång av rekommenderad läsning på ämnet.
Kedouries egen text är en passionerad (och kritisk) genomgång av nationalism ur ett idéhistoriskt perspektiv. Snarare en personligt färgad essä, än en neutral genomgång av begreppet. Då den skrevs 1960 har den förstås åldrats en del, men kärnan i hans resonemang och kitik mot nationalismen kvarstår och är än idag giltig (anser jag).
Boken är en lätt- och snabbläst introduktion till nationalismen och kanske en bättre öppning än att redan från start ge sig på Benedict Anderson, Ernest Gellner eller Eric J. Hobsbawm - som spelar i den lite tyngre ligan. Om inte annat, så kan man - efter att ha läst boken - med hjälp av Sörlins inledning och lästipsen på slutet, lättare ta ur en fortsatt riktning in i ämnet.
Kedouries egen text är en passionerad (och kritisk) genomgång av nationalism ur ett idéhistoriskt perspektiv. Snarare en personligt färgad essä, än en neutral genomgång av begreppet. Då den skrevs 1960 har den förstås åldrats en del, men kärnan i hans resonemang och kitik mot nationalismen kvarstår och är än idag giltig (anser jag).
Boken är en lätt- och snabbläst introduktion till nationalismen och kanske en bättre öppning än att redan från start ge sig på Benedict Anderson, Ernest Gellner eller Eric J. Hobsbawm - som spelar i den lite tyngre ligan. Om inte annat, så kan man - efter att ha läst boken - med hjälp av Sörlins inledning och lästipsen på slutet, lättare ta ur en fortsatt riktning in i ämnet.
February 9, 2011
A good background to the theory and practice of nationalism, which punches holes in the myths. One gets the feeling that the author has a personal interest in the topic, as his arguments later in the book move from argument to disparaging rhetoric. Having said that, I agree with pretty much all of his analysis.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews