对中国民族国家的认识

民族国家是现代国家的基本形态,具有领土、主权独立、垄断合法使用暴力、民族主义政治文化和统一的国内市场这五个特点。中国民族国家作为一个多民族国家,它的演变和发展有其自身的特点。本文从三个方面介绍了强化中国民族国家认同建设的途径和方法。     

民族主义与民族国家构建析论

民族主义是现代性的政治共同体意识与行动,民族主义塑造出了民族。民族主义强调他者意识,强调民族的政治权利,也强调民族内部的平等。民族主义推动了民族国家的创建。民族国家被证明优于之前的政权组织模式,因此民族主义又成为现代国家合法性的来源。民族国家创建之后,民族主义依然存在,还会以爱国主义、分离主义等形式表现出来。对那些只具备了民族国家外表而没有实现对民族国家的认同超越其他认同的国家而言,缔造或者深化民族主义在其未来的发展中显得尤为重要。     

现代化进程中的民族问题

现代化进程中的民族问题的核心是如何解决民族分裂问题。民族主义有助于现代主权国家的建立,同样也提供了继续分裂现有多民族国家的思想基础。一个现代主权国家的建立和巩固取决于内部和外部的诸种因素;也取决于这一区域内的主导政治力量能否在历史给定的条件下,迅速完成现代国家的构建任务,并在一个新的国家平台上解决自身的民族问题。现代主权国家是"民族的国家"而非简单的"民族国家",主权国家才是现代国家的实质性内核。由于各个民族国家的构建时间、国际环境、历史传承和综合国力的差异,强势国家往往具有左右其他国家民族问题走向的能力。因此,现代化进程中的民族问题本质上是一个发展主导权问题。     

从西班牙历史看"民族国家"的形成与界定

"民族国家"是一种国家形式,同时也是近代以来形成的一种政治属性的民族,可称为"近代民族"。它与其他那些传统意义上的自然属性的民族有明显区别,主要特征在于:其规模相当于一个主权国家,而不像自然属性的民族那样不是大于一个国家就是小于一个国家;其主权属于人民,而不能属于任何个人或其家族。它诞生的标志不是"国家统一"而是资产阶级革命或改革。19世纪以前,国家统一之后所产生的往往是中央集权的专制王朝国家,而不是民族国家,它们的性质是完全不同的。西班牙国家统一后,立即通过海外征服和王室联姻等途径迅速膨胀成为一个超级庞大的殖民帝国,西班牙人成为它的"主体民族",但国家主权却属于来自外族的君主。它那时不是民族国家,而是封建王朝国家。直到19世纪初,随着反抗拿破仑占领的独立战争,西班牙的近代民族意识才被唤醒,才成为一个民族国家。     

民族问题个案剖析的力作——《民族主义、国家结构与国际化——南斯拉夫民族问题研究》评介

民族问题是一个重大的社会问题,它关系到多民族国家的政治安定、经济发展乃至领土完整、主权独立。冷战结束后,世界民族问题不仅没有消亡,反而成为诱发国际和地区关系紧张的一个重要因素,而由来已久、盘根错节的南斯拉夫民族危机无疑又是整个世界民族问题中的典型个案。虽然波黑战争与科索沃战争的硝烟已过,但人们仍不禁反思,民族主义为何成为威胁与破坏南斯拉夫多民族统一的顽症?     

印度民族政策初探

印度民族政策的核心是“一个国家,一个民族”。本文认为,这是对欧洲“民族一国家”理论的歧解和误读,其防止国家分裂和增强国家凝聚力的用心可以理解,但结果却并不利于国民团结的增强和各种矛盾的缓和。这一政策的实质是民族压迫和民族同化。     

孙中山为谋求国家统一奋斗终生

争取和保持国家统一,反对帝国主义瓜分中国,反对军阀割据,建立统一、共和制度的多民族国家,是孙中山的三民主义中民族主义的重要组成部分,并且随着他的思想与革命活动的发展而不断充实和丰富其内容。为实现和谋求国家的统一,孙中山奋斗了一生。     

民族主义的话语形式与民族认同的重构

民族主义运动中阶级、种族、性别等范畴的经验揭示：民族主义有可能成为一种隐含不平等权力关系的话语形式。本文认为其根源在于民族国家的同质性假设,因此要想实现个体在根本意义上的自由与解放,满足民族主义的文化诉求,就必须在新的基础上重构民族认同。本文认为在这方面可以借鉴后殖民批评理论在重新构建独立的民族认同这个问题上提出的有关思路和策略。但同时也必须注意后殖民批评理论本身的不完善性,而本土化语境会放大其理论缺陷,不仅使后殖民理论的本义遭到歪曲,且民族认同的内涵也会发生嬗变。     

