Reterences A, 995 “En sana mt foi, dR Su Symposium on David Miller’s On Nationality edited by BRENDAN O'LEARY* ‘The publication of David Miers On Natimalty provides an exsent pportunity 1 ret on wt pial phicronhy can bring Io the sabe ler of his journal ntions apd atonal. el in whch eee and poieal philosophers have rarely ead. abd when they haves has sully fen to expres anata contempt profesional vse On Natl ates a vlfeshie contrast to mont previous wetings mtn Anslopone pola theory. Deng a once sympathetic awards nationality, et eased Inits Boel reasoning. Below, David Miler hist presets eeaders with pis of the core arguments of hi defence of ibe atonal though Frade are adie to consul he text ofthe Book for Miler al He Tt ion the fll bok tht our reviewers focus thir attention, and there ae five of then. The fist thre responses ae by the poll theorists Margret Moore, Sra Bury and Ken Knight They dspay varying degrees sympathy for Milers intentions. Moore highs the enstons etncen Miler intrins and ssteumental jstiietions of atoaliom. 398 thoi contadistory impliions for nant seledetermination Barty ‘ares that Millers argumert i fatally compromised byt apparent shsndonment of eis unserslion. although he regard with gusts the Brak prcipons that Miler ler. Kght maitans fat Mile ‘kes not role the tension between his sommment to irl tonals tnd commaitrn socal and the mateo te barenucat, heath ical Sate of modernity. The lst wo reviews se by poiical sets wth ines in political plsophy. James Kelusand Bendin O'Ledy.Kelbs height domestic provenance of Miler’ argument. and. questions Miles poliealjgemens ina range of specie ethno rational eons, she O'Leary crests Miler for being insutenly Hora nd nationals ins loge and prescriptions. ‘The rvewer fotwen them representa range of ation, etbc and rehsious backgrounds tir ay Canadian, Quede0. Bish, Engh Seatah, Ih Anglican, Protestant, Cato, stb), butte esponsesas Symposion fave not sereorypical, They rele. however the tact assumptions of Songs oles the editors of Nati and Natnatim woul welcome ny further broadening ofthe debate osanoned by the publeston of Das Miler poneenng esa. T ‘On Nationality* DAVID MILLER Sith Cage, Overt tn wring this book, F soup 0 counter two bebe about atonal and tational that ate very widely held in comtemporary eral soities One isthat nations, alough unquestionably a potest force ithe oders ‘orld something thst ress eatnalexplnaon snd therefore rational rgument. wheter in its favour or agus i Our naval éentites and rational yan, i id. ae nt things we can tenon abut they ae Felngs or erotons which canbe Tanned ita fame or dampened down 10 some exten, butch rest rational apa. On hs vi Ht makes 90 setse to propound a poll theory or pltcal philosophy of nation Tecause one would be ying 10 apply reasoned argument toa phenomenon fm which can ge mo grips # would be ss ponies a0 King Canute ‘ordering the wats Torte “Te cond bl is that nationalism is cre of he pti ight, hat ‘it fends support co authoritarian reines ands host to Heals and {fo beet) and justice. ought To rest maton sess, which om Te one upd can be wed justi sates in repressing itera sent i the name of national unity. and on the eter provide the lak under which external projet of trroral expansion and domination of meighbounng tes an fe carried out If 'we cull id curser of these eas. if we cod se ures stpty as human Beings who happen to long 10 ullerent Cultural groups, the world would become Beer more jst and more peel ‘These two belie have one fextue in common: they both segd uioalism as having @ Bed essence so that altboush the coment of ‘ational doctrine may vty rom plac to place tcl has the ‘Se imfecul standing and peorms the same Tnctions wherever Wi Found Apsins thi aot fo arpe that nationality both moe ders and more fd tha popular eli sugges, 0 tha makes good ens 0 Shunpunh moray dense from morally indefennileforms of maton diy, and to ange: fa ivonr of the formers equally, i aes Some 10 “singe politely progressive fom polly reactionary forms. Tete in sace for moral an politcal argument about the frm that our national ‘Memes and lays should ake Ofcourse sush argument must always tein trom a history gen understanding of maton io parala0 Symposum place — what it means to Be pt of he Bri or French nation in 1996 fut these understandings can be changed though poll argument, and indeed n some ces an be tranfoed na eatsey short pred of ne 'eeertion.pebaps. So witout nny way dang om he val of the hsonca-sovolgsal stabs af holm ander aken by Geller Shh, Hobstm and ters (Ger 1983. Hobs Tse Seth 9S iy aim dierent to ata pinks stich sould sees in thinking about nana questions. wheter these ae qos about the border of sats about sovereign. aut mince ahs oF about the tical yanifeanes of atonal T peter the tom "atom nations” Har, beetue the Ber sem too heal loaded wit unwelone impeatons or my Purposes. istrs that seve witers hae suggested polos of nationals which say alo ere Sisinguihine moe seepsbe fo es sexetale Gems the ditinction between Wescn’ and str natonslaen To ‘xampl, or between emi and ev natnalism (or hese dines ‘5 temti 1994 Kon 194 Pleats 1976 Sth 199), But even hen {tahed this way. the tem “atonal continues to sages an al fimtrcing pliteal creed ip which indus fst ty to serve Sie tion. and tional elfeteriation fan overiding political goal. The Pcie of nationality tat Iwi to defend more modes tha thst omit three merconnetd sas Fin national ents ae vail soe of personal Mets. Someone wh sss i asp ther deity that they Belong to this or that natn tiny the vt ofan on. Nor atonal to want to ave tat ident prottedseuint etd Toes tat these to Joy o erode Tes no more dutows to sce yourself French my. and 40 want 1 Toman 10 than toe youn a Choi ou hooves Sond, nation ar etal communities We ove spat obisons to those we trad a our compan an ws are std in making seit, fn thor bebi hat we wou ot mae fo uses, Faull th pti 10 create sttutions sachs were ates tat prods goods and serves nly to fellow nations even though hove ouside he natin May th a ‘ree eed of thse sme sods and serves “Third ations have al cmt be sel determining, We shoul ty to crsate pha stoctures tht peri he people who fom the nation fo ‘coke for thmsses matters ta The read porn snd ich ‘rary concer thrown community» whether i the ado form of "Sovereign state o throws Some thet arangenet which sues tt more Somme pater of maton alias (or instance feel xem thst [evies Sef deteranation fronton minors within ation “hose thee cims ght at fst sgh apa innocuous enough. But all of them hve den fel changed nent debate: Aguit thesis sssad that tonal enites ae. nan import sense, Aton The have been eeted and manipulated by powerful eroupe whose mires are Did Mir On Naina a served by having populations Bound hy is of op to tin ses. Morgoscr, thc corerond to nothing rea: you may lve that you share Something in tommon with other Atveeats that makes you part of an ‘Amencin nation ul inact Americans exhib an almost infinite divert personal characterise and each wl haves much in common with 3 meme of some other nation ae with ny fellow American” People who think national inties mater, therfore. have hen dupe int’ fae bee in soil and ell homogsrey which Beed by the fics “The second claim rans diel aguos a Cena proposition of con temporary tis. that ih eur Moral easonng we Should sow equal omen and respect for every Kaman beng reads ot personal feats Sch as rie relon or matonaity. Ths proposition undetiesfor instance, Tier doctrines of husan ebts Prom ths perspective. the principle of ‘atonaly sens ol ou emia and sentiments compat {0 dort out seme of oes! obigition, hick owght to be inpari Ie ‘sprees m oer words the vicery of what Popper once eld Ut {eal ities over our cast to think rationally about teal queso. (Popper 1s: 17. “REN the thi him, two min charges ae brought. Fest, he value of rato sledeermiston ages aor. What mals to people or Sha should mutter" good government, beter this supe by some Cistant ouch. an imperial power, or «national authority The sour ie ‘relevant what counts Is whether tbe governing power resets people's igh apps the lw fury and so forth! Even whore national sl ‘lstrminton is ace, there sno gurante for any gen person that hoor she wil receive the bent of god goverment. She may find her ‘a minor facing am een! majony Who wa To suppres Ber may oF ie tn other word fis gruve mike Yo regard mena astonomy 3 India autonomy deployed in a lpr tema AL ost tational el David Miler O» Nationality ais sahich conta sation ae sy fo soma some element of mth. But The gud thi this need mothe taly damaging fo naoal entities Of course the arbumentqrespposer that these ites serve alle ftom: Sot me ow aun 10 te Second charge, which tha Yanai fete a indlenble nacrowing of out sense of moral obigaton, " “The fest f this change dts fom the etic esmopoianis hat hols soc promi place ine thinking of contempt soit, We "ech osx oes rl ages ei oh “pea nhoseprvteal thought should not be influenced fy our particular iiater ard tachments: Whether the che fal proposed ia tah. Kantian or nightetised, our morul ebligations are derived by "es, an or ein or emetionlatshment o particular peop ase of commune mst Bes aside as ream Time wer to bree this tie hoch woul evolution bout esl outlook, We would have to weigh Ie cents and the hs oF {ery human beng oqualy wes deciding ho to ac IF we adopts form Srutitaranism, for ext, me would fe oars to drt e00es Sash a nay tht thir rina iy eas the sme or every ssi Of ihe lobe which im vow of exiting per capita source ineguaes would Fret todrbution om 2 manuve scale TO Fich counts 10 poor ‘Sones Other cosmopolitan moras may Below demanding th 1S, ‘ut the pont remnine that whatever good of salve the Morality eas 18 to provide for one inal ust be provide sequal has To all That sharp ne Sawn betwen moral agency On one side an peso Meni and personal motivation on the ler Are human” Deings 50 owsiatsd thar they eam se ide the sense of Ment and sense of longing and act simply om the Pa of atonal conviction about what ora cares of hem? "To ths ita! Soesn the cosopoktan may reply hat # univesaist cts can make rom for parca By dtngising diet. stander foal reasoning {fom chal seiner renaming. "When dccidng hs Tovact we may take acount of eitise peaches and conventions Wich ‘nay impose oblgtions to porter people and parca communities But ished to otis Those eonventiows abd pacts, we should ove TO the scond kel and apply to them snes elena of jasc. phe oF ‘ele oc potin of eh kin, nee Bary 198: chs 8-9) To ake fais Feitonships yam exemple. we ghe spi pron to ment a our oe Family whe deciding how o we ou Be and resource, Bu, uve ‘him, this perl practice can be even an spn ustilcaton by Showing ow fais relaonshipe meet the nese of shen, preside ‘Sonal eat and 0 fmt1s dificult, however, 40 see ow thi yasticalory strategy can be ppd to he obliatons of yatomaits. porcully once we take ito mccoun the hugely dierent nau of ving curently enjoyed in diferent ‘avons. In ssh evcumsanes hon can be htt acknowledge spec {hes to promote the wll of compatriot when our resoures mht Be (hat o far pester fst through an mtermationa chem of redroaon? ‘ect grat moiy of people do acnowinze sich dues indeed very Mien thee athe wet des that they ackowlses. The soemopoltan ‘ese sce strkly a 00s wth the pars of etal reasoning that We “he alematines we Fike it appears. are wither to adopt thi universalism and apy i uninchingy a whi case nana yas wil irr no bal weight, or to aknowlsge tat or eb Thinking i Fea suocatinal national” provie he contexts hick we evlop ur seme of right and yore, and hee is no single exeralstandponn om Sthch we jus he obkeation that we acknowledge We hase dais Temi members neighbour, is community reprsenitives and 0 forth, and incach ease the dates sem ety frm our ndersanuing of the fcusonhi. This perypstve has the grat shsnte tha tes topther ‘enity and membership with oblpton in seing who Tm and where | wen morality uid eFitset sens, beeee in ating a moaiy ‘eu, am promoting the sere of gommumties whose Nowa bs Sate or me my action sot one of pre sles From ths purer perpectve, we cam alo understand why ston communities uke spec clam upon eI thin noch eomancs ‘blgnions to thon in esd, to victims of fa Take ad so Tort, are Fecounsed. Two futon seem inpertin’ bee. Fist hatons ate fot Coluntary aseciatons, but communis wit which most embers a orm ie and sw tit we are Hound tether sth our ompatis 2 Community of fate: moreoer theve communities at we hate see. oncewe of themseles at sorely extended, so ovr obliations are not member wllaznes to satiice ther ines tens of the natn Steond, bate nations are eter cial or snipe political commu ‘ics ther members seas of jusice cane sen concrete expesion in lew and Soil poly. Where this comes about, people can discharge their tblations inthe Koowledge tht they are insane it practice whose tier memes wil If cesar. be compel to play her par (or fnstance. the pay tes knowing that others ate lel rege 49 thee Ee sare ‘Although the absence of any comparable practi at the intention sid Miler On Nanay a test means that (forthe foreseeable furs) the en f wil justice ill ‘nl ve practice within nation communi, the artis ew {amr sketcing does not le out all international sbiations, The ‘blgations that we have towards offer human being sonsdeed simpy #5 ‘oct ie apart fom any paar relationships that me have wh them ‘Se probably best understood sn terms of base human rights he to foal integrity, personal edom. amin level of resources, an 50 forth ora good account, see Se 1980) In essing tial unsaan jn cosmopottanim, Im mot densng the vay of ssh clams. | father sugeesting thatthe ethical clams of mainly. and fhe sch particulars clams, ae equi Tundatena. Our duties ss human bens {Nd our dus as members ofa particular nation may Sometines con Sn where thy o, there Archimedean pin from wich o sae the ott Nations ae communities of people who aspire to govern thems, Bt, ‘res, this apis has oan challenged on the grounds tht atonal, ‘stdetcmiaston has no. pariclar sal. and that iis ih general Imposible to ahve. ta response, et me sggest thee eons fo alin ‘detenination where atom tate achievable: thn Tw rf the problems posed by sessions demands Imagine community rls by « encvolen fon pine or a colons! per ich pote subjects interes and applic the ul of I fps Why might they nonetheless aright of sleet? WWehave sen that rations ae communities of ogation. and PoP they are communes wich foster kes of sca aie TH prvi fom thew ideals take wrk, howsver, font one county to the ext national sommes generally rosopnse an obligation to psig for ther tase reeds, but whit counts ava need ies to sme extent from society Uo Sosy Equals, outtnding soci conrbuons may Be recognised 3nd honoured hut hoth the round andthe fm ofthe honouring wil vary according 16 the pubic clare ofthe county In guston.” A sel-govening ‘ation ab to rasa such wes nto practice na ay that no outed "ith could, I ths way socal rice can tevome an este once verningelstonsip roughout the sooty nthe manner spaced {he previo section of his paper. evo ason has to do Wk he expresion and proton of public ‘otire I stall assume bere that indus have ‘an interest im the Precrvation of common cultire wich peovide them wth 3 acne ety as well a 1h trie of elu Me-orms to choose between * Bur sth a cular cannot be reed upon to ceprduce ise spontaneously iemay need proetion both rom the narowly slbitereted ations ofais Symposium Individuals ~ for instance, those wh for seasons of person aun deseoy Instone bung or lanscpes, or downgrade the content of ts pubic ‘ned ~ and rm ese Fores tht ack fo promt a emmogenes Bu impoverished ple eure Sch protection can only be ecrey provided byte state And i oder wo being owt these muse Gt people sho themsees purtpate in the sulte to be protected. Why Should outers take steps to promote citar vse Rat may soem Ge ten toe” Or again the me houses two dtl ato roups ther mua jealous wi mean tht the tate freed to adopt aSnce of ural neu. leding Hs authonty and promotional power to the treo nether” “The thind reason favouring national sedterination concerns the value of democrae government. ts hardy Ace tha al succes emocrases nthe lige stale have abo bach nations, Democratic foverament cannot fnetion unk eens trast ope anther, and Sich feust & diel to achieve where numbers ae lege Even the more Iinimal forms of democracy require sndiduals of partes who Tove "letions fo sta down and fund ver the intrments of power. which require salicent faith that the score ill aot ae thee Nes poo {uel opposiion ordeal shundon the Jemrati enstttion entre. I Stoners and owt belong to separate