Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Nationalism and Race - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Comparison of sources or information that look at two different aspects of the same thing
        
        Zooming in to get the minute details of an idea/theme
- - - - Civic Nationalism
        
        “Divine right of kings”. US life liberty and the pursuit of happiness
        
        The nation is based and split by institutions and principles. People can form governments when people come together with the same principles to join together.
        American and French revolution - defying the right for royals and defining a nation as a set of people to form a central government defined by their own constitutions.
        Liberal democratic revolutions of the late 1800s.
        The US formed on the myth that it was always a state - core political ideals - fundamental equality of all human beings.
        These were in the country's national and founding documents. Destruction of Slavery through the civil war.
        Economic on the american dream.
      - Racial Nationalism
        
        A part of the US constitution, immigration law of 1870 remained until 1952. Restricted immigration from southern and eastern europe.
        People of colour could not become Americans. Not full citizens. 1920s KKK existed across the 19th century.
        
        Ethno-racial people group.
        People held together by common blood and skin colour.
        Race was a cultural and ideological concept.
      - Nationalism/US History
        
        “Loyalty and devotion to a nation”
        “Sense of national consciousness”
        “Exalting one nation above others” - Merriam-Webster
        
        Create a sense of sameness and difference between members of the nation-state.
        Talking about an imagined people group created from myths.
        Two forms - civic nationalism and ethnic nationalism.
        Shared traditions and singular history.
        Exist in tandem with each other
    - - Middle (1971, 1974)
        The middle category of interpretation [is a] bridge between the initial and current interpretation in that they are critical of the violence of the KKK, but do not go as far as characterising the organisation as radical or terrorist. Racism is deemed inconsequential to the Klan’s purpose.
        
        Richard Schaefer “The Ku Klux Klan: Continuity and Change”, J.C. Stagg “The Problem of Klan Violence: The South Carolina Up-Country, 1868-1871”
        
        Acknologement of rascim but it was justified, but primarily it was still a political, although they were targeting ex-slaves but still wasn’t about racism, all about class system. Economic and social issues created through the freedmen.
      - Contemporary (1964, 2009, 2011)
        The contemporary view of the KKK assesses the prominence of white supremacy during Reconstruction by recognising the violence of the KKK as racially motivated terrorism linked to the larger spirit of racism in the Democratic Party and the South, and condemning the agenda and actions of the KKK as racist.
        
        Herbert Shapiro “The Ku Klux Klan During Reconstruction: The South Carolina Episode,”, Elaine Parsons “Klan Skepticism and Denial in Reconstruction Era Public Discourse,”, Michael Pfieffer “The Origins of Postbellum Lynching: Collective Violence in Reconstruction Louisiana,”
        
        More honest, quite far away, no personal connection, less bias, more clarity. Agreed that is was racist and had white supremacist ideologies. Dismissed the idea that it was primarily a political organisation and tells how radical it was.
      - Initial (1906, 1924, 1927)
        The initial way historians interpreted the Ku Klux Klan…is united by its tendency to legitimise the Klan as a political organisation with a justifiable response to Radical Republican policies.
        
        Political focused - against liberating Republican ideas, justifiable purpose of the KKK to protect past white supremacy, very biassed quite close to the amendments being passed, personal connection, wanting to defend their supremacy.
        
        WD Wood “The Ku Klux Klan”, Francis Simkins “The Ku Klux Klan in South Carolina”, A.A. Taylor “Opposition to the Reconstruction,”
    - - Beginning in the 1830s, the South developed a new and aggressive sense of “nationalism” that was rooted in its sense of distinctiveness and its perception that it was ringed by enemies.
      - At the same time, southern intellectuals began to defend slavery as a positive factor. After 1830, white Southerners stopped referring to slavery as a necessary evil. Instead, they argued that it was a beneficial institution that created a hierarchical society superior to the leveling democracy of the North.
      - During the 1840s, more and more Southerners defended slavery on explicitly racial grounds. In doing so, they drew on new pseudoscientific theories of racial inferiority. Some of these theories came from Europe, which was seeking justification of imperial expansion over non-white peoples in Africa and Asia.
      - Seeking to free their region from cultural, economic, and religious dependence on the North, southern “nationalists” sought to promote southern economic self-sufficiency, to create southern-oriented educational and religious institutions, and to develop a distinctive southern literature.
      - Other racist ideas were drawn from northern scientists, who employed an elaborate theory of “polygenesis,” which claimed that Africans and whites were separate species (different shaped skulls equating to smaller brains etc.)
  - - - The French revolution solidified this as they rose up and killed their king and formed a nation. Local nationalism rises up. Centralised government and well defined borders.
      - Origins and Impacts of Nationalism
        (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PBdw0Z4Td3rFm6z-rKt08j3VcX6z0n9971E2VcVwH7g/edit)
      - Over the 18th and 19th century especially in Europe then spreading to the Americas, Asia and Africa in previously colonised lands, the rise of nationalism was prevalent. For most of human history, until recently, nations didn’t exist. Instead of nations there were city states, empires, kingdoms and many more civilisations. The people living in these times identified themselves by the town or village that they lived in, also with widespread religion many people identified themselves especially in Europe as Catholic or Protestant and looked to religious authorities to find their identity. Modern nationalism has its origins in revolutionary France, and at the end of the 18th century with the American declaration of independence. When Napoleon Bonaparte took over France in 1799 he created a central government over all French territories in Europe. After many years of war and this new centralised government French people found a sense of unity in the fact that they were all French, not English or German. This combined with a new sense of pride within France and as they, still under the leadership of Napoleon Bonaparte, expanded throughout Europe which made other countries develop nationalism as well. This is how nationalism spread throughout Europe but through the rest of the world it spread with colonialism, the declaration of independence in America is an example of this. Because after winning the revolutionary war against Britain in the late 18th century they created a central government and constitution. And the people of America had a great sense of pride in their country and united after beating Britain. The United States of America was one of the first former colonies to gain their independence and inspired many other states to become independent and form a sense of nationalism. These are some of the main elements that spread nationalism through Europe and the world in the 18th and 19th century.
        
