Great historical failure: marxist theories of nationalism

Nimni, Ephraim

doi:10.1177/030981688502500103

Cited by 14 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Marxist states used ruthless approaches to establish communist society including censorship on social, religious and economic freedom of man which led to the failure of Marxism in USSR. Nimni, (1985) attributes historical failure to Marxism in understanding the phenomena of nationalism and imperialism.…”

Section: Critical Analysis Of Marxismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Philosophical Foundations of Economics – A Comparative Study of Islamic Economics, Capitalism and Marxism

Ullah

2023

Int. J. Is. Ec. Fi. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The philosophy of economics is concerned with the nature of reality, sources of knowledge, and the way knowledge is created. Based on their respective philosophical frameworks; capitalism seeks solution to economic problems through its laissez-faire model, Marxism attempts to resolve the problem through a planned economy model, and Islam on the other hand keeps the balance between the two approaches. The study is based on a comparative qualitative analysis of the philosophical frameworks, making reference to practical world problems. The paper maintains both Capitalism and Marxism have contributed to poverty, economic inequality, unemployment, and financial crises of the world at large. The study provides a model of the righteous economic system based on Islamic teachings for the sound functioning of the economy which can be adopted by the countries intending to switch from the conventional systems to the Islamic economic model.

show abstract

Section: Critical Analysis Of Marxismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Philosophical Foundations of Economics – A Comparative Study of Islamic Economics, Capitalism and Marxism

Ullah

2023

Int. J. Is. Ec. Fi. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For Marx and Engels, the modern nation was ‘to be located in a precise historical period of the ascendance of the bourgeoisie as a hegemonic class, which at the same time [was] the period of consolidation of the capitalist mode of production’ (Nimni, 1985, p. 62). Among the existing national communities , those possessing the capacity of acting as agents of capitalist transformation were historical nations that could exercise the right of self-determination and claim state independence; others, lacking this capacity were the non-historical nations , socially regressive feudal enclaves, in Engel’s words, ‘ethnographic monuments’ that had to ‘culturally and politically perish to pave the way for the unifying leadership of the bourgeoisie’ (Nimni, 1985, p. 66). The nation, in this formulation is homogenising.…”

Section: Conceptual Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Differentiation, Integration and Exclusion: Dynamics and Challenges to Nation-Building

Mukherji

2022

Sociological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethnicity, nation, nationalism and the nation-state have been politically volatile concepts marked by ambiguities and predominantly Eurocentric bias. These have impacted the formation of states and the dynamics within them. Is the nation-state the exclusive domain of ethno-nations forming a territorial state by exercising the right of self-determination? The emancipation of post-colonial states added a new dimension to the on-going discourse; among these, the contribution of the Indian subcontinent is prominent. Their leaders who were in the forefront of the freedom struggle were not only familiar with this discourse, but actually played out their politics on the basis of either subscribing to, or, in outright rejection of, the Eurocentric model. The latter, argued for, and established, a civic-secular nation-state that admitted ethnic plurality and class realities of equality, within an overarching civilisational bonding. This article examines how this dynamic played itself out in the laboratory of South Asia, particularly, with reference to the formations of India and Pakistan. Their top leaders Mahatma Gandhi and Quad-e-Azam Jinnah held opposing views on the concept of the nation and nation-state. I have argued that the Indian nation-state has steadily evolved through a continuous zig-zag process of differentiation and integration. In recent times, a new contradiction has surfaced out of believers in ethno-nation, introducing a volatile churning in the political process.

show abstract

“…35 Marx and Engels (1820-1895) thought that a "modern nation could exist only in the context of a capitalist economy, and originated in the process of transition from feudalism to capitalism." 36 They call this modern nation "an historical phenomenon that has to be located in a precise historical period," 37 and value nationalist movements according to how far they profit society.…”

Section: Marxism and The Black Holementioning

confidence: 99%

Nationalism: A Chronological Reading

KOÇAK

2022

Temaşa Erciyes Üniversitesi Felsefe Bölümü Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As it is not possible to name any particular founders or pioneers in nationalism studies, instead of primordialist and modern interpretations, this paper reads nationalism in chronological order by dividing them into four sections. The first section focuses on how nationalism started to be defined as a concept by referring to Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and Sturm und Drang movement, Immanuel Kant’s definition of freedom, the importance given to language by Johann Gottfried Herder and Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s social contract, whereas the second one deals with the awakening of nationalism with reference to the French Revolution, John Stuart Mill’s seeing nation as a portion of mankind, Ernst Renan’s definition of the nation as a spiritual thing, and Marxism’s undefinition of the term. The third section discusses the acceleration of nationalism studies by mentioning Carlton J. H. Hayes’ classification of modern nationalism, Hans Kohn’s classification of nationalism into western and non-western and Edward Hallett Carr’s division of the history of international relations into three periods, and the last section analyses the period when nationalism studies is at its peak by giving references to the definitions of nationalism by Ernest Gellner as political principle, Elie Kedourie as an invented doctrine, Anthony David Smith as an ideological movement, Eric Hobsbawm as invented tradition, Benedict Anderson as imagined communities and Michael Billig as banal.

show abstract

Great historical failure: marxist theories of nationalism

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Philosophical Foundations of Economics – A Comparative Study of Islamic Economics, Capitalism and Marxism

Philosophical Foundations of Economics – A Comparative Study of Islamic Economics, Capitalism and Marxism

Differentiation, Integration and Exclusion: Dynamics and Challenges to Nation-Building

Nationalism: A Chronological Reading

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About