Communities with no overarching tes why should sch fh be prsent” And i we ant to g0 beyond Tininal Gmocray to a move ertcatory wron, where econ ae made fer pubic deliberation (© which everyone hae am oppor) 10 cnttibut, the ead for tt © songer sill To argue on ground of Senile, rather than of secon ners, and to eerste my demands Erorder to achieve a working Gonenros must bebe that my Elo urtspans nthe deletion ave simian moda bya sie 0 feach 2 fair argeemem. Only among. people he topether by commen lossy snd 3 common Wnty con We expect sich mutual conence to ‘Nitin self determination, therefore, i slut simpy been aon themes ck st Halle cae allows soca xe To come a operate Mel because t maxims the chuce Bal one peblicclture con Be sstine, and beaane mikes posible weake oF roner frm of democracy So anyone who values tho etl ought so {ond slleterminaton @ worthy pou. Ba he eis Furth logs tht ‘san amatsnale goal. nstar 36 ping seldterminaton to the 4s ll lost aby im practice men denying othe Bs Here we must fist sist azuit on the distinction between ations sed cttie groupe early all nations ae tule, im the sense that they Hncudepoups. sah scprate denies who onetses hace Inthe ‘ommon atonal ety Although unjust or nla tetment at the andthe majo community may ever ne transform sich group a rascst nations thi is nt pleardaned, and may Be pre-empted David Miler On Nationality a9 rll pos that show eq eps or group cles within he fon Boundary questions arte only where a Sa s preset consitted {Satin tne or mor ep nacre ond ty tl) mao Sette. Even her, nana selection doe not aufomatcly itvour sping the sae. The question to based is wether the suxosor Sat wl achieve ths goal noe o ke eft than the orginal on. Ein he sate Be rid ing two omogeneoer commutes or i he ‘Secs sate contin minorius whose poibon sore vlerble han Joey the ca” (I Quce were separate fom Canada for Hatance, Shar woul! be tne postion of he Engsbspesking and indignous ‘Shima n Quebo an what woh! he heel on Frenshspesing ‘Seuss chewbee in Canats?) The perience of tee guetons mens fh alfoundslPdctermnation can Sty often be achieved mon sue fly not by sees or ie Uision of existing sate ut though ‘Ssiton arrangements a give pl seedctemination 0 nino ous Dy ging ten contol ent Toes teeny orate of pokey it {Inet'key haves sol teret though fara ster, for stan, or Tough c-govering ato ofthe kind Mat the ative popes of North Ameria hve ted t eas. Hrwe rid ours of the eth ha Ital stedlrminstion tus mean ate sven eens form avd focus tad the ase vahing we crn vod he ‘Srp tat itmut etal Tceforall in which mine eroupy ea sce Sf emtory only to face simi demands from. minoriestinthe Imnoty hone find temscen on he wong ae ofthe borer" Kind {rotate taka niche ven ify argument forthe principle of nationality are seen to have mer. many people my find them anachronism sak that among ths Shvent of teal democracies, national Metis are rap dsating [Riise of the ertergeace of ne traneationl sours of nt whethet freenal (nowt nobly the European Union) or cultural soc an the International eaveonmentl movement) In plies where mations Tenis rampant Wakes lira and authortaran forms: wheres the Neral eocracics can sun themes wathout relane on. ational iene inthe ainal form ~ for instance, by fostering coms Tonal patotn of the kind favours by. Geman weitere sch a5 Haermis. where Toalty to constitution pineipes and nsitons replies maton prope ee Habermas (992-8: 1- 19). "oy en wie tht these. clame are Srecuenly exerted: in purser, they overtook the Tet tha national niin fave Weve ee clave and” uncomested, but hive always” compet Tor” peoplesSymposium allegiance with lis, repious and tcl ities, Whit is pthaps tru is thatthe sens, over the fas hall centary ors, of conic among the Hal democracies, foster wih convergence im tha inwtetons and sways of Me his made Ht move iil to see what distingstes one of These counties fom the nes. oF to tke pre it ational achievements That st tis mation apart fom the est (Le tre! 0 show how Bit atonal iy, which as format im expat opposition to the thst rations of Europe especll France, hs undergone 3 sens of eres Shieh have let the rsh peope sl conscious of thet distinct. bat rai mht ths dnc ey eons im (Miler 195. 153-66, 98S {ch 6. On the he hand. we have reason to be sepinlof the propos Sheenatves to pionaliy Let mes concison “consider sch “One T shal abel radial mulietalsm, This isthe vw that ation iMcraties were abaya based in Tour of ch and power groups 50 We Should erestrage ther dssipation in Taveur of the many apse group ‘nis shat peole may come to shire in sl sity, Poles. om th ‘sew, should hecome the expression of group difeence (Young 1980)" Dens thi, Ushould argue that ras! param ofthis hind il do ee tor help the deprived and_oppesed groups is meat to elp. Inthe heen of a shared sense oF mona. there is no reason to expect ppoerfl groups to dal jay ith fcr weer brethren. Rar than ‘atl jc, ne shoul expect ee sot rapmenttion, and frm of ners group polite in whch susoss depends on the bargaining Power of cach aroup, “The snd poston asap the ns! for &sommon focus f yay, ba argues that this can he provied by cienship ise as citzns we ove allepance tothe constitution, and we owe oliptions to ou flow sites tot as boifers of a common mations! entity. bul as pertkpanis ima ommom practice. This pont tr founded than te fst I gh Fecognises the Imporatce of sated peincpis and ther cmsttons! faetnentm hiding topetber the eens of conempory Mh ste. But 'do not boeve tat can fear al ofthe weight that matonay Bs are in the past Fora doesnot const pital pists ad pace tora shared culture anda shared sor in the wa th ate ens have dope and so does aot site citizen these sense ofthe place the World andi he Maw af stole Nor dos itv any ice When the toadanes of the pleat conimanity fal nto Sopa exo expan ‘hy pola cooperation should Be cased am etween ths SOF people rather than that ‘Although national ene are under presure the allemates 10 ratonaity so far proposed seem quite utsatsfactry. 1 eoplade that we ‘mus hold on tothe principle of national, whe eit to forge nations! ‘ens hat eam accommodate the plain and Mubiity of come porary cule David Miler Or National ea {Tani sompon hoe Boas a ata pl Refrnses ‘Walt M198 Sphere of fue Oxf Marin Raine i tT SP fDi: Pcs: Prise Uy ABs an Aaron Fn hs, Pio Further referees Eich fin Te ey Sie Rew YoMiller’s ode to national homogeneity MARGARET MOORE erty of Watro David Miler hein his hook On Nataly by noting the pelfeation of futonalist lains and eatioal confit sce the calape Of communism hd he uncertainty among those Westen biel demcersses about bow te respond to these eaims. Soils (ad iberals) have tena to dismiss ‘ution as primitive stave and partisan, and to gn the hes wih What they Teel ba more progressive conception of vera {rotherhood, But Miler suggests that soil democrats, epcily, ave ‘een mistaken to ignore or reject the lms of community in the mae svi (and communities sm the modern sor ae national infor). He rument stempts to bridge natonalm and social demoerscy by ptoing 10 the beneis oF «non-aggransing frm of maton, Millers bast thes is that nationality shoul a5 fr as possible, conde th the boundaries of the tte The argument inthe fit thre chapters “stcte fom the betrogenous character of most sates ~ very fom ses ‘vein fact culally homogeneous Japan, Poland, Kores and few ote te the rave exeptony). Most ae ier conpossd of coensing nations) omnis, te. tora! commnies on what they peeve toe thet “tcstral leery" and who aspire to atone status, or people fom sare of ethnic backgrounds who hive immigrated Io counties ike ‘Autti, Canada and the United Stats, Mile sous fo pot out hat rnavonaity i not the se a ethnicity inthe United Stats, the very ide il hypkensted Americas (eg. Ish: Amercan) presuppose that como rationality not derved from common ehnisty, Miler also args iat 8 tation can ensomnpast a rar of etek groups nonimmigrant tes, iPtbe ethnic group has a0 malonal coneiouest” Moment, he line tetneon etn group and nation maybe very fd, pen thar enc groups which ae cultural oF Kings ifeent and eesding om ther Hone terior. canbe mobilised easily along national es Miler has two kinds of jstieatory arguments fer why states shoud be rationally Homogeneous: Ope points othe iisic valve of atonal ‘tachment the second 10 ther nstrmentl le