Philosophical Considerations
My first bias is to the political, while ignoring such considerations as economic organization.
Another bias I have is that I believe human beings haven't much changed in the last 150 to 200 thousand years. Even though they may have been limited to stone tools and fire, early humans "raced, gambled, drank, and swore."
1
Modern technology has allowed, to be sure, much higher heights of human civilization.
Simply put, a theory can be most exacting, and precise, and tend to consider everything and leave out nothing, but, because the scope of human society is incalculable, it can obscure the most important elements. Alternatively, as with this theory, just one thing is concentrated upon, and it is tethered to as many aspects of reality as would be appropriate, in order to bring that one thing into clearest focus.
Other theoreticians have discussed similar issues in the past, links to my considerations of their works begin here:
Johann Gottlieb Fichte
(1762-1814) and Romantic Nationalism
Karl Deutch
(1912-1992) on Nationalism
Eric Hobsbawm
(1917-) on Nationalism
Footnotes 1. The great colony of Virginia stood in strong contrast to New England. In
both the population was English; but the one was Puritan with Roundhead
traditions, and the other, so far as concerned its governing class,
Anglican with Cavalier traditions. In the one, every man, woman, and
child could read and write; in the other, Sir William Berkeley once
thanked God that there were no free schools, and no prospect of any for
a century. The hope had found fruition. The lower classes of Virginia
were as untaught as the warmest friend of popular ignorance could wish.
New England had a native literature more than respectable under the
circumstances, while Virginia had none; numerous industries, while
Virginia was all agriculture, with but a single crop; a homogeneous
society and a democratic spirit, while her rival was an aristocracy.
Virginian society was distinctively stratified. On the lowest level were
the negro slaves, nearly as numerous as all the rest together; next, the
indented servants and the poor whites, of low origin, good-humored, but
boisterous, and some times vicious; next, the small and despised class
of tradesmen and mechanics; next, the farmers and lesser planters, who
were mainly of good English stock, and who merged insensibly into the
ruling class of the great landowners. It was these last who represented
the colony and made the laws. They may be described as English country
squires transplanted to a warm climate and turned slave-masters. They
sustained their position by entails, and constantly undermined it by the
reckless profusion which ruined them at last. Many of them were well
born, with an immense pride of descent, increased by the habit of
domination. Indolent and energetic by turns; rich in natural gifts and
often poor in book-learning, though some, in the lack of good teaching
at home, had been bred in the English universities; high-spirited,
generous to a fault; keeping open house in their capacious mansions,
among vast tobacco-fields and toiling negroes, and living in a rude pomp
where the fashions of St. James were somewhat oddly grafted on the
roughness of the plantation,--what they wanted in schooling was supplied
by an education which books alone would have been impotent to give, the
education which came with the possession and exercise of political
power, and the sense of a position to maintain, joined to a bold spirit
of independence and a patriotic attachment to the Old Dominion. They
were few in number; they raced, gambled, drank, and swore
; they did
everything that in Puritan eyes was most reprehensible; and in the day
of need they gave the United Colonies a body of statesmen and orators
which had no equal on the continent. -- Francis Parkman, Montcalm and Wolfe
back
Comments or Questions about this page? Click here Revision 349 as of 2009-04-10 10:44:33 © 2003-20011 by Joshua Simeon Narins