Term papers writing service

An essay on merits of gellners and andersons approach to the study of nationalism

Example essay writing, topic: It is not recommended to submit free essays or any of their parts for credit at your school as these are easily detected by plagiarism checkers. Where Gellner describes how [the nationalist] imagination works, Anderson describes not only the how of imagination, but what is imagined Marcus Banks 1996: Clarify and critically review the respective merits of the approaches to the study of nationalism essayed by Gellner and Anderson.

Nationalism as a concept first emerged in the late eighteenth century. It was a structural change, fundamental in the transformation in the way of thinking of entire nations.

Or as Benedict Anderson would say, in the imaginations of the people of nations. Born with this transformation and new way of thinking was a change in structure and in fact it seems progress was being made. Named the century of enlightenment by Anderson, the dawn of nationalism was produced by the erosion of religious certainties.

Nationalism is defined as a sentiment based on common cultural characteristics that binds a population and often produces a policy of national independence.

  1. If they are caused by barriers of other character, such as physical characteristics or deep religious-cultural habits, the problem becomes far more complex. On the basis of this thesis he therefore argues that nationalism is the general promotion of high culture, creating of anonymous society with mutually substitutable atomized individuals held together by this culture and not because of their own traditions or folk culture.
  2. Here, Anderson mentions an example of SE Asia, since it was colonized almost by all major powers. Also philological nationalism, boom of folk pre-nationalism, anti-Semitism, Zionism, etc.
  3. Nationalism serves as a means to mobilize the common people to war in the name of self-defense. At the beginning it must be said that unlike Anderson he uses the term nationalism everywhere where he talks about the negative manifestations of national aggression or xenophobia.
  4. Nationalism serves as a means to mobilize the common people to war in the name of self-defense. Comparative approach, paving the road for further research to come the term the study of religious-nationalism poses a multidimensional landmark essay the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism 1904-1905 positioned the study of influence on the study of nationalism anderson 1991 gellner 1983.

Collins English dictionary 1995: However, I do not think it is possible to give a single definition to what constitutes nationalism, no single, universal theory of nationalism is possible, its historical records are so diverse, that so too must be our concepts. This paper aspires to both highlight and distinguish the concepts and theories of both Benedict Anderson and Ernest Gellner, while at the same time aiming to point out any restrictions in their arguments.

Anderson characterises nationalism as an imagined political community-and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign. It can be said that members of the same nation feel a certain patriotism towards their nation, it is not something that can be explained in words, but it is nonetheless a cross culturally occurring phenomenon. Anderson defines the nation as imagined in three ways. First, he says that it is imagined as limited because no matter how large a nation, and no matter how many people subsist with in a nation, it has finite if elastic boundaries, beyond which exist other nations.

Secondly, it is imagined as sovereign because the concept was born in an age in which Enlightenment and Revolution were destroying the legitimacy of the divinely-ordained, hierarchical dynastic realm. Thirdly, Anderson states the nation is imagined as a community because the nation and its people is always considered as possessing a great amount of comradeship, so deep that it is this imagined community that has made it possible for so many people to willingly die for their country.

An essay on merits of gellners and andersons approach to the study of nationalism

Anderson holds firm with his argument a solid belief that print technology has enabled people to imagine large linked communities to their own imagined community. Communities that were not until that time connected to them in any way, and did not affect them in any way suddenly became important to the way they perceived themselves, and in the way that they viewed themselves as a nation. The way that print media would do this was to connect nations by giving the people the same news on the same subject matter on the same day, and by doing so it is said that the nations were given an incredible advantage of association.

Gellner on the other hand gives a different definition of nationalism he states that Nationalism is primarily a political principle, which holds that the political and the national unit should be congruent.

He does put forward the idea however, that What do exist are cultures, often subtly grouped, shading into each other, overlapping, intertwined; and there exist, usually but not always, political units of all shapes and sizes. He states will and culture as being candidates for the construction of a theory of nationality. But two generic agents or catalysts of group formation and maintenance are obviously crucial: Gellner agrees with Anderson on the point that nationalism is a form of modernization.

However, that is where the agreement ends.

We can write ANY essay exclusively for you and make you proud of the result!

Gellner states that nationalism was part of a transition from agrarian society to that of an industrial society. It was through this industrialized society that nationalism was fashioned.

Anderson on the other hand, ascertains that the main reasons for the progress of nationalism as being the deterioration of sacred communities, texts and languages and an increase in the amount of available literate material, of which the industrial revolution was the foremost mechanism for its decline.

In a sense then, it can be said that the creation of nationalism was a principle of modernity, and therefore nationalism is to a degree invented in this modern manner. Gellner also argues that nationalism has developed from modern society s need for homogeneity.

Homogenization then gets furthered by the deterioration of pre-modern folk cultures the general imposition of a high culture on society, where previously low cultures had taken up the lives of the majority, and in some cases of the totality of the population.

However, they often shade each other leaving gaps in their arguments.

Example essay writing, topic: Nationalism Has Developed From Modern Anderson Nation Gellner

I would decline Gellner s suggestion of culturally homogenous nations. To do so it is necessary to express how people of a nation adopt the idea of a nation. This can take place in many ways remaining with the idea of national homogeneity; by nations acknowledging myths of a nation it is possible to create an impression of nationalism. In my opinion, all the people of a nation never all come together at the same time. There may be certain occasions, celebrated on specific days in a nations calendar, for example ANZAC Day in Australia and New Zealand, and Independence Day on July fourth in the United States of America, where nations stop to celebrate and honor the idea of their national identity.

However, these are not celebrated by all, for most it is another holiday and it goes by just as other days do. Therefore, this is an example of myth making, even when people of a nation are apparently bound in unity. Therefore, it is my view that there are many ways in which people come to know their nation. However, these ways only adhere in the sense that each person pledges to the idea of nationalism, mostly through the making of the myths that exist within the nation.

Anderson s idea that a nation is an imagined community is in accordance with the myth making concept in that its people can only perceive the nation by the image they have manufactured in their minds. In conclusion, I believe it is fair to say that both Gellner s and Anderson s theories of nationalism are able to hold their own, they are both credible in their arguments.

However, I think it is reasonable to conclude that further work can be done in this area to fill the gaps that both have left behind.

HarperCollins Publishers Gellner, E. Expand your research by topic: