z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Liberal nationalisme og politisk teori
Author(s) -
Theresa Scavenius
Publication year - 2010
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2446-0893
DOI - 10.7146/politik.v13i2.27448
Subject(s) - argument (complex analysis) , political philosophy , miller , nationality , nationalism , politics , national identity , sociology , political science , mainstream , law and economics , epistemology , law , philosophy , immigration , ecology , biochemistry , chemistry , biology
Politically and morally, liberal nationalism is a controversial political theory. Modern political theory tends to argue in favour of a liberal-egalitarian, multi-cultural or cosmopolitan theory. Distinguishing himself from mainstream political theory, David Miller claims the necessity of integrating a national-theoretical argument into political theory. In this paper, I critically examine Miller’s argument. First, I distinguish between a strong and a weak version of the idea that nationality and national fellowship are constitutive of individual identity. Secondly, I discuss Miller’s argument for the moral relevance of national obligations. It is shown that the national aspect of obligations is arbitrarily chosen and does not vindicate a moral relevance of nationality. Finally, the argument for national responsibility is taken into consideration. National responsibility is an innovative idea within modern political theory, i.e. theories of collective responsibility. e strength of the argument of national responsibility is dependent on the assumption that national fellowship is a morally relevant entity. An assumption, however, that is insu ciently justi ed. 

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here