Miler central argument forthe inns vale of natonlty is that a oper account of elcsshould pve weght o national Netty and rational Stamens, Tor these have sthal sgnfcance "Thi Hea te explored Through a discon of unversly And parla ethical there. The frst sep vues depelng the Hea that universal cam account forthe tiene fs 19 oor corntinal- A subsidy argument that univeast theories have icy explaining the motivational fore of the obligations Stic ty contend ne have ol aman beings p80)al an Somposiom Miler to acrance see strat tition fr endorsing he igen that national snd te bounds shold come Wheres naten oily aonomout i able fo ements use ete ‘etae), to prtet nd fosters common clr again the as are of NeDonait' and the wintended comeatens the fsnerested dees eid and cll to Jaume ts omnaeiny (sae pope favea somite fo ne together ta ae mel tocmproma he Meet of hese struments argues on rast bt lite land to Show tat ats song crates wth oan although ier, teas lune las sat ta clo ean srs acon frouns He args tht pos estan pou tenho epee Inge imersted tarts nd mov vee opm ‘Whats orworty abou Miers inne sone oPounalsn thai sis Weg to the eth attachments whch Pople hes whey the {rset usiteaton support naam as meas eng te ss In practic the two mh cu Sons rach ei as et eo fo imate fom the perspective of the inne jen wheter people fongeheofihemsches va mente oe pepe teg German ekaoe 2s people (Exon. Chshc) But does scan tome fr he instumentajusteaton hiv semsto bebe ones asta nbc tae tough o support abe eibtie pac Mile does nosy oe Swart the tension, ands does no dicts hcl weg or nporse ‘hae inks shold beached othe json arp tsetse hen nth nthe saps te ht the todes af ates should conde wah mato! dvsows, Mier aps bis dition of the natonity pone tos tgs of eens iran jis, tesson, mina ies ution sd nse policy ume few However is proce of ssracting fo the sal ccopeeny of ats has important pistons or Medco of nratonl tag ind eceson. Bes l h ents ht Miler desis sre hy nen poles borers cone wh aol dons the ince ‘tention pen tote ery Hel eau that th il pt cole, Imernatona jie “The argues that Miler advances in the Ast thee chapters allow his to reach ths concasion that thee sec importance stashed to pola sutonomy for each sation. Miler ‘acer sqtey the. pes that Eosieations of autonomy sometimes point ina ike! diction fom tose of juste: and interprets grating tutgpomy to ations to mer that ich should he held responsible for the doowons that it maken THe implication fr international asic is tha shee no genet blgstion to ‘ip poorer sues although he doesnot ul ou the os hat sors ‘ato might wis toi the worst. nid Miler On evo 2 octet only in ey few tts do the etn rm wih sala conmunites. The sstonomy tat Mier pane to sates sed on fm atpument about the etal seieance of tina problemi ‘Rese mon slates ae not atonal Romogenous th a that ile cums forthe purpose of Tay abstract ei agunen ithe fist three shapers. Andee his emphasis on tration commit, Ad the difeuty of developing trom across nttona groups we rely do ihe woe tou! he vlnraty of people many parts he wri. tron af whom ive ultra suis and whose ees Mem Sontag th thr ft "scm nj. In thls son, to ignore te plight of the colneabie, mont of om donot hive the pk seas eae Actermine ther tao, othe nstuonal methanansapreaching Miers Sele ens Me es ing gen ht se Sovecgny the eho nonsnteferenc mineral tess fen tow igor dete y ate cist or oiing tb ase ee ‘peopl the jurado, Tuner whethee Miers propos reprdingnterationl ase are taken 10 appl only hen ve hone world ded no en of falloee’s oF whether he tlds tay onciuion about the Pelt {stonomy’ of sts rom his agunen about nons His smooth trnstion iran argument about nation to that of tater suggest th later, Dutt ichnd oso hit an thi argument seat the autonomy of fhe mation Should sae ms soporte pita Sovesonty oats ‘ust ain hs dscusion of internation se, Miller ses to easly fom {scusson of ration to that of at, 0, mh dicusson of secon, the "rgument tends fo sopports stat ats quo. More, asin. the urption ‘hut Miler makes in the cary chapters about onal homoge ‘ele in i dacuron ofthe condoms of atiable ces a the Seumptions have the unfrtonate eller of aking seexion an untsliai pion for mos tons a multinational sats ‘ter wenchant criss of Roan’, fchis ad cansn’s Hera theories of session, Miler advances his ow tees bic fectses on the pial conditions for suring national identes His patcipe tls us 0 Further the caine of atonal sele-dtermincton where pole. It ho ‘ges that exiting boundries shouldbe putin question only when rina ( dstinet rom an chi aoyp, other kind grup) Srey bein denied sl eterno. Millers justiestry arguments fr The importance of national have ierentsepications foe 4 theay of seesion. Giving Wet to People's Sbjct seme of ent and atacment 12 other (he iesi ne a Somposiom ‘secession, perhaps simply ensuring (a) that a nation was being deve {at tation oie eu wth ech hr and sport Re band. would tend to consider whether selfdtermination would we nd 1: ah ‘other goods, such as un effective redistributive practise. In his discussion of secession. Mille ignores thei intrinsic justification, "thick all oop, Sia lin jin, ane igre «sl ap ‘on. Miller's argument that the wou : in ‘Rae ha coud wt ners Se el bot radly weaken the paren ste by mating i ial to ond sondiions which would enible 4 smal people to dtemnig eae Seet meg imme te ese ons, an this wo eo 10 be ind owas sats ahs San ‘sey and poplin them ta eae he {cso hmogsous plea ommanty within teins ae nd ate the seeson of G would simply proves» mins! nee ‘stringent. Although Miller points out, acc sind Sovenia deed independence 9I.3 yr set of a pon ee David Mile On Nationals fe Se, abd Serbs. on most acount, were not mere ste EOWp bak were Suny mone eter wath a Serban national entity 4 Yuponss ni). ths percent Serb snort good reson to preven lovers ftom Seeding? As Mi econises een here (pin dierent context tbat good Treason could you ge Slovenian to agree to renin int YYacosi’ federation and feibate to poopie with whom the didnt isemiy” ‘Miles conditions woul! ao rle ou he sseson of Quek frm the rest of Canada on to dst grounds pp 14, 117). Past, Mller contends tha. even all Francophones i Quebes soup separation fom the west of {Canada sll he separation of Qucbee would wie the 20 per cent of {Qurbeckers who are nom Francophone and whose sc-undetanting Canadian” Moreover the separation of Quebee would eave sell Franco ‘one communis inthe rent of Canad more elas and eps than fefore At the root of ths condition i the Mew that there most en ‘movement from the slats que unless noone’ national Meni slate, This sens unfirly bse toward maining the atts quo, bic isl sight te unaceprable On Miler’ argument the 80 percent oF Quebeoi, stho a: forthe sake of argument, sous the teceson of Quek, ould ‘Se preventd ftom easing ts This would not only bea voution o ther {thal bonds of attachment, but tis aso hard tose bow a pli ety Which rained these people agaist thir wil would have the bonds of ommanitynesisay to support sound rodtbutive practice and eee ‘Semoery ‘On Miler’ condons for juiable secon. & would abo sem that the Repub of rela could not have stay seeded rom the Ue Kingdom in 1921 The Ish Free Slate contained a small (10 per cent) Protestant mioriy, who Sd not think of themes at Trish and the Parton etement of 1921 ao lef ignieant Ie Cato minor 9 ‘iow notably the United Kinglom was not merely altempting to separate f2usrance an inbuilt Protest majoaty within what bocame Neher, Treland. and oscar nim statue terry fortis arty. Thi ream thu the partion stemen was sggrandsing, for two provinces Fermanagh and Tyrone, with Cathe rajnties. were unjustly includ 0 Norther Irelan, Howeter, no puriion amangeent would have satisod Miers rquitement for ase session, Bsc the border could ot be deown ina way which would completely encapsulate all members of rational commaniy, and which would exloge all mrs of a ttonal communis, the season of Trtand Irom the United Kingdom Reconciling th clans of propl wih divergent, iacomputibe ational iets who ate commingled on the same teetory i obviously ery {iia ie 40 ree and Mile, anlike many omer pli pioso-2 _ Symposium pers, & at least aware of the ditcules. Howeve. his conditions or {Steion som far too stringent Inthe eae of both Quiche. an Irland in TB2I, Miles conser aut to mae 2eyone