传统民族主义与近代民族主义的历史界标

关于中国的“近代民族主义”可以有不同层面的认识,据此,郑师渠先生认为,民族主义是以共同文化为背景,要求在政治与文化合一的基础上实现民族认同与发展的一种心理状态与行为取向。其信仰的核心是本民族的优越性及缘此而生的忠诚与挚爱。但近代以来的民族主义,首先是一种政治学     

我国统一多民族国家的形成和发展

我国统一多民族国家的形成和发展是我国历史上的重要问题,但长期以来却由于一些理论上的问题没有正确认识而未能很好展开研究。我国各族加入我国统一多民族国家不是自古如此,而是有一个过程、时间,有早有晚,方式也各不相同,而以各族和我国中央皇朝建立政治上的臣属依附关系作为加入之始。多民族国家在民族结构。社会结构上必然是多元一体。多民族国家按其本身发展规律而产生阶段性．形成中国这一多民族国家历史的分期。     

‘The True Love of the People and the Motherland’: The concept of socialist patriotism,socialist nation and anti-nationalism in Hungary in the 1960s and 1970s

In the late 1950s, the concept of socialist patriotism in Hungary was reformulated as a basic political concept in the ideology and propaganda of state socialism. The definite appropriation of Leninist contraposition of socialist patriotism and bourgeois nationalism became paramount in the second half of the 1950s because of the nationalist sentiments of the 1956 revolution. I trace the history of the concept of socialist patriotism in the 1960s and 1970s in socialist Hungary. During this period, socialist patriotism served as a slightly undetermined, yet didactic counter-concept to set against ‘bourgeois nationalism’ which was characterised as a xenophobic sense of nation. From the late 1960s, the doctrine of socialist patriotism confronted a new ideological enemy: supra-nationalism or cosmopolitanism. In the mid-1970s, a new ideological equilibrium was elaborated in Hungary between socialist patriotism and proletarian internationalism, which served the economic and political integration of the Eastern bloc countries. In this sense, socialist patriotism was meant to express a link with socialist political order, its achievements and its institutions, in contrast to the ethnic character and revanchist tendencies of nationalism.     

Theorising economic nationalism*

Abstract. Economic nationalism has been regarded as a set of attitudes rather than a coherent theory. However, by using Durkheim's analytical framework and bringing the concept of the nation into political economy, the author argues that economic nationalism can be provided with a systematic theory. This theory for economic nationalism helps us to grasp the reciprocal relationship between the political and economic power of the nation‐state. Economic modernisation, especially industrialisation, needs the powerful state, and the state derives its power from the nation. Economic development can amplify the social imaginary of the nation by expanding mobilisation and communication. Protectionism, industrial policy and Keynesian policy can strengthen not only the economy but also nationalism. The proposed theory for economic nationalism thus paves the way for understanding the role of nationalism in political economy.     

Ethnocentricity of the Nationalist Discourse

Abstract. Nationalism is a theory about the nature, purposes, boundaries and the basis of the legitimacy and the unity of the state. It maintains that the state should ideally be constituted as a nation. This means that a nation has a right to form a state of its own, as also that every state should endeavour to become a nation. The nationalist discourse rests on several assumptions, such as that nationalism is a universal phenomenon, that nationalist movements have identical structures, that all nations aim to become independent states, that non-Western nationalism is derivative in nature and that nationalism is an unmitigated evil. The author elucidates the distinctive nature of nationalism and criticises these and related assumptions.     

“家族国家观”的悖论

日本儒教中的家族孝主义是家族国家观的重要基础。但是作为幕藩体制下封建武士之间的道德,它无法直接为明治近代化的目标服务甚至形成阻碍。因此家族国家观虽然植根于传统的儒教家族主义,但又是对其不适应时代课题的部分进行修正后,重新建构起来的一种意识形态。因此带有两面性,不是简单的“复古”,也不是儒教家族主义道德的简单复活。虽然家族国家观在统合民众方面发挥了巨大作用,但由于其原理与近代国家原理之间存在抵触,致使家族国家观自身蕴含着重大的悖论。     

Explaining,and explaining with,economic nationalism

This article rejects the widely held view that economic nationalism is an anachronistic economic doctrine in the age of globalisation. Rather than being the opposite of economic liberalism, as the conventional view maintains, economic nationalism is better understood as a generic phenomenon that can accommodate almost any doctrinal content, including economic liberalism. Economic nationalism is not so much about the economy as it is about the nation, as illustrated by literature on economic nations and national economic cultures. Such a broader conception of economic nationalism is then placed in the context of a larger ‘nationalising mechanism’ that sheds new light on a variety of phenomena discussed in the globalisation debate, such as economic performance, state disintegration, or cultural conflict, and success or failure in post-communist systemic change.     

