РефератыИностранный языкBLBLOOD AND BELONGING Essay Research Paper This

BLOOD AND BELONGING Essay Research Paper This

BLOOD AND BELONGING Essay, Research Paper


This is a critique of the book, Blood and Belonging, by Michael


Ignatieff. This paper will explain the subject of the book and its


relevance, discuss Michael Ignatieff’s methods and conclusions on the


subject and finally include a personal critique of the book by the


author of this paper.


The author of the book travels on what he terms "the six


journeys." On these "journeys" he encounters different cultures, as he


travels to six different coinciding areas of the world. He examines


the unique expression of nationalism that each populace displays by


interviewing various members of that particular society. The six areas


that he travels to are specifically chosen for the clarity which


nationalism is expressed in society. Nationalism is a factor


contributing toward both present possible future instability in these


areas.


These areas are former Yugoslavia (specifically Croatia and


Serbia), Germany, Ukraine, Quebec, Kurdistan and Northern Ireland.


According to Ignatieff, in Croatia and Serbia there is a desire for a


separate identity between the two nations. The fear of losing one’s


national identity has caused ethnic hatred. A terror so strong and


historically persistent, it has driven people to a desperate state to


do anything. This is a large contributor to the reasons for the extreme


violence present there today. The author states, "A Croat, thus, is


someone who is not a Serb. A Serb is someone who is not a Croat."


This quotation profoundly expresses the short-sighted mentality present


in their conflict.


In his travels in Germany, the author points out an important


question. Does the nation make the state, or the state the nation?


This question by far does not stop here, especially when Germany is the


subject. The essence of the German people is seen by some as aggressive


and offensive, thus the existence of the German problem. If the nation


makes the state then Germany will always be a threat. If the state


makes the nation, then the aggressive nature of the German nation, which


lead the world into two global wars, can be harnessed and redirected.


The question has its roots and answers in the recent reunification of


Germany.


The Ukraine is concerned with not being Russian. It is here


Ignatieff receives a complete vision of what nationalism is. He states,


"I understand what nationalism really is: the dream that a whole nation


could be like a congregation; singing the same hymns, listening to the


same gospel, sharing the same emotions, linked not only to each other


but to the dead buried beneath their feet."


Quebec is a model that presents a possible future of the state


system. Ignatieff uses the example of Quebec to illustrate the


relationship between nationalism and federalism. He implies that "if


federalism fails in Canada it can fail anywhere." If the balance


between "ethnic and civil principles" is not maintained in Canada, who


is not an impoverished country and has a large, successful economy; then


perhaps the modern world has not transcended the grasps of nationalism.


The Kurds represent a nation without a state, who find


themselves surrounded by other nations who are more aggressive


nationalists. The term Kurdistan is a definition of the areas used by


Ignatieff to explain the area of major Kurdish populace concentration.


There is no real borders, no flag, no government and Kurds must


acknowledge the state in which they reside (i.e., – Syria, Turkey, Iran


and Iraq), of which, is not Kurdistan.


Finally, the sixth journey ends in Northern Ireland. He makes


the observation that this is the ideal place to conclude his project.


Northern Ireland contains a recurrence of the themes that seemed so


prevalent in the other journeys. In Ireland ethnicity, religion and


politics are all bound into one expression or identity. These are also


evident in the five previous studies.


Is Michael Ignatieff’s work relevant? The answer to this


question is, yes it is. The issue is important. Nationalism presents


itself as a phenomenon. The questions of why people need to retain a


cultural identity and the way they go about preserving it is still


unanswerable. Evermore unfathomable is the violence permeated through


nationalistic expressions, which are "necessary" by the parties


involved. The very existence of the enigma created by nationalism


dictates the need to explore the subject in more depth.


The situations in the book are not isolated events. Nationalism


exists in every state all over the world. There is a dichotomy


presented by Ignatieff between nationalism and federalism. He explains


the political doctrine of nationalism by stating "(1)that the world’s


peoples are divided into nations, (2) that these nations should have the


right of self-determination, and (3) that the full self-determination


requires statehood." Federalism, though not a particular ideology, is a


means of sharing political power among different peoples within a state.


The various systems of government which fall under the definition of


federalism are not problematic to the people; unless, of course, they


are not completely legitimate. If the government is illegitimate, then


ideally nationalism steps in to demand a completely self-determined


government, which renders proper representation to its populace.


Despite the diversity of a state’s population, theoretically, harmony is


maintained since the people are properly represented or controlled.


This situation with variation is experienced throughout the world.


