What is it about?

In his highly influential work on the “small,” stateless European nations, the eminent Professor Miroslav Hroch seems to assume that patriotic movements have a homogeneous view about the core relations or “ties” that constitute and identify their nations. This assumption seems generally correct for the cases Hroch studies. However, is it correct if applied to the study of those patriotic movements developing in comparatively larger, heterogeneous and underdeveloped societies, comprising several ethnic groups bound together by the colonialist rule of an autocratic empire? I argue that, while the colonial experience can lead to the creation of some ties among the dominated populations, it also affects the way patriotic movements perceive their own nations. As a result, the phase of patriotic agitation can involve diverse movements addressing the same nation, but each having a particular view on the features and history of it. Such contested patriotic doctrines can lead to very important variations in the political agendas and goals of those movements, especially when they reach the mass phase. The nineteenth century movements in New Spain / Mexico are used as examples.

Featured Image

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Transplant or graft? Hroch and the Mexican patriotic movements, Nationalities Papers, November 2010, Cambridge University Press,
DOI: 10.1080/00905992.2010.517517.
You can read the full text:

Read

Resources

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page