Imperial versus National Discourse: The Case of Russia

Abstract. It is inaccurate and misleading to apply the term ‘nationalism’ to Russia prior to the present day. Both Tsarist and Soviet leaders sought to maintain an empire and not a nation‐state, and their national consciousness was imperial rather than national. The lack of Russian nationalism was crucial for Russian history since it explains the failure of both Tsarist Russia and the Soviet Union. Modern societies cannot be successfully constructed upon the basis of imperial thinking. The absence of Russian nationalism also has significance for nationalism theory. Russia possessed the social, political and cultural characteristics that have been adduced as ‘causes’ of nationalism by a wide variety of scholars, yet Russia failed to develop a nationalist movement. This suggests that what is crucial to modem nationalism is the appearance of a particularist, secular ideology, since the most notable aspect in which Russia differed from Europe was Russia's universalistic, religious and imperialist discourse of national identity.     

The end of ethnic nationalism? Changing conceptions of national identity and belonging among young South Koreans

Historically in South Korea, ideas of nation and nationalism have been based upon the ethnic and cultural homogeneity of all Korean people. More recently, there has been an evolution in South Korean nationalism that is based on strikingly different notions particularly among young people. This paper argues that a new South Korean nationalism is emerging and that it has, what I term, globalised cultural characteristics. These characteristics challenge the role of ethnicity in young people's conception of the South Korean nation and its component members. This paper details the evolution of South Korea's nationalism and explains its implications for Korean politics and society as well as its comparative significance for other national contexts. It also highlights some elements of this evolving nationalism that demonstrate less cosmopolitan characteristics, such as patriarchy and social class, in determining who can be ‘imagined’ as a member of this changing South Korean nation.     

战前日本的极端民族主义——以“国体明征运动”为中心的考察

“国体”是战前日本的民族主义的重要保证和推动力量,因此亦可称之为“国体民族主义”。与“国体”的结合,体现了日本民族主义的独特性。本文即以日本极端民族主义的典型体现——1935年的“国体明征运动”为例,指出“国体”意识形态作为共同体的一种防御机制,其作用不在于是什么,而是在于它的绝对价值特征可以用来确保民族认同、统合民众。于是每当体制有动摇之虞时就出现国体论的高潮,在这个意义上,“国体”与民族主义的结合是结构性的。     

The national question: sociological reflections on nation and nationalism

The sociology of nation, national identity and nationalism has long been the subject of benign neglect. After examining the few positive contributions made by classical writers, we attempt to explain why the contribution of classical theory to the field is unreliable. In common with others we find that, for all that classical theory might treat the prominence of nation, national identity and nationalism as a passing phase, it in fact takes the existence of all three as givens to such an extent that they and their effects become invisible. But the sociology of nation and nationalism reached a turning point with the publication of Elie Kedourie's influential work in 1960. We explain the effect of this work on later writers, especially Ernest Gellner and Anthony Smith, and survey the work of these and other contributors to the field with an eye to their differences and similarities. We identify various stages in the development of the sociology of nation and nationalism, culminating in the most recent stage in which the significance of the subjective aspects of nationalism has received increased attention. We think there is room for a multiplicity of approaches to the subject and stress its central significance to sociology. We explain why nation, national identity and nationalism are certainly not in decline and suggest where the most fruitful lines of inquiry lie for future research.     

Bringing the study of warfare into theories of nationalism

This article argues that warfare has been marginalised in theories of nationalism but that in conjunction with nationalism is vital for understanding the rise of nation‐states, the formation of nations and the nature of the international system. It offers a critique of statist approaches, suggests mechanisms through which warfare may sacralise nations and explores different patterns of nation‐state formation as they affect the interstate system. In particular, it emphasises tensions between state and nation‐formation as activated by the fortunes of war and the destabilising effects of waves of imperial dissolution, which are accompanied by patterns of re‐imperialization. It suggests that it is simplistic both to claim that war has led to a transition from empires to nation‐states and that contemporary practices of war‐making have led to a postnational era.