States are dynamic, also their g

overnment and populace. If the dynamics


of the government or the state do not keep up with the pace of change in


the populace, then instability will rise in the name of nationalism and


shake the very foundation of the state if left unchecked or not


placated.


The method used by the author of the book was personal


interviews with both prominent people and the normal everyday person in


the areas visited. He also uses descriptions on the surrounding areas


to accent the point of discussion. His intent was to objectively take


the reader on a stroll through the areas he visited. Through his style


of writing, he allows the reader to sit in on his interview by


highlighting specific questions and the responses that take place in his


conversations. Finally, he creates visual images that he had viewed as


ironic and analogical in support of his observations.


Ignatieff comes to the conclusion that nationalism is not the


problem of this world. Continuing, he goes on to say that when one


loses their individuality to become a "patriot," that is where the


danger lies. Being yourself is something that ethnic nationalism does


not allow. Political ideologies can become blinding to its possessors.


At the beginning of the book mentions that he is a liberal. The


traveling and experiences did not change that at all. He notes the


importance of "liberal virtues – tolerance, compromise, reason," but


concludes in an observation about how these virtues are opposing human


nature.


Ignatieff addresses the violence factor that surrounds


nationalism like a plague, concluding that, nationalist rhetoric is an


excuse to commit acts of violence. He observed that most of the


violence is performed by young men between the ages of 18 to 25. His


explanation is that the liberal mind set forgets that not everyone hates


violence. He also says that there exists in males a basic loathing of


peace. Human nature is the reason for the violence or Ignatieff thinks


that it is specifically male human nature.


I personally enjoyed the book and found it to be interesting


reading. It had the aspect of a novel without losing its academic


nature. Michael Ignatieff’s writing style was creative and supported


his observations well. He portrayed the destruction that he found in


his journeys in a way that allowed the reader to experience the same


despair and hopelessness of seeing it first hand.


Another interesting perspective that the author added to the


book was his own identity. He traveled to places that he had either


lived at or where his family originally came from. His family roots


add a personal touch that would otherwise have been left out.


Religion and its role in society are important concerning


nationalism. It is in this author’s opinion that religions not be


viewed as a secondary facet to nationalism. The Islamic uprisings in


France and the peace talks in southwest Asia between Israel and Syria


are two different perspectives to the argument. Claude Barreau, advisor


to the minister of interior in France says, "Foreigners arriving in


France . . . now have a new fatherland. Islam has a place in France,


provided it is willing to stay discreet as the other religions. But


Islamist are coming as colonisers." This illustrates an underlying


principal that splits Europe down the middle. France is a


representation of Europe according to the late Charles De Gaulle.


France has adopted internal policies to control the growth of Islam by


limiting both social expressions of that faith and by specific


immigration procedures. Are not the three million plus population of


Moslems in France entitled to nationalistic expression of their identity


as French Muslims? Where does that leave the Bosnian Muslims, the


Turks or any other non Christian state located near or inside Europe?


The second point deals with Israel and Syria. The two countries


have been at odds with each other since 1947 when Israel was recognized


as a state. The main reason for the clash is the difference of


religion, not national identity. However, both countries have evolved


since their beginnings and have strong nationalistic tendencies. Both


countries are now leaning toward compromise rather than a holy war. As


the talks continue for the return of the Golan Heights to Lebanon the


Moslem Jew factor still remains tense. Of the recent peace talks is the


strip of land called the Golan Heights in north of Israel. Avoiding an


attempt to explain an extremely complex situation or to oversimplify the


matter, it is a fact that many heads of state in the region are choosing


political solutions to old religious problems. However, the foundations


of their society are religions, to be specific Islam and Judism. This


religious factor will never cease and always cause instability in the


region because of fundmentalism present on both sides.


In conclusion, the subject of the book, Blood and Belonging,


has been discussed. The relevance of the book’s theme was examined


along with the authors methods and style of writing. This critique also


addressed the conclusions drawn by Michael Ignatieff concerning


nationalism and its expressions in the world. Perhaps the world will


allways have to deal with the dichotomy dicussed in this paper, however


one can only hope that a long lasting solution will be found.


BIBLIOGRAPHY


1. Ignatieff, Michael Blood and Belonging: Journeys into the New


Nationalism. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1993.


2. "It Depends on Rabin." The Economist, 24th-30th September, 1994, pp.


42-43.


3. "Secularity Defied." The Economist, 8th-14th October, 1994, p.53.

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: BLOOD AND BELONGING Essay Research Paper This

Слов:1972
Символов:13644
Размер:26.65 Кб.