Essay/Term paper: Blood and belonging

Essay, term paper, research paper:  Cliff Notes

This is a

critique of the book, Blood and Belonging, by Michael

Ignatieff. This paper will explain the subject of the book and

its relevance, discuss Michael Ignatieff's methods and

conclusions on the subject and finally include a personal

critique of the book by the author of this paper. The author

of the book travels on what he terms "the six journeys." On

these "journeys" he encounters different cultures, as he

travels to six different coinciding areas of the world. He

examines the unique expression of nationalism that each

populace displays by interviewing various members of that

particular society. The six areas that he travels to are

specifically chosen for the clarity which nationalism is

expressed in society. Nationalism is a factor contributing

toward both present possible future instability in these areas.

These areas are former Yugoslavia (specifically Croatia and

Serbia), Germany, Ukraine, Quebec, Kurdistan and

Northern Ireland. According to Ignatieff, in Croatia and

Serbia there is a desire for a separate identity between the

two nations. The fear of losing one's national identity has

caused ethnic hatred. A terror so strong and historically

persistent, it has driven people to a desperate state to do

anything. This is a large contributor to the reasons for the

extreme violence present there today. The author states, "A

Croat, thus, is someone who is not a Serb. A Serb is

someone who is not a Croat." This quotation profoundly

expresses the short-sighted mentality present in their conflict.

In his travels in Germany, the author points out an important

question. Does the nation make the state, or the state the

nation? This question by far does not stop here, especially

when Germany is the subject. The essence of the German

people is seen by some as aggressive and offensive, thus the

existence of the German problem. If the nation makes the

state then Germany will always be a threat. If the state

makes the nation, then the aggressive nature of the German

nation, which lead the world into two global wars, can be

harnessed and redirected. The question has its roots and

answers in the recent reunification of Germany. The Ukraine

is concerned with not being Russian. It is here Ignatieff

receives a complete vision of what nationalism is. He states,

"I understand what nationalism really is: the dream that a

whole nation could be like a congregation; singing the same

hymns, listening to the same gospel, sharing the same

emotions, linked not only to each other but to the dead

buried beneath their feet." Quebec is a model that presents a

possible future of the state system. Ignatieff uses the example

of Quebec to illustrate the relationship between nationalism

and federalism. He implies that "if federalism fails in Canada

it can fail anywhere." If the balance between "ethnic and civil

principles" is not maintained in Canada, who is not an

impoverished country and has a large, successful economy;

then perhaps the modern world has not transcended the

grasps of nationalism. The Kurds represent a nation without

a state, who find themselves surrounded by other nations

who are more aggressive nationalists. The term Kurdistan is

a definition of the areas used by Ignatieff to explain the area

of major Kurdish populace concentration. There is no real

borders, no flag, no government and Kurds must

acknowledge the state in which they reside (i.e., - Syria,

Turkey, Iran and Iraq), of which, is not Kurdistan. Finally,

the sixth journey ends in Northern Ireland. He makes the

observation that this is the ideal place to conclude his

project. Northern Ireland contains a recurrence of the

themes that seemed so prevalent in the other journeys. In

Ireland ethnicity, religion and politics are all bound into one

expression or identity. These are also evident in the five

previous studies. Is Michael Ignatieff's work relevant? The

answer to this question is, yes it is. The issue is important.

Nationalism presents itself as a phenomenon. The questions

of why people need to retain a cultural identity and the way

they go about preserving it is still unanswerable. Evermore

unfathomable is the violence permeated through nationalistic

expressions, which are "necessary" by the parties involved.

The very existence of the enigma created by nationalism

dictates the need to explore the subject in more depth. The

situations in the book are not isolated events. Nationalism

exists in every state all over the world. There is a dichotomy

presented by Ignatieff between nationalism and federalism.

He explains the political doctrine of nationalism by stating

"(1)that the world's peoples are divided into nations, (2) that

these nations should have the right of self-determination, and

(3) that the full self-determination requires statehood."

Federalism, though not a particular ideology, is a means of

sharing political power among different peoples within a

state. The various systems of government which fall under

the definition of federalism are not problematic to the

people; unless, of course, they are not completely legitimate.

