Nationalism and the Modern Nation State
A comparison of Umut Ozkirimli's work, entitled "Theories of Nationalism: A Critical Introduction" and Stuart J. Kaufman's "Modern Hatreds: The Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War".
# 49055 | 842 words | 2 sources | MLA | 2004 |
$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper examines these two writers' views on nationality and concludes that, although Kaufman is more inclined to speak of "hatreds" rather than ethnic identities, Kaufman also, like Ozkirimli, stresses the importance of understanding the emotional significance of ethnic and national identity when constructing a nation state, rather than the idea that ethnicity exists as a linear, enclosed historical trope within definable and easily recognizable boundaries;ethnicity is "felt," rather than historically in evidence, for both authors.
From the Paper:"The overview present in Umut Ozkirimli's analysis is a warning not to dismiss the importance of nationalism, and also a caution not to accept certain groups' claims to nationhood wholesale and at their face value, as the concept of what constitutes ethnicity shifts and changes, depending on individual's particular political alliances in a particular historical context. Ozkirimili's work has a far more dispassionate tone, in contrast, to Stuart J. Kaufman's Modern Hatreds: The Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War. Kaufman's work, in contrast to Ozkirimli, is more stridently prescriptive in nature. However, Kaufman is also more rigorous in his use of international political theoretical frameworks to justify his suggestions to policymakers."
Cite this Analytical Essay:
Nationalism and the Modern Nation State (2004, February 23) Retrieved April 04, 2020, from https://www.academon.com/analytical-essay/nationalism-and-the-modern-nation-state-49055/
"Nationalism and the Modern Nation State" 23 February 2004. Web. 04 April. 2020. <https://www.academon.com/analytical-essay/nationalism-and-the-modern-nation-state-49055/>