worse Of lesves him sopping {sau gu which is patertlyureeptable lo are atonal mores The fen is coonterinutive. Miler's theory of justhable seen woud lite the selfundersanding ofthe vast majonty of shen who sought Tosssde fom the Unita Rinedom in 1921 and woul hase ead thet to remain ia sate that ts) dal not say with. Mier ed othe Soncinion Rosine hs eae dscusion Tossed many on the advan {ag which flow from a nationally homogeacous polis commuiy. ‘escent follow hat seen would be permisle ony when the ould ‘esate cam encomjuss al members of parclar national commis ‘only tht national commun. ‘Not ony are Miler conditions on justiable secesion wnveaisialy stringns bat ney do nt rece llow fom the Bro sree the hook, which should be concerned wth what would he 8 far way accommodate atonal cans! Mestanans to accommodate dierent ‘atonal communities, eho perhap se onthe sate tert. ot wh sai the sume lad, are ot ven an much ation sb thy deserve. este Miers discussion has been 0 focicd on the enc und pasta advstaes which flow fom Raving naonal and. polis! Rounds Conchsion Mie’ twojustieatory arguments point in diferent ection: the itinsie jusibeation spe tat national tachments ae nts alle the ‘nartnentsl ction poms te the importance of national esi Supporiag’ ase which attempting to relne texan soi dimcrate goal The wsttunentaljfeston, a parca. inks Miles ‘deers oF natinahty ery closely wilh reboably large renbute fine, Te close ink hetwcen nation sd sttes whch xsbled int Jsticatory argument. fet Miler’ dseussion of nteraations tice and ‘eeeson. The moverent fom an afgument i defen af nations 10 ene ‘sending the phe of sates troubling theft ease hese the E80 ‘arly conde. and the kin of autonomy which Miler supports 0 stses Inoen wed by sate oct ntent an wlstng Bae um Heh ed Pepeteating jes. troubling lo in theese of ocx. Pocus t Tends fo make the secesion of 4 ational group tery dict 10st Miller's theory of scion would be welcome reine Tor thse poi Teaders in mulinational stats ier on preerving iy tito Igy Senne the wishes othe people gots, people wh meh experience the Ste as hove to tht natal en This a a sanded, for ook wb argues bo ha mona aches ae nisl salable and hat pols in multinational states equenty degenerate int sl interested mas end arranges Notesa, Nationalism versus liberalism? BRIAN BARRY David Miles On Navona s mailed bythe bb thatthe dominant lteal schoo! within Anglophone poiial plop has tded to et ‘atonal a a atin oes tobe accomodated ss peeeary within Ikea pots, rather than asm intelictully defense conception of te appropriate ass on which fo orBanhe Raman sets His objee it Iatte natal respectable ~ no, of ours, toemorie every nro that hat exer ben cared out the nae onan, But to aoe tat national 1 per ara darepataie nation, How Ta dos he suceed 9 Sciesng his ambious sig? The verdict mat, supe. Be a mite one ean focus on to ns of apts ate bok The rs ontanad ‘nthe ted chapter ened "The Eis of Nationa The second coc ‘nthe and sth chapters. These are concer to Work ou (ith Spe atenon to the ese of Bian the practeal patios of a defensible cncspon of rationalism. This second line of argument seems {0 Me Csontly sound "in what jets even Moe ha WH proposes. Bat as {hal tc sbow how, thre is noting in chat ned eend a semble Ira AC this level, the confit etwcen era aod atonal Frauen asserted by Miler imply doesnt get of he round Te cont. the argument conned in the thd chapter i obnoxious from a itera” ses more roa, from 4 Nun poet of vw Thee feo mat ideas. Opes at common nao Met ges ret some Sortof natural of preinstiutonst obigtion on the comtioal to do thes for one anther tha they mould note reqied todo for others It fas to be concede that Divi! Miles yuion of ths matin dt = far too cautious wonders the uss of i mae recently i, sy, Bost tnd Ronda Bu dited poison ie sll pao even i the principle of omeopay is ail in mee, ae no Plc tpl pstowop donot, ofcourse, wih ors moet 0 deny that fe ful of ones within which we have obiatiny to some people that we do not bays to ‘thers. Miler makes things arly easy for bimscf By suggesting that the only coherent ante to hs om ew one tht dene the vay ‘of such spec obligations unless they ean be shown to be conducive 19 Some inpesona ohpstive sich as the maximisation of toll sty. His Strategy io, propel at into ap accepiance of hs nationalistic tw on furan 8y encouraging 1 bee tat only by doing so can we ‘scape twits kindof universal that runs counter all common sen ‘norte. But hs eed choc a gus one. Morality finds, universal i is nate Millers fundamental eer bes denying thi Bt tht UDA moray conse Largely fm geet David Miler On Navona a wesrptions that in the actual dicumstanss of exerday HE, generate [jefe obtatione’ to Keep promises, to respecte bene. and To play Sor pat inthe wel protees of our society, Such a6 thse tha presibe the ligation pf das to care for chien. (anno that theres Covting “nual” and peesocal about the norm that voles ist ‘cane responsty on the ological parent oul not sure een the foes casi survey of the wide warty of ways im HCH childcare Feiposiie ar drat in non. Ween soit) ‘My conetion that theres nating shoot common national a uch that can mike contact with any morally competing Bass Tor seins Seva algtions Us simply the wrong wet tng. Thi sno 0 8) ‘hat we my not very Wel Have obligations to coaational that we do not fave fo olbes. Bul we sball I hee, says. discover on further Investigation that this obligation aie rom sme moral evant ration ‘hop eich (more ores wel corel with shared rationality ‘never mperian source f seal ohgnins common membership in asiate IF ask why Tam obliged to conrbae (© the old age gesion Semesody Ive never met and have no parca meet io whe Tesi Rosherhamn, but po ote pension of somebody equally distant tome who Isc Rennes, tbe answer that | flong te sabe Scheme of sa insane ste st bu ot the second Now lo trata (proba) ‘Shore nationality withthe fst and not the second. Moreover heeft ‘Shvius connection Between this act ad the fs hat T boone to the sme {stomefsocl security ath rt andnothesezond- But we should beat foto eile hese wo eprate ets eonelde thal my pil obligation t9 ‘he pensioner in Rother derives rm oa common national ‘Aough I do not have the pace at my pom demonstrate it ere, ‘maintain tat none ofthe apparently persusnv examples tat Mil gc ST spealablaationsarkng Tom shred Sational entation oppor his case In every stance, eee that We shal id ha some other, Fetionhip hat eaeying the moral stan. Mos fens x common membership in sate that ding the work, but the seca abiptions nung fom tht ace teated aa athe morally relevant fstre inden them were smo nani. “There of sous, «common age tat res on the Mention of sation and sate when we speak of Sabonal soverepmy tnt felaone But, as Miler hic fcounses sm hs second (Gcinional) Shaper, any such Wenieton ud deat hs prpowe, which rere bio be abl oak about patos that donot have sate and slates that te inationl (pp 8-19) et the appisation of Miler other ea Chapier 3 tury on Westing a ates asthe) had dhe atte tate Seribes to nations. Ths second ides const in principe of ations! Sono and rlted pesple of atonal responsi for outcomes ‘sing rom nations desis tay help to octet 8 to Observe that Mir has in sent yearsoT a Sympos fallen hei ner te Influence of Michael Walzer. who Rahs ack in arnt Gorman romans atonalte such a Heyer Libera in i of thr ie that talus ley in ial baa eis ad nat in oles are neil suspcious ofthis hind of romantic maton sey But i sem (0 me tt the theery Would not be SOECONaDE fy Frito the oxen tate preconstions were tally me What ‘Sbgctnable he way tubs adherent lading Milly bee SFiehad wigesecad appcation in the real worl when fat as scarey "Thus suppose we pack into the ie of nation the seinen that scons seards flow national as equally tala, so that thee ae 0 {roupe tat are sigmatsed or dicimnated apuns And sappose we lo Sinaia that there most on all important mates of public poly Ipaace Mt wars income dhinbation, and apn) be a cmensin Ong. the members of the ation 2 General Wil in wich all partpae, Then, ths pation inhabits a ste, there surely some pausing hat {atany rate within certain road ite ole autonony & lust scams scan e sen ava oninton to the Aourshing fi nds rmembes. Simi. under thee very sbtgent comitins. the aol Probematic concept of eoltve fesponsbty