        Holly's paragraph
    - - Source D and E discuss this further, it is to do with eugenics, the theory of racial improvement through planned breeding, (Source D), as well as ‘biological stock’ and no cross-race breeding (Source E). The Nazi party led by Adolf Hitler would become one of the most well-known examples of a government trying to purify their nation. “Eugerties, it was claimed was the best strategy to achieve a “healthy body politic” and a strong nation-state” (Source D) this in combination with the “Nuremberg laws in Nazi Germany” (Source E) of cross-contaimination between races, prove how strongly linked Nazi ideals were between nationalism and race. These examples of differing narratives of nationalism in Europe from sources A, D, and E enable us to understand one complexity of nationalism and race, their relationship, to a great extent. Although these sources are very useful as they provide us with a wide range of information, with many different aspects of nationalism and race within Europe there are limitations.
        
        Holly's first essay
      - Nationalists struggled to unify Kingdoms and city states to a central government as people identified to their local area and not their nation.
      - Nationalist Ideologies
        
        Eugenics
        
        Anti-semitism
        
        Aryanism
        
        Social Darwinism
        
        Pure-breeding
        
        etc...
        
        Superior Race
    - - Central/Eastern Europe
        
        Lots of different ethnic groups that want their own nation state but aren’t powerful enough. A lot of ethnic tensions and a lot of history.
      - European powers
        
        WWI was in part caused by Serbian nationalism. But was fought by nationalistic nations and powers. Imperialism nationalism. “Age of Empires”
      - Fascist states
        
        Holocaust when nationalism has a racist focus. German people had a racial focus were led blindly
    - - Imperial Nationalism
        (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pJEzdxneJN7zf6o8-CZLwzXqbEHy_NL6UWTG9-PntRc/edit)
        
        In few other countries does imperial nationalism endure with such explicit social, political and economic consequences. Chafing against movements to “decolonize” Britain, Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Conservative Party’s Brexit campaign touted a “Global Britain” vision, an Empire 2.0. “I cannot help remembering that this country over the last 200 years has directed the invasion or conquest of 178 countries — that is most of the members of the U.N.,” he declared. “I believe that Global Britain is a soft power superpower and that we can be immensely proud of what we are achieving.”
        
        For generations, the monarchy derived healthy doses of its power from empire, just as imperial nationalism has drawn legitimacy from the monarchy. This phenomenon stretches back to King Henry VIII, who first declared England as an empire in 1532, while his successors granted royal charters facilitating the trans-Atlantic trade in enslaved people and the conquest, occupation and exploitation of the Indian subcontinent and vast swaths of Africa.
      - Suppressing Nationalism
        
        Historically, what was Britain’s approach towards the emergence of nationalism within its own Empire?
        War, acted militaristic towards these countries - malaya
        
        What was Britain’s motivation(s) for this approach?
        They wanted to stay a great empire/to be the best/to be the most fully developed/respect and reputation
        
        To what extent could Britain’s Empire be described as a benevolent dictatorship?
        Britain ruled their population in a sense of terror more of a militaristic dictatorship not benevolent at all due to the fact that the actions of the government rarely benefitted the public. “After Britain waged some 250 wars in the 19th century to ‘pacify’ colonial subjects, a contested through coherent ideology of liberal imperialism emerged that integrated sovereign imperial claims with a huge undertaking to reform colonial subjects, often called ‘children.’”
        
        ‘The British Empire and by association, the British Monarchy were inherently racist’. Discuss.
        British empire has ignored its past, so yes it was. Favouring it’s population over the migrants.
  - - - 1st Sino - Japanese War 1894
      - Russo - Japanese War 1904
      - World War I 1914
    - - Revolution in Japan.
      - Geographic features (being surrounded by sea) enabled Japan to pursue isolation.
      - Commodore Perry triggered Nationalist Unrest.
      - Emperor Meiji more westernised.
      - Abolished feudalism.
      - Samurai didn’t fit in society with the new modernised army.
      - Internal struggle within Japan.
      - Education is reformed - Education is important for installing ideas of nationalism.
      - Centralised government.
      - Good example of a nation state at this time because
        
        One culture/language/ethnicity
        
        Created a government.
      - Set up at western style constitution 1889 followed by the country's first elected Diet.
      - Urged loyalty to the emperor.
      - Western technology, didn’t take long to adopt western technology.
      - Did not want to be colonised.
      - Fiercely independent.
      - Trying to modernise so they didn’t have to be colonised, driver for them.
      - Needed to trade - resource poor country.
      - Had to open up to modernise because trade was critical.
      - Almost in envy of the west’s technology, they were impressed.