代写论文:民族主义和现代性的关系是什么
代写论文:民族主义和现代性的关系是什么
因此,正是因为这个原因,他定义了现代主义的学者认为国家表达现代而不仅仅是民族主义(哈钦森和史密斯1994)。史密斯认为,多数学者忽视国家的民族和前现代的根源,否认不可否认的,这是民族的决心来自现代的遗迹。不过,他也承认这一事实的民族主义作为一个概念在现代爆炸(尽管多数国家先于相同)虽然已成功演示了由史密斯,有一定程度的连续性从许多前现代社区当代self-defines国家和民族国家意识。
欧内斯特·盖勒提出的理论是最直接的关联理论在民族主义和现代性:“众所周知,工业化和现代化进行以不均匀的方式……[和]…民族主义是一种现象与其说与工业化和现代化,但其不均匀扩散”。根据他的说法,国家视为一个悖论可以定义在时代的民族主义,而不是上帝或自然的方式分类的男人(假面1997)。这是因为民族主义往往会造成国家和相反的同样是不正确的。尽管它是选择性地利用已有的文化财富(Breuilly 2001)。然而,也有一些学者不接受的论文假面;他们认为,民族主义并不是工业化的主要原因,因为它来得太迟。两个主要的原因是现代国家的专业管理人员和军队和商业资本主义的普遍的社会阶层。
代写论文:民族主义和现代性的关系是什么
Hence, it is because of this reason that he defines modernists as the scholars who regard nations as expressions of the modern age and not just nationalism (Hutchinson and Smith 1994). Most scholars, according to smith overlook the ethnic and pre-modern roots of nations, denying the undeniable, which is the determination of the ethnic communities from the relic of the modern times. However, he also acknowledges the fact that nationalism as a concept exploded in the modern age (even though majority of nations predated the same) although it has been demonstrated successfully by Smith that there is a degree of continuity from many pre-modern communities to contemporary self-defines nations and ethnicity to nationhood.
The theory proposed by Ernest Geller is the most direct theory of the association amongst nationalism and modernity: “industrialization and modernization notoriously proceed in an uneven manner… [and]…nationalism is a phenomenon connected not so much with industrialization or modernization as such, but its uneven diffusion”. According to him, nations are considered as a paradox which could be defined in terms of the age of nationalism and is not the God-given or natural manner of classifying men (Gellner 1997). This is because of the fact that nationalism tends to engender nations and the same is not true for the contrary. Even though it is in a selective manner that it utilizes the pre-existing cultural wealth (Breuilly 2001). However, there are some scholars who do not accept the thesis presented by Gellner; they are of the view that the principal cause of nationalism was not industrialization as it arrived too late. The two major reasons were the modern state with its professional administrators and armed forces and the commercial capitalism with its universal social classes.
The theory proposed by Ernest Geller is the most direct theory of the association amongst nationalism and modernity: “industrialization and modernization notoriously proceed in an uneven manner… [and]…nationalism is a phenomenon connected not so much with industrialization or modernization as such, but its uneven diffusion”. According to him, nations are considered as a paradox which could be defined in terms of the age of nationalism and is not the God-given or natural manner of classifying men (Gellner 1997). This is because of the fact that nationalism tends to engender nations and the same is not true for the contrary. Even though it is in a selective manner that it utilizes the pre-existing cultural wealth (Breuilly 2001). However, there are some scholars who do not accept the thesis presented by Gellner; they are of the view that the principal cause of nationalism was not industrialization as it arrived too late. The two major reasons were the modern state with its professional administrators and armed forces and the commercial capitalism with its universal social classes.