may que puny be ‘pard a having some appstion. do mot Know a thee are any nation-states in the world, if we understand the execs of 3 nations ring these coniton. (Peri Tesnd fa candiste What lsat ny rate car to mei that very few ste ace nutions inthe slevant sete and the theory his es sppication "he free hey dear roo ts presuppositions. nthe ight of hi ems tome gle gates that Miler shold deploy Ho explain (pp 63-79) Shp walty Westen eountnes shoul not serene he intra ls OF Stes ih subSahsean Africa (hecuse th would be a sili of national autonomy or sllSetermintion ad why they hve no oMbation te provide economia (ecawe this would hea wolaton ofthe electne responsi Miny of thse countries 60 not rake contact at any point wth the sequins necsary to Wgger the valves of nana! aonomy and ‘tional responsi. These clade Angola and Rounds. which Miler fics specially as salable applications. of te prin of national Sutonomy fp. 74, m1, and Soman, whch etd an lstation ofthe ‘tay im uhch thi pec of atonal sponsinty rlescs ich counties (fan agation to aid peor onc (pp. 63 Manet, the onan patna ie has hers bec tanto ito the doctrine of sat autonomy ai sae eypnsty, hich i amed sl to app even the sate fe isn by nlermecine confit beers Spposngwroupe and the yovernment isin excee 4 a of ot sent fm sqnering what st can gato he pplton at whatever Est to the Fire of the courts. Cantar to what hile 4 confer clams, on sid Miler On Nail a rte considerstons (which may sometins be powsrfl) weigh aginst Fcrention and economic at! where state ae a0 radially dfectve in providing ther caizens wih the minimum ‘of physcal and conomie EEurty. Miler rgurds t's 4 deciive objection to univers that i ‘ule in ths concson: I sould rather urge its dashve objection 10 Miran pata that ee ‘Despite my fundamental dient from the “thics of natoniy” pu forward in chaper 31am 4s Thavesieady sai broadly sympate o Miers praca! proposals in chapters ® and. Uwe were to define ‘tional ays¥bsrpton to thse, | would be wlng tog up with hy mibor quaibeazor. The obvious implation mast be that thetic se natonality aid Miler selfxyed nationals programme ae vital Independent opal om cm th be! donot think that he ans is ery serous. What ils i ey dcusing in chapters Sand the sos ad intl) Sondinons under which hora demecatc polity can mina sll Sithoot Raving to esrt to soe of minor. Un comtan tothe (oft argument in capi 3 hese chapters ae ently stearate ‘Phas wo sy they take a geen te hone Bounds nude mms oraierent etn gious oe nllral groupe how ater might te uranged 90a to maimin he prospect of eational and ced pute ‘Socoume leading to poly outcomes Hat are equtable ad ied 2 he Durst ofthe pai interest Summaring Miler’ aa we might sy that this segues ab a precondition of 4 common socity-wide sel Uundestandng and common areas of pote devsion thi the ‘srerailming oujoniy of the inhabitants mst apesh the same lingua, thon not necesiy as her fist language. Beyond thi regis Sidepread adherence to cri tes of the pane an cob prices Undeling thom ao regen peer ings to tanto, the We ‘nt ths of make group enters into demas ofthe form We kee That we hase a legiinate elim fo ths, on the bash of broly shire Sexi values” AST understand bis. Miler abo blots ht the eta’ Shits 10 appeal «shared conception of the pu terest reas a Underpinning some sort of common ew of = inctie cllcthe ‘OF al these conditions. sem fo me that only the st ea wi any hiner! leptimacy he avait to ansthing ke sense of common ruionalsenity. Foray Miler ise adit with domes concer, nvm view) sone of the rest fs amy exentilrefetece to characters that diferente one couney Irom oters (eg the United Kino fom mos other members ofthe European Union Indeed, since he elves tha Britons cunnotsatsactoviy unite around thse conttoion nee i oui and moderns may be sid that he sll advocating te That would remove one ofthe mat smporant erences betwsen the {Unie Kingdom ands neighbours Afr thi efor had Been eucd> o Symposium rough, its hard ose how the content ofthese euston tha Me {voces forte schools of Bain would Be sry diferent from Ra 1 Be ound nother European bert democracies In the lat shaper (Concusion) Miler writes: have defended cnc ‘dverton that presets to students the princes on whi Their society rere, and ec the hisovieal proces whereby thowe pines bane Some into ply” (p. 198) He Bos on fo sy immediately” “Literals ae ‘ations wil Bd hemes somes te ore sues sch these Buti this kindof thing 10 come ae “natonabn Tsp cannot se sshy should he regard beng sn pimped conic With bean, Liber are presumty, st and focemot,peope who sno Uber Unsttions thane Ilyas seems pausble enough. Niller scree “enti the cotons orth thing, mou have to be 3 perverse Stora who would lbct to measures eer Torte Fostng OF Thoxe onions Ingo, th noabe that the American peti Teorist Amy ‘Gurmann, inher werk 9” what se als ‘democratic education advoctes 3 form of eve eduction that tcoeporates evertine proposed by Miler fd anything. woes beyond (Gutmann (947, 1951. Ths so doubt felts the Ameen Bele? (WhiGh goes ack wll over a Gem) tha the Primary mission of the pubic schol stn 8 arm country of Immigrants frou versity of polish cures sto & Body of eins nie of making eral democrat stations moth. The only ingrednt ip Miers “nations eat & Wha ight be incined to gap at as I have clr sugested, theses thatthe Sitios recwary 10 the faisenance of 9 ier dent poy have tbe ‘ppt hy some common view of a shared clletve purpose or perhaps ‘en destiny, Thee Is no qusion that this ca (and Uslly does) take forms that are profoundly incompatible th ibeal principles. ikerat ‘Somaru ingatone cannot work wel al, ta Oe sky sch {5 Norhernidand which preclimed by af! prime minister to bet Prowesunt sate for a Protest people’ of in 3 Croatia whose goverment rakes cea om the start that hone who ave Nt ee Croat can neset ope for anytina bu at best sscondctiesineshp. But Miler ould Sleary repute hs Kind of excanivy jot a8 eboney a any Hera ‘wh claimed 1 ct Nationa ay oh We get te est ea of what Miler bas im mind in his extended scuson in chapter 6 ofthe contested concept 9 Bris nationality. What teow mportmt here are te altcnatiee iat Miler rests Hei cast that county contaming English, Web and Soot he Gicks Norte "sland wth sacle minority of immigrants or their descendants fom ‘he Canbiesn and Indian wobeomine, abot be deine in any terms hit insinde naonabty im the seme thatthe Eagish andthe others a ational). ce or thn, region or alu. The British Erie Imght he thought to hase provided a worl isrcal prot between 1880 fin (athe oad) 1940, but it has had bo susesor Margret Thatcher’ David Miler On Nationa as vision of Bets pe, in which liberty of aseciation and democratic {Eeouotbiity were to be sterigd the Moloch of esonomieroth lel ies to inpize anyone ous te sal group who grew nish ick from er forts oement ssn more poms aerate wang Miler 1am bound to sy, aot 8 eren Seat of lp bee. prt fom opts that we might rally round the (eto e-wrten constaion. Be tse To sige ha the common projet at the moment et sae fora Soom prowet. My ow ew htt thee ae a amber a ins hat Tush peop can ipimatch take pide in. fr among lee the ouniy’s emarkabt coninbution fo the atthe physi aad elope] ‘Senco, atthe socal Scenes — out of all reportion to Se aD eee Iocaton. I's sake oy somebody whose parent hal fom “Vn shot el any conneton ith these ahve, WOM ey "Hat they ave a uch reason a6 U have. Ayaan can tll 8) aneesor. tere apriulturalbourcs'm Deson and arsine iment London Ivory Inuch doubt if any of them had ay pasa! connection wth great exes {Greet acconding to one spcultion, tring on te txeing end of the Revocitio a the Fact of Nats). Ober cantare ou ein hich ‘he Commonssih shred) the deft of Hie, ou rect of preserving the countnsie, am the duis of dency and aii Kindness ‘slebrated by Orvel ad tll perhaps surpesng. surisns For example Toot bene tht there any country im which passerby wil cme se {que Tote aif somo) who Tals down nthe sire oI volved in acide) ‘Although ssh things it frm the hiss of main en Unig o Betuin 1 would ets 10 cone they ase wuss the sa ot of ‘ich am alkembracing National Purpoe i ing to he forged. But do we ed one? Do we want one? For my own part rear the ck of one 95 mong the mow saci entre of contemporary BrainMiller’s silence on bureaucracy KELWIN KNIGHT David Miler national. Acondingly. he