What do you think?
Rate this book
Nacionalizmus új keretek között
Európa a nemzetállam és a modern nacionalizmus szülőhelye volt a 18. század végén, és úgy tűnt, hogy a 20. század végén temetőjük is lesz. Ám a századvégi Európa, ahelyett, hogy túllépett volna a nemzetállamon, visszatért hozzá, aminek leglátványosabb bizonyítéka a Szovjetunió, Jugoszlávia és Csehszlovákia felbomlása és nemzeti alapon meghatározott utódállamaik létrejötte. A politikai tér nemzeti határvonalak mentén való nagyarányú átszerveződése a nacionalizmus eltérő, dinamikusan összekapcsolódó és egyes esetekben robbanásveszélyes formáit hívta életre: a nemzeti kisebbségek autonómiára törekvő nacionalizmusait, az otthonukat adó új államok „nemzetiesítő” nacionalizmusait, valamint azoknak a „külső nemzeti hazáknak” a határokon átnyúló nacionalizmusait, amelyekhez a közös etnicitás – nem pedig az állampolgárság – alapján tartoznak. Pierre Bourdieu munkásságára és az „új institucionalista” szociológiára támaszkodva Rogers Brubaker összehasonlítja korunk és a két világháború közti időszak nacionalizmusait, és elméleti szempontból árnyalt, történelmi vonatkozásokban gazdag képet nyújt az „Új Európa” egyik legfontosabb problémájáról.
218 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1996
6 people are currently reading
204 people want to read
About the author
Rogers Brubaker
17 books34 followersAmerican sociologist, and professor at University of California, Los Angeles. He has written academic works on ethnicity, nationalism, and citizenship.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
June 19, 2016
This is a thoroughly brilliant examination of nationalism. I would say it’s essential reading for anyone seeking to understand the politics and societies of post-socialist Central and Eastern Europe (particularly the post-Soviet and post-Yugoslav states) and also for anyone with a general interest in nationalism and nations as political and sociological phenomena. Although Brubaker is a sociologist, this work is of the utmost relevance to political science, history and international relations and should be considered readable by students of any of those disciplines.
The book is divided into two parts, each comprised of three chapters. The first part introduces and explains Brubaker’s theoretical framework, most importantly what he calls the “triadic nexus” (explained below). The second part examines the three components of this nexus through the means of comparisons between the post-socialist states of the 1990s and interwar Europe.
The first chapter is a discussion of the different ways of conceptualizing and discussing nations and nationalism. This part is highly theoretical and may be a bit heavy for someone whose background isn’t in sociology, but is nonetheless invaluable reading. The second chapter explains the way that the Soviet system institutionalized nationality as both a territorial-political unit and as an ethnocultural category. Brubaker argues that the result of this is that the post-Soviet independent states are seen as “belonging” to the titular ethnic group and thereby seek to “nationalize” their territory (through promotion of the titular group’s language and culture), whereas minorities are perceived as members of another nation, even if they hold the local citizenship. Moreover, citizens of other states who share ethnicity with the titular group may be seen as legitimate objects of national interest, leading to what Brubaker calls the “triadic nexus” of national minorities, nationalizing states in which they live (and of which they are usually legal citizens) and external national “homelands” (to which they may be perceived as belonging, but of which they are not usually legal citizens). The third chapter is a case study of this triadic nexus in practice, looking at the Krajina Serbs in Croatia during the break-up of Yugoslavia.
The fourth chapter (the first chapter of the second part) examines interwar Poland as a “nationalizing state” and looks at whether this model can facilitate an understanding of the nationalizing states of post-socialist Europe. The fifth chapter constitutes a comparison of “homeland nationalism” in Weimar Germany and post-Soviet Russia, naturally including a highly detailed and informative overview of both. The final chapter examines three historical cases of “ethnic unmixing” after the collapse or retreat of empires: Muslim migration from the post-Ottoman Balkans, Magyar migration from post-Habsburg territories and German migration from post-Habsburg and post-Hohenzollern territories. Here Brubaker attempts to pick out some general trends and thereby to analyse post-Soviet developments from a historical perspective and then provide some tentative comments about likely future developments among Russians and other Russian-speakers in the post-Soviet space.