If the government is illegitimate, then ideally nationalism steps

in to demand a completely self-determined government,

which renders proper representation to its populace. Despite

the diversity of a state's population, theoretically, harmony is

maintained since the people are properly represented or

controlled. This situation with variation is experienced

throughout the world. States are dynamic, also their

government and populace. If the dynamics of the

government or the state do not keep up with the pace of

change in the populace, then instability will rise in the name

of nationalism and shake the very foundation of the state if

left unchecked or not placated. The method used by the

author of the book was personal interviews with both

prominent people and the normal everyday person in the

areas visited. He also uses descriptions on the surrounding

areas to accent the point of discussion. His intent was to

objectively take the reader on a stroll through the areas he

visited. Through his style of writing, he allows the reader to

sit in on his interview by highlighting specific questions and

the responses that take place in his conversations. Finally, he

creates visual images that he had viewed as ironic and

analogical in support of his observations. Ignatieff comes to

the conclusion that nationalism is not the problem of this

world. Continuing, he goes on to say that when one loses

their individuality to become a "patriot," that is where the

danger lies. Being yourself is something that ethnic

nationalism does not allow. Political ideologies can become

blinding to its possessors. At the beginning of the book

mentions that he is a liberal. The traveling and experiences

did not change that at all. He notes the importance of "liberal

virtues - tolerance, compromise, reason," but concludes in

an observation about how these virtues are opposing human

nature. Ignatieff addresses the violence factor that surrounds

nationalism like a plague, concluding that, nationalist rhetoric

is an excuse to commit acts of violence. He observed that

most of the violence is performed by young men between

the ages of 18 to 25. His explanation is that the liberal mind

set forgets that not everyone hates violence. He also says

that there exists in males a basic loathing of peace. Human

nature is the reason for the violence or Ignatieff thinks that it

is specifically male human nature. I personally enjoyed the

book and found it to be interesting reading. It had the aspect

of a novel without losing its academic nature. Michael

Ignatieff's writing style was creative and supported his

observations well. He portrayed the destruction that he

found in his journeys in a way that allowed the reader to

experience the same despair and hopelessness of seeing it

first hand. Another interesting perspective that the author

added to the book was his own identity. He traveled to

places that he had either lived at or where his family

originally came from. His family roots add a personal touch

that would otherwise have been left out. Religion and its role

in society are important concerning nationalism. It is in this

author's opinion that religions not be viewed as a secondary

facet to nationalism. The Islamic uprisings in France and the

peace talks in southwest Asia between Israel and Syria are

two different perspectives to the argument. Claude Barreau,

advisor to the minister of interior in France says, "Foreigners

arriving in France . . . now have a new fatherland. Islam has

a place in France, provided it is willing to stay discreet as the

other religions. But Islamist are coming as colonisers." This

illustrates an underlying principal that splits Europe down the

middle. France is a representation of Europe according to

the late Charles De Gaulle. France has adopted internal

policies to control the growth of Islam by limiting both social

expressions of that faith and by specific immigration

procedures. Are not the three million plus population of

Moslems in France entitled to nationalistic expression of

their identity as French Muslims? Where does that leave the

Bosnian Muslims, the Turks or any other non Christian state

located near or inside Europe? The second point deals with

Israel and Syria. The two countries have been at odds with

each other since 1947 when Israel was recognized as a

state. The main reason for the clash is the difference of

religion, not national identity. However, both countries have

evolved since their beginnings and have strong nationalistic

tendencies. Both countries are now leaning toward

compromise rather than a holy war. As the talks continue for

the return of the Golan Heights to Lebanon the Moslem Jew

factor still remains tense. Of the recent peace talks is the

strip of land called the Golan Heights in north of Israel.

Avoiding an attempt to explain an extremely complex

situation or to oversimplify the matter, it is a fact that many

heads of state in the region are choosing political solutions to

old religious problems. However, the foundations of their

society are religions, to be specific Islam and Judism. This

religious factor will never cease and always cause instability

in the region because of fundmentalism present on both

sides. In conclusion, the subject of the book, Blood and

Belonging, has been discussed. The relevance of the book's

theme was examined along with the authors methods and

style of writing. This critique also addressed the conclusions

drawn by Michael Ignatieff concerning nationalism and its

expressions in the world. Perhaps the world will allways

have to deal with the dichotomy dicussed in this paper,

however one can only hope that a long lasting solution will

be found. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Ignatieff, Michael Blood

and Belonging: Journeys into the New Nationalism. New

York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1993. 2. "It Depends

on Rabin." The Economist, 24th-30th September, 1994, pp.

42-43. 3. "Secularity Defied." The Economist, 8th-14th

October, 1994, p.53.