presets am argument thst lial commmonits shuld as fas posite be opis in soch a way ‘Rar thie members share common ational ident. which binds the Nopsterin thease thir many diverse poate and grup Metis’ (Met 1995" 185), However, ‘no one mpl « nationalist and nothing ee she nay bea lita nations sci patina, a comet nationalist (isa) or these alternatives, Mer Fs peimaiy socal nationals. Be Irises to Bnd people ogter because he thinks tt ony insofar as poole Tel ems to beso bound ean ‘pole communities’ enjoy suit Kiimac) to rduteresourss betwee the members, Ths hypothe ‘Srmically supportable may be wed to explain the unstsl sazess of Socal democrat retiibvive polls in som northern and ental ‘Eorpes nation sas, lng that ofthe posta Labour povernmedtn Bihan, Miler might then, be seen a drawing a prc Fenn fom Fistor to nfo a proposals to ow soit polis might be eid Miler mt he congratulated on fis presse, gen that polteal eons amore fen follow political change chan antpat it, Hi. in fonts, isa ly argument published when invent voices in the Th batour Party have teguh publicly to debate how sos can Engst wth national dens (ee Thorson 1995) pd te lender, hn Sete the solar spot of 194, has detanal We te parts. Ths ‘Babe pato pany (Bit 1998: “That tere ira protien in combining scilsm apd nationalism may, of ‘ute also be Tern om hisory. Their combination by. for example, {Burs Cortadint andthe Saver brohers ay be seen a the ils itn of fassn (Strmell 1998) and tional socialism. Teta, ‘cktration oh wasome salinity made soci poticans susceptible 10 fre’ appat (inte 195), Mies way around ths poblr 0 ess {hat ha sees of ronan And soca i ected ibn the core fla! pnts of iba --iokaton abd fee speech, the re ok {Be eovernmen by coment of the goverte, and so fort (Mil 1995 199). ste lib socalsm of Jue: aver or Orwell ate than she ital sociale of rel, Mussolini or Mos. ‘hcontnely. Mle presents atonal io te eminently itera form of -a pinople of nately (gp 2187-8) and esrb 1a a frm of| ierasm-oncompiunitaran foundations. as opposed 1 “itera indvidatoe foundations 198) or example rather than suing that Sate poner sepa by individu coment (eventhough sovenment iy cons of the governd” a "core polikal pincple of eras, a a David Miler On Noanaly on poli nonsense when hey sve ope th if he rina cman, wh request he msscts an tesa eh fmt shoud be repre, bu So hx there sul Be Hoda ‘Sment co msi or pais 198) "The prin of sana sins not oly ps nc a oho teen eer ‘lon cpm at ay ples trugh tats Bt Ha Stes nnn Wier chrcts gk, eet ih ray ens, gin rcnmn vy te omen we onal oa ese) sero tect in Ov Natty tow oie Spuments eons rnc 8 ‘uenatienilonse, muita, tdci or univers Hie Ar i sgt dn than ad th stem fds el A pean con he ny toeh fericpetig so sth paces and hogh hr sation fo coleetes INS amy ad ost a op 3)Thn these copmentarn hiqu of nd hteiun bad by comeates Wat Sa fash Miler sala atonal am cower nto he itn be dvs twee hemp” arp fr conan 3 normative argument Torchbeashipe * Nationally it Meniy we ae common an syn ug ese ie "rom th pan ot ofen ona sty, Cie pi sat 85 teh ran gh cy. ore “his combination of slsims is cobsrent ad compelling, bt perhaps & prem may sil be found with thi libra and epaticin frm of soca fionalsm For Mile. pacts ad clive insttation alike comstate pessoal deny. The appurently fatal lam, im good Human ie ‘Sublses the proper parameters a eormatve deste and pot ation Hs postions, indea, rationally superior to that Lutes abd rmulcuturalss who avoid acknowledging the necessary bac of Merah pois i the insti ofthe nations by king instead of society” fr “the polical communty"" (Miler 1995: 185). Kr would te carping to emis the places in Miles agument viet he ao lies in ef ch tenpeecne sts for state” Nevrths, the Fegueey of Such lapses Songs Ua sometimes unde i ism poison "An ination of whet this rendu ptlen may he gen by Alaa Mactnyein noting that Miler fs distinguish “between Prien the: way ia wich Is insGtubonalzed™ (Maclatee 1998" 184) For Macinige, community ase from parispation in conestonal practes 4nd ther prt form of reasoning. #91 om orgmsatina nett. Insitutions are ncesiary to nxn practices but reser nbelve money fang power which consanly threaten to corrupt those peace the staining of whieh joss ther exisence (p.I84).A stat, frm thiee Symposium David Miler Or Naa 29 erp, sn atid ira fbaencraie mange(p. £9 Far tom nga poll communi in ic adn can manny ‘pte ste keds to oy sch Cooma ess a Enasie pecstne cae pus who ae abarced fm any Scat onto as Mir has pu sommarang Most Mie 88 oh “This eaoses the weakest pt of Mis argument fr nainalism. He take pct pn Or tonal as hore oro cfs maton with ‘se "Nato mus a community of peopl ih te apraon terol sledcemining 258 ante" re ote foe Ilion that they may ani 0 poten fr tema” Mi 19.19 Of swarm he qualifies and cborses hsdfiaton of mation. New tices two inplotons af stave noube became they se cen throws On Nero: Fath debton moka baton concep Incurble om st alhough on or). Seton verte calc consocyian ad feats a pol! actors Mile et the eit ht nto cd beara a ce plea agente isthe aon ad odes oul be sae ts egrstn t poplr oF Savonal wi in eiciony the renee sa Conratiny (Ml toes "Tha “mer ess Gal m,n he one! se 0 link natoatsm 1 ciuesip ind demos, However, in he above Afton and wben wring tos “atonal cl teinaon he Sey ‘Spi tut atonal fray eit pr foe cen satel Sale athoug hw toe ih stat ay, deca codioa Xeecnanly appl wih some ve fre tae exproson Secs een ad vores et apt oy ition! means forse pusine formulation ond expen though tera pccedes. it's Bard 1 how where t bepntiking ss with hi of « colecve wil when to argon a advanced in spon Wha en be Sie ih Happens nt ony toca mepore ets Foti dngeou a rmowtate by macho arn polis am he Scones onards Tie danger ape allhe me obs hen ‘lume at's sahon so Be ciedtermining snes shoal i {arm posible sachv onna’ (iler 185150) Thk ci fade in sppor of “lisuive democracy hat of te. many forms of SSemuncy: ope ar matutonase wit ser fe thc democracy ivan compton Tae tan Comet at prove ‘Asin Miler’ positon, Fuge that ate cnno be et with the wil of ation" of any other olion Stern Na Darezcae appro af re 10 which the democracy mate el sited ata sou of eptination eaderip and pols. Miers coum ‘tran came npr sinc Habra) et oer emery cat rosie any strong sens of personal entity’ and hat people gure sch Este are_both plausble Miler ix thorefre, righ. sugges that fatonatisn i ust as another mins of gaining oth ses ad follesvist potest does not follom, however. thal eatonlivm Sasictory Source of personal emit. Peopc sense of Went nde Inglyconstutd by ‘hei sociation no ‘oles ad by “parte potg in social peat. ut this docs not ena that it costed by ‘Abo plsunble is Miles communitarian cao that mucus, a ombination wih the global market. undermites people's seme of si emit and soldat (Mier 195: 18), However eter tings ay have a Sraieystomising eet ier repeat, bu dos ot answer, Matric ‘hrge that "areata peosdure fend "0 dstioy communal ts fd absiit indus fom any soca nity Take the Tacoins, for ample, Tey di ot champion, RSL. Popular sovereignty and. then, ‘atonal Hon 194) order to ety & sk ofa ses of ents. On ‘he conta, m nde o promot these 38 sours of persons ent they hd 1 outaw and anempt to destroy myriad eer coleeive sours of personal ident) Eewnere this process may have teen less deat foes hive expanded ther ower fo aime soil function previously pevfome i other, eh mote conpeative ways hut every cna fationastkgiimation of sates ts kly to have the elt of Tote “ndermining cooperative practices sconce communis, ‘Can this charge be dal wih [rom the policy sli, socially rest ad phlowphiclyscptsal stance that Mille bas. now etn ‘laboratieg for many seu? la his Bist book, Mr atempted "to welte Tnerpectation of jute 9 ew OF soc Hn sash a way tha the ‘indeting ole of the social Model becomes apparent’ thal each of ‘rious perpanes pon socely "vas. show To support 3. spaate Priel of soil join (Miler T9TH 1S3, 48). “Our ob in piel theory isto enpliate te ise and prin Tound In out) care according 16 tht culture's “sare ater loge sn empineal evidence. Given the “sharctrste phenomenon of contmporaty soe at oope appear to hold relushly diferent vac etre’ the pola theorist ould not = argue conclusney in favour sone poneple of sie a the expense of hes" but oly Stend soc ratve erspestive i he thostht that