Historical legacies, nationalist mobilization, and political outcomes in Russia and Serbia: A Weberian view

Nationalism, liberalism and liberal nationalism in post‐war Croatia*

“…The transformations of economies and political systems in the past decade in Eastern Europe, Latin America and elsewhere have given rise to new schemes and rekindled old themes about nationalism and self‐determination (Gyani and Radzai 1993; O’Leary 1997; Schnapper 1998; Vujačić 1996). According to Ignatieff (1993: 8), ethnic nationalism is ‘gaining ground’ in some countries and flourishing in others, often based on ethnic nationalism's agenda of ‘overturning some legacy of cultural subordination’ ( ibid.…”

Replenishing Comparative Historical Analysis

“…Here, again, different cultural understandings of how labor was understood and interpreted in national contexts help us explain the different practices and developments in each country. We can also cite the work of scholars such as Veljko Vujacic (1996), whose comparison of Serbian and Russian national 54 HISTORY: Reviews of New Books identity and politics embraced Weberian notions of national self-understanding or that of Stephen E. Hanson and Jeffrey S. Kopstein (1997), whose Weimar/Russia comparison explicitly incorporates institutional and cultural legacies, with both paying attention to important shared experiences, their memory, and their national interpretation to explain important political outcomes. Paying attention to comparative interpretive research has the additional benefit of responding to the criticisms of atemporality.…”

“…Paying attention to comparative interpretive research has the additional benefit of responding to the criticisms of atemporality. Among those who have pursued a more Weberian interpretive road to comparative work, scholars have paid much closer attention to the integrity and the historical unfolding of each case (Geertz 1971;Bendix 1980;Brubaker 1992;Vujacic 1996;Barkey 2000). It seems, therefore, too restrictive to group all those who have paid attention to cultural interpretive stances with the radicals who cannot "generate valid knowledge" and seem to have an "antiscience identity" (24).…”

Book Reviews

“…Here, again, different cultural understandings of how labor was understood and interpreted in national contexts help us explain the dif-T ferent practices and developments in each country. We can also cite the work of scholars such as Veljko Vujacic (1996), whose comparison of Serbian and Russian national identity and politics embraced Weberian notions of national selfunderstanding or that of Stephen E. Hanson and Jeffrey S. Kopstein (1997), whose Weimar/Russia comparison explicitly incorporates institutional and cultural legacies, with both paying attention to important shared experiences, their memory, and their national interpretation to explain important political outcomes.…”

“…Among those who have pursued a more Weberian interpretive road to comparative work, scholars have paid much closer attention to the integrity and the historical unfolding of each case (Geertz 1971;Bendix 1980;Brubaker 1992;Vujacic 1996;Barkey 2000). It seems, therefore, too restrictive to group all those who have paid attention to cultural interpretive stances with the radicals who cannot "generate valid knowledge" and seem to have an "antiscience identity" (24).…”