Attempts at formulating a dichotomous classification of nations and nationalisms have proliferated in the relevant literature over a long period of time. In this study some of the most influential instances of dual typologies of nationalisms are selected for interpretation and analysis. The examples include Renan's under?standing of differences between the "French" and the "German" concepts of nation; Kohn's distinction between "eastern" and "western" nationalisms; a revision of Kohn's dichotomy suggested by J. Plamenatz; and a more recent version of dual (...) typology propounded by L. Greenfield. By reconstructing the views of the selected theorists of nationalism, at the basis of all these typologies a dichotomous division into "civic" and "ethnic" nationalism is identified. Critical objections to this fundamental dual division are articulated at two levels. At the first, historical level, a socio-political contextualization of dual typologies points to their practical, political-ideological purposes. At the second, conceptual level, and drawing on the ideas of R. Brubaker, the author discusses analytical and normative weaknesses of the usual distinction between "civic" and "ethnic" nationalism. Literatura o nacijama i nacionalizmu svedoci o istorijski dugotrajnim pokusajima formulisanja dihotomne klasifikacije proucavanih fenomena. Stoga je autor u ovoj studiji interpretirao i analizirao neke od najuticajnijih primera dualnih tipologija nacionalizma. Predmet njegovog istrazivanja su Renanovo shvatanje razlika izmedju "francuskog" i "nemackog" pojma nacije, Konovo razlikovanje "istocnog" i "zapadnog" nacionalizma, Plamenceva revizija Konove dihotomije, kao i novija verzija dualnih tipologija Lie Grinfeld. Rekonstrukcijom stanovista izabranih teoreticara nacionalizma, autor u osnovi svih prikazanih tipologija identifikuje dihotomnu podelu na "gradjanski" i "etnicki nacionalizam". Kriticke primedbe ovoj osnovnoj dualnoj podeli formulisane su u dve razlicite ravni: istorijskoj i konceptualnoj. U prvoj, socijalno-politickom kontekstualizacijom dualnih tipologija naglasena je njihova prakticna, politicko-ideoloska funkcija. Oslanjajuci se na stavove R. Brubejkera, autor je u drugoj, teorijskoj ravni, istakao analiticke i normativne slabosti uobicajene podele na "gradjanski" i "etnicki nacionalizam". (shrink)

The recent surge in academic theorizing of the nation and nationalism has made it difficult to isolate the actual phenomena from their constructions as objects of theory. This is all the more difficult because most contemporary theories are grounded in unacknowledged political agendas that to a significant extent generate the theories independently of the phenomena. Chapter 1 focuses on “antinational-ist” theories of the nation—theories that deny the reality of nations or fundamentally delegitimate them as retrogressive or inherently oppressive political forms. (...) Such a theory rejects the nation primarily because it is inconsistent with the theorist's uncritically assumed political ideology. In Chapter 2, I examine theories that do not reject the nation, but rather control its form—again in line with a particular political agenda or ideology. Such a theory allows the reality and/or legitimacy of nations, but only after theoretically misconstruing them as consistent with the theorist's specific ideology or by limiting approval to only those nations that are in line with this ideology. I stress the important practical consequences of this: when backed by powerful institutions and forces, such a theory of the nation supports the coerced transformation of minor or post-colonial nations to fit it. These critiques expose the complexities of nations and nationalisms that most theories fail to register, due to their limiting assumptions. In Chapter 3, I develop an account of the nation sufficiently comprehensive to capture this complexity. Perhaps most importantly, my account does not reduce the nation to just one type of social force, political relation, identity characteristic, narrative structure, or “false consciousness”—which virtually all other theories do. All “unity” associated with the nation is partial: any presumed universal unity is always cut by gaps or discontinuities. A nation exists where the discontinuities are bridged by some alternate connector, by another type of relation. I then consider the relationship of nation to race, gender, and sexuality, as well as to state and ethnicity. Finally, I develop a novel concept of national “self-determination” as conceptual self- definition, not territorial control. (shrink)