ern" nationalism of any "tribal" impurities is shown by H.
Arendt in The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York, 1951).
He was chided for this by H. Gerth in his review of The Idea of Nationalism in the American Journal of
Sociology, LI, 341.
Cf. Hayes, The Historical Evolution of Modern
Cf. J. D. Clarkson, " 'Big Jim' Larkin: A Footnote to
Nationalism," Nationalism and Internationalism, ed. by E. M.
Earle (New York, 1950), pp. 45-63.
R. Heberle, Social Movements (New York, 1951),
Although the existence or non-existence of some
"nations" represented by particular nationalist movements
was sometimes argued about.
E.g., T. Hodgkin in his Nationalism in Colonial Africa
(New York, 1957).
Cf. R. Emerson, From Empire to Nation. J. S. Coleman applies to both the term "nationalism" but distinguishes
between its traditional and modern forms. Cf. his Nigeria:
Background to Nationalism (Berkeley, 1963).
For a general view of various reactions to conquest, cf.
A. Toynbee, The World and the West (New York, 1953).
L. Wirth, "Types of Nationalism," American Journal
of Sociology, XLI ( 1936), 723-737. This article was recently
reprinted in the Bobbs-Merrill reprint series.
L. Wirth, "The Problem of Minority Groups," The
Science of Man in the World Crisis, ed. by R. Linton (New
York, 1945). This article was recently reprinted in Theories
of Society, ed. by T. Parsons and others.
Wirth mentions also the fourth orientation found
among some minority groups, namely the desire to be completely assimilated to the dominant group, but since this
orientation, if adopted by the whole group and accepted as
desirable by the dominant majority, would eventually lead
to the disappearence of a given minority, it cannot be considered a minority "movement" in the same sense of the
term as the other three. It is also an extremely rare phenomenon, if considered in reference to whole minority
groups, not just individuals, but it does occur. An example
of such a minority group which is not interested in preserving
its distinct identity is the American Negroes.
Wirth, American Journal of Sociology, XLI, 725.
Following in part F. Znaniecki and in part R. M.
I have attempted to discuss some of the problems of
such an approach to nationalism in my paper "Nationalism
Considered as a Social Movement" presented at the Annual
Meeting of the Midwest Sociological Society in Milwaukee
I am not concerned at this point with the nature of
the state in which one or the other solution is possible.
Cf. R. Emerson, From Empire to Nation, p. 95 and
Cf. R. Linton, "Nativistic Movements," American
Anthropologist, XLV (1943), 230-240; A. F. C. Wallace,
"Revitalization Movements," ibid., LVIII (1956), 264-281;
P. M. Worsley, "Millenarian Movements in Melanesia," Rhodes-Livingston Journal, XXI (March, 1957), 18-31; B.
Barber, "Acculturation and Messianic Movements," American
Sociological Review, VI (1941), 663-669. Cf. also Millennial
Dreams in Action, ed. by S. L. Thrupp (The Hague, 1962),
and The Pursuit of the Millennium by N. Cohn (New York,
It seems inadvisable to include among the varieties of
nationalist movements another category which is frequently
distinguished, especially by students of African developments,
namely regional or pan-continental "nationalisms," Panmovements, when not the instruments of the policy of some
aggressive power (as was the case with Pan-Germanism or
Pan-Slavism), are usually to be considered a way of bolstering the nationalisms developing among a number of related
weaker nationalities which on their own could hardly hope
to achieve their aims of independence and unity. They belong
rather to another level of group solidarities, those that reach
beyond the limits of a nationality or a nation.
All states that have recently gained independence
are faced with two interrelated problems, legitimating the use of political power and establishing national identity. And if it is a democratic polity they
seek to establish, they must develop institutional
and normative constraints upon efforts to inhibit
organized opposition or to deny civil liberties to
individual critics of those in power.
problems were confronted in the early history of the
United States. National identity was formed under
the aegis, first of a charismatic authority figure, and
later under the leadership of a dominant "left wing"
or revolutionary party led successively by three
Founding Fathers. The pressures in new nations
to outlaw opposition movements were reduced in
America by the rapid decline of the conservative
opposition. The revolutionary, democratic values
that thus became part of the national self-image,
and the basis for its authority structure, gained
legitimacy as they proved effective—that is, as the