Families
Dannah
Why does Anderson propose that nationalism might be better grouped with "kinship" and "religion" rather than with "liberalism" and "fascism" (p. 7)?
Grace
Anderson proposes the inability of people to imagine the nation before the decline of the 'certainties' of religion, monarchies, and time. Why, then, was it the 'nation' that grew out of the subsequent quest for belonging? Why not 'family' or 'language,' for example?
Imagination as mechanism
Cathy
Anderson writes that nationalism “is imagined because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each lives the image of their communion” (6). Can we interpret this claim to mean that the mere capacity for members to experience a kind of connectivity with other members demonstrates an imagined community? In what other ways might nationalism be “imagined” by members of a particular group?
Cathy
Anderson suggests that the power of print can create communities by simply knowing that there are others like you: “They did come to visualize in a general way the existence of thousands and thousands like themselves through print-language” (77). How can this be? Is Anderson alluding to a kind of force of shared beliefs (akin to Durkheim’s collective representations) that manifests realities?
Lauren
Anderson describes the discovery of advanced civilizations beyond the European continent as suggesting “an irremediable human pluralism (69).” His analysis of the utopian novels of the time as “criticisms of contemporary society” suggests there was a perceived relationship between the civilizations of Europe and the civilizations of other newly “discovered” continents. What are the possibilities for an imagined community that extends beyond the bounds of the national to something more grandly human and cross-cultural?
Lucas
If a nation can be defined as “an imagined political community – and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign”, what prevents the nations from reinventing or recreating themselves constantly? What are the social bonds that prevent the nation from collapsing under the imaginative and fertile social relations of its constituent members?
Alison
Anderson discusses cultural "imaginings," such as religious and dynastic communities, as precursors to nationalism in Europe and to a shift in the conceptualization of time. To what extent could one say that Durkheim's concept of "collective conscience" was also a part of this shift or present in the previous "imaginings" (novels, kingdoms, churches, etc.)?
New community consciousness?
Dannah
Since Anderson sees such a strong causal relationship between the development of print media and the rise of nationalism, what would he say about the rise of Internet communication technologies (such as Facebook) and globalization (squishy concept though that may be)?
Lauren
Or might new manners of communication and linguistic evolution facilitate new manifestations of imagined communities?
Nathalie
Can we compare the effect print capitalism had at the time to raising national consciousness to the effects of what are being called "facebook and twitter revolutions" in the Arab world?
Are nations dead? Should they be?
Grace
What are some ways in which perceived membership in an imagined community is constituted in the absence of political power (i.e. for stateless 'nations')?
Lauren
Writing in 1983 Anderson asserts that the end of nationalism “…is not remotely in sight. Indeed, nation-ness is the most universally legitimate value in the political life of our time (3).” His analysis of nations as imagined communities drawn together by vernacular language and print capitalism raises questions as to the fate of nations in our current era. If we follow his trajectory of emerging imagined networks, technological and communicative advances have facilitated the growth of communities among anonymous individuals through social media that exist far removed from the boundaries of politically established nations. In this context, does the term “nation,” as Anderson defines it, retain its geographic and political immediacy, or can the more abstract concept behind the term, the “imagined communities” that give rise to its legitimacy, be discussed in a distinctly different manifestation while still retaining a similar level of political, philosophical, or emotional relevance?
Language
Lucas
How can written-language produce such an effect in fomenting social interconnectivity in a world where most of the people are illiterate?
Non-states / Non-aligned States
Lucas
Anderson’s emphasis on typically Western characteristics depicts the nation as an essentially Western social phenomenon, silencing other peoples’ imagined communities, or rather delegitimising them as nations. Thus, how can one use Anderson’s concept in other peoples’ nations (using here the same definition proposed by the author) who
emphasise cyclical time, spoken language, kinship economy and bodily manipulation as elements for social integration and organisation?
Mary
Through his discussion on print media, is the author stating/suggesting that a precursor to nationalism is community-wide literacy? If so, why must a community share a literacy before being able to become a nation, and how much of your population must be literate? How does this affect your ability to imagine your community? Does the advent/popularization of television and non-print media affect these conclusions?
Nathalie
What about ethnic groups within nations? How do we include them in Benedict's imagined communities?
Alison
Just as Anderson speaks of pilgrimages and travel stimulating solidarity among imagined communities, people now, with so much international travel, are becoming much more aware of a global community. Yet, within nations maintain strong identities and there exists a firm conceptualization of who its people are and what sets them apart. Countries now seem to be colonies of a global enterprise. What might Anderson say about this? How could he explain it?
Mary
My question relates to the potential relationship between these new nationalist movements mentioned by the author and the established nations/world (represented by the UN and “old nations”). I wonder if these new nationalist movements (including sub-nationalisms) take the nationalist form by their own choice, or to fit into global nationalistic molds established by “Old Nations” and supranational entities like the UN as to what a group must do to be treated and respected as a nation in order to gain legitimacy for their causes so to speak on a global scale. Would the answer to this question affect the what becomes the imagined community for that group (potentially affecting their nationhood, via the author's definition, altogether)?
