Teoría social sobre el origen de la naciónpuntos de encuentro entre los paradigmas perennialista y modernista. Etnosimbolismo y otras vías eclécticas: la hipótesis de la continuidad-intensificación

  1. Lluís Català Oltra
Aldizkaria:
Disjuntiva: Crítica de les Ciències Socials

ISSN: 2659-7071

Argitalpen urtea: 2022

Alea: 3

Zenbakia: 1

Orrialdeak: 19-32

Mota: Artikulua

DOI: 10.14198/DISJUNTIVA2022.3.1.2 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openRUA editor

Beste argitalpen batzuk: Disjuntiva: Crítica de les Ciències Socials

Laburpena

The theoretical debate about the nation and nationalism has too often focused on fixing temporary borders and locating geographically the phenomenon. In the last decades, this (perhaps sterile) debate about temporal and spatial origin of the nation and nationalism has especially faced two paradigms: (neo)perennialism and modernism. As is well known, the modernist theory set the start of the nation and nationalisms era between the end of the XVIII century and the beginning of the XIX century. This is the time when the industrialization was strengthening the role of the bourgeoisie and it began to support civil and political reforms that will modify the sovereignty principle. On the contrary, specially based on Hastings’ historical revision, the neoperennialists go back to a premodern age to date the beginning of the nation and they use to turn to the English model of State and nation building (facing the French model, postulated by a large part of the modernists). Despite the antagonistic approaches of both paradigms, in this work we emphasize the common ground to give rise to an eclectic view of the phenomenon origins. In some way this is linked to the ethnosimbolism and other eclectic proposals.

Erreferentzia bibliografikoak

  • Anderson, B. (1993). Comunidades imaginadas. Reflexiones sobre el origen y la difusión del nacionalismo. México D.F.: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
  • Armstrong, J. (2004). “Definitions, periodization, and prospects for the longue durée”, Nations and Nationalism, 10 (1/2), 9-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1354-5078.2004.00151.x
  • Arnau, J. A. y M. Nieto (2002). “Democracia y sociedad moderna”, Laberinto, 9.
  • Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. Londres: Sage.
  • Breuilly, J. (1990). Nacionalismo y Estado. Barcelona: Pomares-Corredor.
  • Calhoun, C. [editor] (1994). Social theory and the politics of identity. Cambridge: Blackwell.
  • Connor, W. (2004). “The timelessness of nations”, Nations and Nationalism, 10 (1/2), 35-47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1354-5078.2004.00153.x
  • Connor, W. (1990). “When is a nation?”, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 13, 92-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.1990.9993663
  • Gellner, E. (1998). Nacionalisme. Catarroja: Afers-Universitat de València.
  • Greenfeld, L. (2005). “Nationalism and the mind”, Nations and Nationalism, 11 (3), 325-341. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1354-5078.2005.00207.x
  • Grosby, S. (2003). “Religion, ethnicity and nationalism: the uncertain perennialism of Adrian Hastings”, Nations and Nationalism, 9 (1), 7-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8219.00070
  • Guibernau, M. (1996). Los nacionalismes. Barcelona: Ariel.
  • Guibernau, M. y J. Hutchinson (2004). “History and national destiny”, Nations and Nationalism, 10 (1/2), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1354-5078.2004.00150.x
  • Hastings, A. (2000). La construcción de las nacionalidades. Etnicidad, religión y nacionalismo. Madrid: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hobsbawm, E. J. (1992). Naciones y nacionalismo desde 1780. Barcelona: Crítica. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521439612.
  • Hobsbawm, E. J. y T. Ranger [compiladores] (1988). L’invent de la tradició. Vic: Eumo.
  • Kerr, William (2021). Darwinian Social Evolution and Social Change. The Evolution of Nationalisms. Londres: Palgrave-Macmillan https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77999-3
  • Llobera, J. R. (2003). “A comment on Hastings’s The Construction of Nationhood”, Nations and Nationalism, 9 (1), 15-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8219.00071
  • Llobera, J. R. (1996). El dios de la modernidad. El desarrollo del nacionalismo en Europa Occidental. Barcelona: Anagrama.
  • Özkirimli, U. (2003). “The nation as an artichoke? A critique of ethnosymbolist interpretations of nationalism”, Nations and Nationalism, 9 (3), 339-355. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8219.00100
  • Renan, E. (1882). Qu’est-ce qu’une nation?, conferencia leída en la Sorbona el 11 de marzo. Disponible en http://www.bmlisieux.com/archives/nation01.htm (visita el 23-5-2021).
  • Routledge, B. (2003). “The antiquity of the nation? Critical reflections from the ancient Near East”, Nations and Nationalism, 9 (2), 213-233. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8219.00083
  • Smith, A. D. (2004). Nacionalismo. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
  • Smith, A. D. (2003). “Adrian Hastings on nations and nationalism”, Nations and Nationalism, 9 (1), 25-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8219.00073
  • Smith, A. D. (1999a). “Ethnic election and national destiny: some religious origins of nationalist ideals”, Nations and Nationalism, 5 (3), 331-355. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1354-5078.1999.00331.x
  • Smith, Anthony D. (1999b). Myths and memories of the nation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Smith, A. D. (1995). “Nations and their pasts”, The Warwick Debates on Nationalism, Warwick University.
  • Smith, A. D. (1986). The ethnic origins of nations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  • Thiesse, A.-M. (1999). “Democracy softens forces of change: inventing national identity”, Le Monde Diplomatique, junio.
  • Tilly, C. (1995). Las revoluciones europeas, 1492-1992. Barcelona: Crítica.
  • VV.AA. (1996). La questió nacional: un debat obert. Barcelona: Fundació Pere Ardiaca.
  • Woods, A. y T. Grant (2000). Marxism and the national question, en http://www.marxist.com/Theory/national_question.html (visita el 23-5-2021).
  • Yavari, A. y Z. Azhar (2017). The Origins of Nation and Subjecthood in Ancient Rome: from Gens to Subjecthood, from Citizenship to Nation. Comparative Law Review, 8 (1), 55-.
Datuen iturria: Dialnet