Political theory question

[Colon™]

I once read in an article I can't find back again that mentioned there are basically 3 sorts of glue for every country: monarchy, nationalism or ideology. Either the land is bound together by a common royal family, examples would be many historical states or present day's UK. Or a country's raison d'etre is the common ethnicity/cultural heritage/whatever, as is the case with Germany, land of the Germans (minus Austrians). Or they share a common ideological vision, as is the case with the US: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the American Dream etc. These binding forces aren't mutually exclusive. For instance, France would be bound together by nationalism (as the various peoples living there got frenchified like fries) as well as ideology (equality blabla).

Anyone knows whether this theory is just something the author thought up with or if it's got academic credibility?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Sounds decent enough.

[Colon™]

I'm asking for academic references.

[SlowwHand]

You don't need that. "Imran said" is sufficient for any scholastic entity.

[VetLegion]

The "theory" is bull****, on so many levels, starting from definitions of terms. Nationalism is an ideology.

But lets be extremely generous and accept the categories as they are presented. It is then obvious that the examples have been fitted to suit the theory, or that the theory was deduced from the few examples, lacking any generality.

USA for example is not held together by ideology, nor is Germany lacking ideology, nor is France successfully turning her immigrants into Frenchmen.

[Aeson]

Any time you try to distill a hugely complex system into 3 separate and distinct modes of action, you are either stupid, trying to sell a book, or ... oh ****!

[Sava]

the common ethnicity/cultural heritage/whatever, as is the case with Germany

anti-semitism and love of scat porn is not culture

[notyoueither]

The "theory" is bull****, on so many levels, starting from definitions of terms. Nationalism is an ideology.

He might have said national identity, like common language and customs. Ease up, dude.

But lets be extremely generous and accept the categories as they are presented. It is then obvious that the examples have been fitted to suit the theory, or that the theory was deduced from the few examples, lacking any generality.

USA for example is not held together by ideology, nor is Germany lacking ideology, nor is France successfully turning her immigrants into Frenchmen.

Uhmmm, they fit the few examples we have of large groups of humans and how nation states come to be or blow apart.

And you are deluded when it comes to the US (and other places). You can bet your ****ing ass that ideology binds some nations together out of very disparate parts.

[kentonio]

USA for example is not held together by ideology

[Colon™]

Vetlegion, weren't you the guy that once raged with absolute conviction that trade diversion does not exist in economic theory?

[Colon™]

Any time you try to distill a hugely complex system into 3 separate and distinct modes of action, you are either stupid, trying to sell a book, or ... oh ****!

If you apply it mechanically it doesn't work, but I don't think you're supposed to apply anything mechanically in a social science.
And it does seem to fit with a lot of going-ons in countries. For instance, is it coincidence that at a time people the authorithy of the monarchy is on the wane that separatism has become such a major issue in the UK, Spain and Belgium? Or take the ACW: the one time the US was in danger of falling apart it wasn't about a specific ruler or ethnicity, but about political ideas.

[Ben Kenobi]

Well, I'm not so sure about that 'separatism', if the cause is a united Europe than the abolition of all the monarchies would be seen as a step towards this - rather than having a dutch King, or a Danish King or a German King, or a French King or a Spanish King - you have just Europe.

Would you really want to see Donatus, Landgrave of Hesse (as the current senior line descendent from Charlemagne (Via the House of Brabant and Hesse) as "King of Europe"? That might be an interesting way to go.

[Dr Strangelove]

"Nation is as nation does."

[N35t0r]

If you apply it mechanically it doesn't work, but I don't think you're supposed to apply anything mechanically in a social science.
And it does seem to fit with a lot of going-ons in countries. For instance, is it coincidence that at a time people the authorithy of the monarchy is on the wane that separatism has become such a major issue in the UK, Spain and Belgium?

Um, correlation doesn't imply causation? If you ask any catalan about it, they've always felt the same, it's just the economic crisis that has exacerbated things. The king has nothing to do about it.

[Colon™]

Weren't it for the monarchy Catalonia wouldn't be in Spain to begin with. I'd say the notion of allegiance to the king is a pretty relevant factor in explaining why Spain has held together since the 15th century and why this notion has become increasingly quiant is a relevant factor in the steady rise of the Catalonian nationalism over the past century.