The Nation State and Prestige -- Mimetic Theory and Literary Study

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:16:32 04/27/08 Sun
Author: JPJ II
Subject: The Nation State and Prestige
In reply to: Jfish 's message, "Nuclear Rivalry" on 18:16:51 04/23/08 Wed

I suppose that there is something to be said for the prestige factor affecting national actions. Charles Sumner wrote in the late 1800's that the growth of Nationalism contributed to countries acting purely for the sake of gaining more and more prestige. Many of the actions of the 19th century and 20th century were made by countries that stood to gain nothing but prestige by them. Napolean's campaign's into Europe, for example, were discouraged by the highest members of the French Government (his brothers and Tallyrand) who understood that they would be detrimental to France in the long term even if they were beneficial to Napolean's image in the short run. Sumner argues in an essay we read for Heritage that monarchies naturally fall into the trap of Prestige Fights because in them the whole of the state is concentrated onto a single person, but that republics should be more immune to "the trap of monarchies" as there was no single person who could claim to be aggrandizing themselves through expansion or conquest. Of course, the modern notion that the state does in fact posses ontological being outside of its citizens puts every nation in danger of 'acting in its best interests' and of performing the "acts of high state craft" that Franklin hoped the US could be rid of.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]