Post-Communist Nationalism

Brzeziński, Zbigniew

doi:10.2307/20044197

Cited by 60 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, a unitary system does not promote mobilization on a territorial basis; this affects the form of representation as well as the possibilities for identity formation and identity protection' (Roessingh 1995: 257). His second conclusion is that communist policies -compared with liberal-democratic ones -eased the transition to virulent nationalism (Roessingh 1995: 249; see also Brzezinski 1989). So, the combination of an ethnonational federation and a communist system provided the best chance for nationalism and for political instability in the long run.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

State formation and nation-building in the Netherlands and the Soviet Union: a historical comparison

Knippenberg

1996

GeoJournal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interrelated processes of state formation and nation-building are analysed for two cases: the Netherlands (1795-1960) and the Soviet Union . The central question is: how did these states deal with strong cultural (religious or ethnic) cleavages in its societies. In general, there are three options: elimination, marginalization, and institutionalization. In both states institutionalization was dominant, but the kind of institutionalization differed very much: 'personalistic' (the Netherlands) versus territorial (Soviet Union) institutionalization. The hypothesis has been put forward that, in general, institutionalization on a 'personalistic' basis will create more political stability.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

State formation and nation-building in the Netherlands and the Soviet Union: a historical comparison

Knippenberg

1996

GeoJournal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is probably more correct to say that the USSR was both the cradle and the cage of Soviet ethno-nations, although this was not always obvious. As Zbigniew Brzezinski notes, ‘Although communism declares itself to be an international doctrine, in fact it fostered nationalist sentiments among the people.’ 2 …”

Section: Problems Of Nationalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That automatically created an opportunity for long-suppressed national grievances to surface and for national aspirations to focus on the quest for effective control over the potentially significant local instruments of power. Hence, again quite unintentionally, Gorbachev's emphasis on greater legality – so necessary to a revival of the Soviet economy – gave the non-Russians a powerful weapon for contesting Moscow's control over their destiny 5 …”

Section: Mikhail Gorbachev's Reforms and Their Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of the National Problem in the Disintegration of the Soviet Union

Shinar

2013

European Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘The Soviet Union, like the United States, was a country established to serve and promote a political idea, not to be a state for nations. The United States was founded in order to be a modern democratic polity; the Soviet Union in order to promote Marxism-Leninism. The Soviet Union thus began as a ‘modern,’ post-imperialist state. The cement holding the state together was a compound of ideology, a hierarchical, disciplinary party, charismatic leadership, and external treats. [In the 80s] this cement was crumbling… [The Soviet] state had lost its raison d’être and the people turned to the traditional and conventional basis of the state – that is, the nation. But since this was a multinational state – and unlike the multiethnic United States, most peoples in the USSR have distinct languages and territories of their own – [they returned to them to establish independent states.]’1

show abstract

“…El concepto de internacionalización no se refiere tampoco al muy amplia y profundamente analizado impacto de la globalización en la estructura del estado nacional y su supervivencia política; no se refiere a la forma cómo la globalización hace de la soberanía territorial un imposible (Strange 1996). La internacionalización tampoco describe cómo la violencia se ha 'difundido' en el sistema internacional; no estudia las dificultades que implica el intentar contener una confrontación en el tiempo y en el espacio ni tampoco cómo una guerra local puede constituirse en una fuente de estabilidad internacional después de la Guerra Fría (Brzezinski 1989/90;Jervis 1991/92;Mearsheimer 1990;Snyder 1990). La internacionalización no es un sinónimo de los efectos de contagio o spill over.…”

Section: ¿Qué Es La Internacionalización?unclassified

La internacionalización del conflicto armado después del 11 de septiembre: ¿la ejecución de una estrategia diplomática hábil o la simple ocurrencia de lo inevitable?

Guzmán

2007

Colomb. Int.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current U.S. war against international terrorism constitutes a superb scenario for the internationalization of the Colombian armed conflict, a strategy that the administration of President Uribe is advancing.The internationalization policy is an explicit and conscious decision to invite external actors-mainly the U.S.-to participate in the Colombian war.This decision is clearly conditioned by the international arena. Both rationalist and constructivist approaches in International Relations provide key elements to explain why the Colombian government decides to internationalize its conflict, and to identify what are the main components of this foreign policy strategy.

show abstract

Post-Communist Nationalism

Cited by 60 publications

References 0 publications

State formation and nation-building in the Netherlands and the Soviet Union: a historical comparison

State formation and nation-building in the Netherlands and the Soviet Union: a historical comparison

The Role of the National Problem in the Disintegration of the Soviet Union

La internacionalización del conflicto armado después del 11 de septiembre: ¿la ejecución de una estrategia diplomática hábil o la simple ocurrencia de lo inevitable?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About