Difference Between Nationalism And Nationalist Historiography

Introduction

The sociological critique of the nationalist struggle, as well as nationalist historiography, must begin from an interrogation of the very terms, denoting conceptual or analytical categories, that have been used in the fields of political science and history. Nationalism, and its associated concepts of nation, nationality, and nation-state, among others, have traditionally been conceptually studied in the discipline of political science as an ideology, at par with other analogous political ideologies such as liberalism or socialism. The discipline of history, its other intellectual ground, has studied it as praxis - as narratives of emerging ideologies and movements, that conclude successfully in the formation of nation-states of varied natures. Thus, on the one hand, nationalism is almost something of an ahistorical ideology, on the other it is a narrative with a beginning, a period of growth, and a conclusion. Sociology, as a discipline, has directly interrogated the problem of nationalism more recently since the 1960’s, particularly since changes in the discipline, emerging from actual crises in nationalism in multicultural states among others, which have forced its focus on the nation as a specific and significant historically constructed collective. Complementary changes in historiography, which has opened up to analytical tools of sociology, is also significant. Current scholarship on nationalism acknowledges the necessary collaboration across