Paradoxes Of The Nationalist Time

In Paradoxes of Hawaiian Sovereignty J. Kēhaulani Kauanui examines contradictions of indigeneity and self-determination in U.S. domestic policy and international law. She theorizes paradoxes in the laws themselves and in nationalist assertions of Hawaiian Kingdom restoration and demands for U.S. deoccupation, which echo colonialist models of governance. Kauanui argues that Hawaiian elites' approaches to reforming and regulating land, gender, and sexuality in the early nineteenth century that paved the way for sovereign recognition of the kingdom complicate contemporary nationalist activism today, which too often includes disavowing the indigeneity of the Kanaka Maoli (Indigenous Hawaiian) people. Problematizing the ways the positing of the Hawaiian Kingdom's continued existence has been accompanied by a denial of U.S. settler colonialism, Kauanui considers possibilities for a decolonial approach to Hawaiian sovereignty that would address the privatization and capitalist development of land and the ongoing legacy of the imposition of heteropatriarchal modes of social relations.

This major new work by Professor Anthony D. Smith challenges the notion of nationalism as a product of modernity. Major new work by a leading historical sociologist Challenges the prevailing idea of nationalism as a product of modernity Demonstrates that different political forms of community and collective identity from pre-modern times have contributed to the formation and character of nations Analyzes the chronology and nature of nations, from the ancient world, to the European Middle Ages, the early modern, and the modern eras Discusses alternative destinies facing modern nations today

The Paradoxes of Nationalism explores a critical stage in the development of the principle of national self-determination: the years of the French Revolution, during which the idea of the nation was fused with that of self-government. While scholars and historians routinely cite the French Revolution as the origin of nationalism, they often fail to examine the implications of this connection. Chimène I. Keitner corrects this omission by drawing on history and political theory to deepen our understanding of the historical and normative underpinnings of national self-determination as a basis for international political order. Based on this analysis, Keitner constructs a framework for evaluating nation-based claims in contemporary world politics and identifies persistent theoretical and practical tensions that must be taken into account in contemplating proposals for "civic nationalism" and alternative, nonnational models.

"The war in 1971 between India and Pakistan led to a huge refugee crisis. This book argues that the massive influx of ten million refugees into India within a few short months changed ideas about citizenship and belonging in South Asia.The book looks at how the Indian state, while generously keeping its borders open to the refugees, made it clear that these refugees were different from those generated by Partition, and would not be allowed to settle permanently. It discusses how the state was breaking its 'effective' link between refugees and citizenship, and how at the same time a second 'affective' border was developing between those living in the border areas, especially in Assam and West Bengal. The book argues that the present discourse regarding illegal infiltration from Bangladesh has a long historical trajectory in which the events of 1971 play a key role. It goes on to analyse the aftermath of the 1971 war and the massive repatriation project undertaken by the governments of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to examine ways in which questions about minorities and belonging remained unresolved post-1971.The book is an interesting contribution to the history of refugees, border-making and 1971 in South Asia, as well as to studies in politics and international relations"--Provided by publisher

What are the imagined communities that compel men to kill or to die for an idea of a nation? This notion of nationhood had its origins in the founding of the Americas, but was then adopted and transformed by populist movements in nineteenth-century Europe. It became the rallying cry for anti-Imperialism as well as the abiding explanation for colonialism. In this scintillating, groundbreaking work of intellectual history Anderson explores how ideas are formed and reformulated at every level, from high politics to popular culture, and the way that they can make people do extraordinary things. In the twenty-first century, these debates on the nature of the nation state are even more urgent. As new nations rise, vying for influence, and old empires decline, we must understand who we are as a community in the face of history, and change.

Offering a detailed analysis of post-colonial South Asia, The Politics of Dialogue discusses the creation and impact of borders and the pervasive tension between the new nations. Neither all-out war nor complete peace, this fragile condition makes political leaders and strategists feel claustrophobic - a war produces an end result but peace allows the rulers to carry out their policies for governing along their preferred path of development. The book shows how cartographic, communal and political lines are not only dividing countries, but that they are being replicated within countries, creating new visible and invisible internal frontiers. It argues that, in a situation where geopolitics constrains democracy, the political class becomes incapable of coping with the tension between the inside/outside, eg democracy appears as an internal problem and geopolitics appears as a problem related to the 'outside'.

This book provides a lively and readable introduction to current debates over U.S. power and purpose in world affairs. The end of the Cold War launched a new era in U.S. foreign policy. The United States entered a period of unprecedented global power, but one also characterized by new conflicts, challenges, and controversies. The terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the subsequent U.S. military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq cast a spotlight on continuing debates over how the United States should best use its considerable international power to secure safety for Americans and stability in the world. These debates involve two crucial questions: Should U.S. foreign policy focus on securing vital interests that are narrowly defined, or should the United States seek to spread U.S. institutions and values to other societies? Should the United States exercise maximum independence in the exercise of U.S. power abroad or work principally through multilateral institutions? This book brings together many different voices to answer these questions and to add to our understanding of the issues. Contributors include: Andrew J. Bacevich, Max Boot, Stephen G. Brooks, Ralph G. Carter, Robert F. Ellsworth, Niall Ferguson, Francis Fukuyama, Philip H. Gordon, Christopher Hitchens, James F. Hoge Jr., Michael Ignatieff, G. John Ikenberry, John B. Judis, Robert Kagan, Charles Krauthammer, Christopher Layne, Michael Mandelbaum, Joseph S. Nye, Jr., Minxin Pei, PEW Center for the People and the Press, Jeffrey Record, Paul W. Schroeder, Todd S. Sechser, Dimitri K. Simes, Stephen M. Walt, The White House, William C. Wohlforth