the evidence was stony is eu (Mier 1974: 383. Miler fivouted perspective hak ronuined clear 30 “zuharin concptiot of jae will be preserved in commun i at SS at manages to Muintan else, soldat. reliomhips among. is members (33) eis fom ths stance that fe was abl, late. aly 1 ‘onounce that eben thos [social who Tega commit havin Independent pot valve mast rely omit practice to underpin Thee Sistas conse (Miler 19894: 40) Convery he ea agains that poieal community should be based on anything er tan therationstte as comrry “the ideas and principles of our comtemporary care fe. Miler 1984 19-81, Milers previous hook reais the ental statement of bis remarkably consistent posal poston (her 19896). In On Nationals eae gone & Tong may to elaborate tht part ofthe agement whieh attracted mon ‘tial ateaton, hs defence of naionsity seas the pormatve atac ‘one of iberal inverslam, However ger his eavber acknowledgement ‘hat “bureucate ere” isthe preominant frm of ogpanization in ‘modern soy (Miler T98h T e sheald sey mow orm hi steton to wht he fae far unscussed he problem of bureaucracy’ (Met Tso 227) Nor bore he has dent with ha prob o away which i onsitent with hiv etal las about polite commun. wl be Spparet that thou clas fly coher References a ane ee A very British Scot JAMES G. KELLAS, Laney of lagen Poses and poise sents su, “How do you thnk of youre in ters sf navonatiy” (Sytem ThiceScotlnd, and Seotish Election Stay 1992), ‘nd “Do you sce yourself inthe ner Tutte as (Nationals) Europea European + (Satioaly: European ony: (Nationality) onl? (Eurebaror tier 4, December 1993). Ploophers sack at Davi Mil ae mot mich insted in stch qustins, and even less ithe ansmers his book On Nationality angthing to go by (ee pI whee Such “epi rected: there are only two ffeenes fo sich sues, one on Catton Sod one on Seon) ‘Philosophers dea at so much ip empirical resarch a in concep and thie: Nothing wrong wth that But thee out to be # link between the two approaches ip the say of mona, epeily as Miler gy sulscrbe tothe magia commmuntier school of thought about mains Shichi Risa on people's perceptions of the mation and thor own tatlonaiy. So when those im Scotland overwhelmingly answer that they ‘think of threes as Sesh in tems of nationality, even if most also nk of theses ax Brie i ode or Milt ert that the te “palo is mending to describe Scola? ip. 178). Would anyone fake tim serious. pecially ts Re hat nothing to put nis place except ational minor” fly ensconsd within the Bish "naton"? is idea seems to be that a sense of dl (nation) entity’ ssh as Scots and Beth (lo wich majority in Sella do subscribe, though 50-40 per ent ny they have “Scot, not Brisk” ational ett) aes the Scolsh wenity only une eptimate way of “being Both I this ‘Sew, Bran emerge 5 the only tue 'mation (Scotland beng Fld ot) oF ‘3 Englund, since" atonal finked wo he Church of Enatand TTA This preference fr ‘Bin’ ove Scotland a 8 ation 8 90tsurprisng in the context of Niler’s Book, sce much of the dsusion on nationality snd sovereignty is actualy about states (misting cll nation-states at 10) although hei aware ofthis concept econ at p. 19. Late on ratios” sx o mean cizensi. athe ate shel 0 carey wih i Jn olga to ha oma ato ent ( ertsning Yo the ate) 0 the children of strane (pp. 145-6), Soin ths terminology cons een nahoniculual minontes and ster, which oocor wie et ‘hocued and asta onus ace wally died i era that ake ‘he appear Mggate. In contast, stats sch 38 Britain. France and {Canad ae sexta tv nutone wose statchood fs unguestoned by the ‘pincipeof sonaiy,Antstate nationals in tex stats ae eset ‘Surf oder and even hay motated. For example Scotch atonal,an. _ Symposium “ihe been eared baed on a dese to “opal the ol the ‘Nowh Set at England's expense (p 105 nlading pte) ACN. li Poe factor camerporiry SNP caraponing. wb ch moe sad fom the right of aon! selfetermpaion, Coram, ye aod Wg ‘aonalsm donot ata mention nthe context of Frances nationality pp 13-4), Ques seraratsn so good gp. 14,117) and is incompatible with, {he overarching and more leita “Canaan national Sen" (183). shunt cannot be petered on tous of nationality alone (p15). Catalan ang Base atonalss in Spin areal right as fog asthe ws say thin Spin pp. 1168) Teall thoi mattis gts shee sri crus the Czech Republic nd Slovakia i "good reason to spurte politely. because the ste towed “wo communis whowe eational neni ae ceil dnc” (p. TW) Bulan tof Bena wt has fat fur inc subsae tonal iden and one ste Rational identi)? And were thee ne ‘Cechonova sete ae the ae Brih ides? How many chine mvonal senior are pede to conse Baio, which ck ‘hen lial form nton ste? ‘Whe appeting to accept the onlin cans abe Cash Republic at Stovakin (bere no teleredoms on separation were eld i ce that Miler doesnot acep it in ma other pase Some Patios. he sys wil have to site for lev than full l-goveroment they are sographiesly intermingled wih other eroups (P81). In ict, such a condition apis row using ad seta tts C0 some degre, apd Miler’ condition Eh en enourage a out of en ceasing To gt onthe right side frail Tomogensitnany caves ub sould the recat 185 sate nthe UN PS Sipportadin thei sovereignty Ilse tha stesbave he een egy ‘se nation for some phosphor aswel Tor sate goverment Miler Healy emerges ae someting of Bish atonal, which be prefers to Sets, Webs and lish atonal His “ect” of resting ation Diigo Bean through civic education (p12) sounds ke the ontmporary Conservative Party New Right “Scots children should tearm Boch history, ba shoud focue purity on developments Scolsed" (p. 182). OF cour ey 8o that slats, he such hones ‘duction docs not news lead fo the dese rsa of a stonge Beith atinstte oa Seth tatonalst perspective Is adopted. The feos on ‘Scots developments might edanger the Bris ste nd i testing that such Yoes wa introduced ia Seth choos the peri of Fee Scoish national inte 1960s. Linda Coley book Briton. Fersie the Nason 17071837 (ale University Pres, 1992) i quoted with approval but her condusion ot flowed through. She sats tht the factors tha ravi forthe forging of British nation i the pst have larg ceased {To operate (p73) The estat separate Webs, Seotsh ad Engh ‘alts oF More kel a federal Bein, ae seh 38 appropriate (P35) Miller's answer 1 de weakening of Bish rational identity fs To ge David Miler @ Narioal a0 the nations within Briain any e-gverament (devolution and federalism Ac not menoned) bu io integrate These nations fre within the Bish atone The only concession 10 Scots and Welsh rationalism 69 Stren Bish Coostition sith 4 Bil of Rights. Such a acangement “ho puaed fer Cape cp TM), but Miler misses the pont that twa rose the 1982 Constitution wth sts sil 1 equal ats forall ovis ou the Canadian Charter of Right that raed she hackles of Freah ‘Guebecken, who sw theres as a “stne soit” with clam t SriSshoad and sovereignty one what they sw ax national vi gs Tantra) be posse 10 indulge in latersay” Bris oF anudian nation baling. Cova Colley doesnot gve any grounds or ‘Simson the Brith case, ad the voters in Quche nthe referenda of ‘Getter 1995 wre more separa than before deste (or bese of) the 19s? consttatonl change “Pocono John Start Ms eatnent of ationaity haut hs ‘won Mi ow selene maton as an ese peice oF "represen The veroment, but it wae Beth, not Scot, nationality tha he Fecognd even ihe was an ethnie Sot For him 8 fr Miler, Ssotland Costot i snatinaligy oaion apd: Botan sepresentedcvlacion and Pore. That ns ie the golden age of Mis Briain, desea by ‘Coty but ecw coday when the con nen ese” "Thee ile support fF many actos! naomi in Miller's ambi ‘ously pronation book And there is ot much material for poll Seebitinoget hir cthintoswbatever tte might be for phlvophes Toxine former, pater of tatenation dainaton apd dscrimiaton, ‘el or anc brad cp oil moni, and sone 1 ‘Site on maton drt, no to mention atu vung im eetons abd ‘Sieadume. din ta menunencns, ltthese ae ruc to the demi {Graf at outomer Se los s aionat direct ston (he-armane a6 Wet athe htlospor in TRA tersinlogy). Thor harly anything aout Pat power ad petal behaviour i NPs ook, nor i there much Frere abou wha edo psivey ou atonal clans In specie eases. Stmetines (a math Scotand and Qube) Bas toma sates takes over We can bent om such of Miler tes. especialy its ness ope Trine peso approch 4 natinalon mena, But A HES Sut to tut be pote jodgement