Question

"The modern nations came into being essentially by two roads. In one case, the state was, from the start of the process of national formation, already an established continuity, [most] often from the Middle Ages. These were states with their own 'national elites' and mature written cultural traditions. . . . For these states, the road to the modern nation was through an internal transformation . . . and the struggle to establish the modern nation was mainly a political struggle to define the nation as a community of equal citizens. . . .

This first type of development toward the modern nation was absent in Central and Eastern Europe. There, a different pattern was typical, [namely] that of multi-ethnic empires inhabited by many non-ruling ethnic groups. . . . Lacking not only statehood, but also written traditions in their own national language, these non-ruling ethnic groups in the multi-ethnic empires were in the most complicated situation. Their national movements had to pursue not only cultural and social emancipation and equality, but also political emancipation."
Miroslav Hroch, Czech historian and political scientist, introduction to Discourses of Collective Identity in Central and Southeast Europe (1770-1945), academic book published in 2007

a) Identify ONE claim that the author makes in the passage regarding the "two roads" toward modern nation building.
b) Identify ONE specific example of a nineteenth- or twentieth-century nationalist movement that would fit the pattern described by the author in the second paragraph. Your answer may be from Europe or from another part of the world.
c) Explain ONE limitation of the author's argument as a source for understanding the different types of nationalism that developed around the world in the period since 1750.

Answer 1

a) The author claims that there are two roads to modern nation building: one involving an internal transformation, and the other involving the struggle of non-ruling ethnic groups in multi-ethnic empires.

b) An example of a nationalist movement that would fit the pattern described by the author in the second paragraph is the Indian independence movement led by Mahatma Gandhi in the early 20th century.

c) One limitation of the author's argument as a source for understanding the different types of nationalism that developed around the world in the period since 1750 is that it focuses primarily on European examples, and does not account for the different types of nationalist movements that have arisen in other parts of the world. Furthermore, the author does not discuss the influence of imperialism and colonialism on the development of nationalism in different regions, which is an important factor to consider.