We have read three texts for class this week: Ernest Gellner's Nations and Nationalism, Paul Gilroy's “Nationalism, History, and Ethnic Absolutism,” and Ronald Grigor Suny's "Constructing Primordialism: Old Histories for New Nations." In the past I have discussed multiple texts from longest to shortest, but for this paper I will be discussing them in the aforementioned order for historiographical purposes. I appreciate the fact that this week's scholarship spans almost twenty years; I believe that allows for us to study how the study of nationalism has changed (or has not changed) over time.
Gellner's Nations and Nationalism, originally published in 1983, brought about a new discussion about nationalism in which he challenges traditional …show more content…
He explores the racial negative connotations of Atlantic nationalism. This challenges the very notions of nationalism, because nationalism is rooted in national pride, and how can one be proud when there are such negative things associated with the nation's beginning? Gilroy argues that while many choose to ignore the negative racial connotations that it does not make the negative aspects of nationalism go away, ergo, we should not ignore them. This is a strong argument by Gilroy, but unfortunately the article's short length do not allow for him to fully explore how one can, or if they even should, address the negative side of Atlantic (particularly, American) nationalism without completely invalidating nationalism. I believe that a longer article with a more pronounced argument would have allowed for Gilroy to not have seemed like he was trying to invalidate nationalism. He makes one remark where he appreciates the need for the nation for clarifying and organizational purposes, but it is nothing more than a superficial statement.
Suny's text, written in 2001, explores the connections between nationalism and identity. He poses the question "why bother about identity?," but I do not feel that this is necessary. I feel that it is quite obvious, especially by 2001, that any discussion of nationalism deals with identity, because in order to