The book is divided into two parts, each comprised of three chapters. The first part introduces and explains Brubaker’s theoretical framework, most importantly what he calls the “triadic nexus” (explained below). The second part examines the three components of this nexus through the means of comparisons between the post-socialist states of the 1990s and interwar Europe.
The first chapter is a discussion of the different ways of conceptualizing and discussing nations and nationalism. This part is highly theoretical and may be a bit heavy for someone whose background isn’t in sociology, but is nonetheless invaluable reading. The second chapter explains the way that the Soviet system institutionalized nationality as both a territorial-political unit and as an ethnocultural category. Brubaker argues that the result of this is that the post-Soviet independent states are seen as “belonging” to the titular ethnic group and thereby seek to “nationalize” their territory (through promotion of the titular group’s language and culture), whereas minorities are perceived as members of another nation, even if they hold the local citizenship. Moreover, citizens of other states who share ethnicity with the titular group may be seen as legitimate objects of national interest, leading to what Brubaker calls the “triadic nexus” of national minorities, nationalizing states in which they live (and of which they are usually legal citizens) and external national “homelands” (to which they may be perceived as belonging, but of which they are not usually legal citizens). The third chapter is a case study of this triadic nexus in practice, looking at the Krajina Serbs in Croatia during the break-up of Yugoslavia.
The fourth chapter (the first chapter of the second part) examines interwar Poland as a “nationalizing state” and looks at whether this model can facilitate an understanding of the nationalizing states of post-socialist Europe. The fifth chapter constitutes a comparison of “homeland nationalism” in Weimar Germany and post-Soviet Russia, naturally including a highly detailed and informative overview of both. The final chapter examines three historical cases of “ethnic unmixing” after the collapse or retreat of empires: Muslim migration from the post-Ottoman Balkans, Magyar migration from post-Habsburg territories and German migration from post-Habsburg and post-Hohenzollern territories. Here Brubaker attempts to pick out some general trends and thereby to analyse post-Soviet developments from a historical perspective and then provide some tentative comments about likely future developments among Russians and other Russian-speakers in the post-Soviet space.
March 25, 2019
Nationalism Reframed, Roger Brubaker
The nation is not an imagined community. It is a political collective that sustains itself through institutionalized cultural and social practices. So the idea is to make a departure from the realist and substantialist conception of the nation as a foreordained phenomenon. Instead, Roger Brubaker’s concern focuses on the process of creating the nation: nationalizing of the nation, the status of the national minority and the external homeland nationalism are perceived as distinct political fields. After all, “nationalism is not engendered by nations; political fields of particular kind produce it” (p. 17). Thus nationhood is a contingent event that is perennially happening. Within these three sets, there are subsets which are not fixed entities but the field of differentiated and competitive forces (cited, Pierre Bourdieu).
The nation is not an imagined community. It is a political collective that sustains itself through institutionalized cultural and social practices. So the idea is to make a departure from the realist and substantialist conception of the nation as a foreordained phenomenon. Instead, Roger Brubaker’s concern focuses on the process of creating the nation: nationalizing of the nation, the status of the national minority and the external homeland nationalism are perceived as distinct political fields. After all, “nationalism is not engendered by nations; political fields of particular kind produce it” (p. 17). Thus nationhood is a contingent event that is perennially happening. Within these three sets, there are subsets which are not fixed entities but the field of differentiated and competitive forces (cited, Pierre Bourdieu).
January 27, 2008
My rate is 3.5, since his later works are brilliant comparatively. Brubaker stopped using the word "identity," and can see how he develops his ideas into "Ethnicity without Groups" etc. This is also a good way to introduce constitutive/sociological institutions to political/social sciences.
August 20, 2008
Admittedly it was just skimmed for my paper, but because it focused on Eastern Europe I couldn't really use it. However, with the current Georgian situation, I'm hoping to check it out again soon to have a better understanding of it all. If you're interested in it, I suggest read this.
May 1, 2009
He gets 5 for being my adviser.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews