Nationality and Nationbuilding

Any other good books on the subject, lads?

Human Scale by Kirkpatrick Sale

Nationality and Nationbuilding is a bit vague.
Civilizations: Culture, Ambition, and the Transformation of Nature
The Common Law by Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr
Alan Ryan - On Politics
The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change
Good Behavior: Being a Study of Certain Types of Civility
Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology
Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger
Our Political Nature: The Evolutionary Origins of What Divides Us
The Origin of Wealth: Evolution, Complexity, And the Radical Remaking of Economics
On Power: The Natural History of Its Growth
Sovereignty: An Inquiry into the Political Good
The Ethics of Redistribution
The Human Condition by Hannah Arendt
The Quest for Community: A Study in the Ethics of Order and Freedom
World Order: Reflections on the Character of Nations and the Course of History
The Problem of Political Authority: An Examination of the Right to Coerce and the Duty to Obey
The Collapse of Complex Societies
The House of Intellect
The Culture We Deserve
The Meaning of Culture by John Cowper Powys
The Rise of the West: A History of the Human Community
Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950
Wired for Culture: Origins of the Human Social Mind

A World beyond Politics?: A Defense of the Nation-State

Nationality (ethnicity), from my area of interest.
The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World
When Ethnicity Did Not Matter in the Balkans: A Study of Identity in Pre-Nationalist Croatia, Dalmatia, and Slavonia in the Medieval and Early-Modern Periods
Geopolitics: The Geography of International Relations
Medieval Europeans: Studies in Ethnic Identity and National Perspectives in Medieval Europe
Julius Pokorny, 1887-1970: Germans, Celts and Nationalism
The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing
Ancient Scandinavia: An Archaeological History from the First Humans to the Vikings
Ethnic America: A History
Orderly and Humane: The Expulsion of the Germans after the Second World War
Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900-1900
Vanished Kingdoms
The Goths by Peter Heather
A History of France from the Earliest Times to the Treaty of Versailles
Europe Before Rome: A Site-By-Site Tour of the Stone, Bronze, and Iron Ages
The Might that Was Assyria
The Phoenicians and the West: Politics, Colonies and Trade
Genocide in the Ottoman Empire: Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks, 1913-1923
Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine, 1921-1933
Ancient Complex Societies
Palaeography of the Brahmi Script...

Thanks for the recommendations, user.

As for the vagueness, sorry for that. What I had in mind was the early evolution of modern (ethnic) national identities and the way in which elites developed them and had them imposed upon their countrymen. I'm particularly interested in sociological works upon the subject.

Isn't nationalism obsolete with globalization and individuality in our current day and age?
I'm not saying it can't be done, many people would love to feel part of something that gives meaning to their lives and is bigger than them, but it seems to me that it's quite impossible if media is bombarding people with trying to be the best, making use of everyone and that individuality is the way to go. Also, far too many of philosophers would argue against nationalism, so it's hard to build a strong foundation.

I don't know, I've puzzled over that for a while and thought that in the end trying to build a strong national identity without having a dictatorship that controls media is pointless, and even then it will eventually erode because younger generations don't feel as hopeless and abandoned as those that wanted nationalism.

(Political) nationalism is a different beast entirely. What I find interesting is the way in which modern (ethnic) national identities were built.

Certainly one part of them is inherently subjective inasmuch as without people to adhere to such a construct, there is no nation to speak of. But at the same time, ethnicity and language in particular, although they hold a greater degree of objectivity, are still quite blurry when it comes to the national constructs of bordering nations:
>An ethnic nationhood can be built around a standardized dialect. (Macedonians)
>An ethnic nationhood can be built around a different standardization of a dialect already employed by another nation. (Serbo-Croatian)
>A dialect found between two bordering nations can be claimed (alongside its speakers) as belonging to either of the two. (Torlaks)

It may become so but it's still very much alive everywhere except the West.

>Isn't nationalism obsolete with globalization and individuality in our current day and age?
Did Brexit, Trump, the rightwing parties in Europe, the rise of China etcetcetc pass you by? Nationalism is doing all the running right now.

Aside from that one, standard texts include those by Ernest Gellner, Eric Hobsbawm and Anthony Smith.

>Isn't nationalism obsolete with globalization and individuality in our current day and age?

>Trump
>Brexit
>Nationalism
You don't what that word means do you?

Then the first half of my second post is kind of that, and some of the others.

Brexit hasn’t happened yet, Trump’s nationalism is corporate fascism, rw parties of europe haven’t toppled a single dem regime, China isn’t nationalist or capitalist or racialist

This is the most retarded thing i've read today

>China isn’t nationalist

>China isn’t nationalist or capitalist or racialist
China is plainly all three of those things

I know what all three words mean.

Then nobody has been a nationalist ever.

You clearly don't.

You going to explain that, user?

What? It's you who need to explain how Trump or Brexit constitute examples of nationalism since they don't fit the criteria.

Seems pretty obvious to me.

Brexit: a major factor in the Brexit vote was/is what the Brexiteers call 'independence', i.e. that the UK should not be 'ruled by Europe'. This is very obviously a nationalist demand.

Trump: 'America first' is a call to prioritise the national community against 'globalism'.

Holy fuck saved

Oh and btw, any books explicitly critical of nationalism in a reasonable manner? Something like what Kymlicka does, but less in the "diversity is inherently good" style. Do these books exist?

>Brexit: a major factor in the Brexit vote was/is what the Brexiteers call 'independence'
You're thinking of Sovereignty.
>This is very obviously a nationalist demand.
Non-sequitur. Wanting more sovereignty (which britbongs won't get, since staying in the common market will require them to accept some demands, while losing the power to vote in the EU council) doesn't suddenly make the UK nationalistic: it lacks the project for a national ethos, a Volksgeist, the focus on a shared history. It's simply britbongs being (rightfully) scared of immigration.
>Trump: 'America first' is a call to prioritise the national community against 'globalism'.
This is just rhetoric and mild xenofobia. Trump hasn't done anything to actually help his national community besides some laws on immigration and he got voted in mainly for the fact that the opposite candidate was embarrassing.

tldr mild xenophobia != nationalism

>You're thinking of Sovereignty
What? Do you know what nationalism is? Have you actually read the OP book or any other books about it? Sovereignty is an absolutely crucial part of nationalism- the national community should be exclusively represented by a state (i.e. a nation state).

And saying something is 'rhetoric' or won't actually work doesn't mean it's not nationalistic. Tibetan independence activists will never in a million years succeed, but that doesn't mean they're not nationalists, just like you can be, say, an American Maoist without actually having a hope in hell of realising your goal.

For some articles on the inadequacy of the civic/ethnic dicotomy that is popularly argued among liberals and so called "left nationalist s" such as the Kurds, Catalans etc see;

Michael gentile - beyond the good civilians Vs bad ethnic nationalism dicotomy
Vicki hesli and Holley's Hansen - national identity: civic, ethnic, hybrid and atomised individual s
Jonathan hearn - Nationalism and Globalisation, challenging assumption s
Peter Kreuzer - violent civil nationalism versus civil ethnic nationalism, contrasting Indonesia and Malaysia
Reina neufeldt - tolerant exclusion, expanding constricted narratives of wartime ethnic and civil nationalism
Stephen Shulman - challenging the civil ethnic and west east dicotomies in the study of Nationalism
Alex toshkov - on the inadequacy of the ethnic civic antinomy, the language politics of Bulgarian Nationalism

Nationalism has inherently nothing to do with the state in of itself, there are more Nations than associated nation-states and not all of them even aspire to that end

What I'm saying is that the reason, the consequences and whatnot of the recent rise of the right (Brexit, Trump, etc) have nothing to do with nationalism but they're caused by people being scared of the migrants and a general anti-establishment sentiment. They're only very mildly nationalist and only in rethoric for the most part.

how many real sovereign countries are there anyway.
Tier 1: USA, Russia, China
Tier 2: Israel, Iran, KSA(?)
Tier Comedy: Somaliland

idk why I forgot India and Pakistan. Maybe they are tier 1.5

The notion of sovereignty in the Nation state of the 21st century of Neoliberal globalisation is of course the joke. As a nationalist myself, my faith is in the nation, not the compromised state it must exist within today's climate

newfag but isn't fukuyama writing about this? "end of history" etc
Also didn't bertrandt russel write about a new world order or something?