Abstract
This article aims to make sense of the apparent incoherencies in Michael Ignatieff's theory of nationalism by first considering how he interprets his mentor's theory of nationalism. Ignatieff was greatly influenced by Isaiah Berlin in his writings on liberalism and nationalism, to the point of mirroring some of his inconsistencies. The resulting discrepancies in the two men's theories arise from a certain tension between liberalism and nationalism that has induced them both to define the latter in terms reflecting the integrity of the former. Understanding Ignatieff's interpretation of Berlin's ideas makes apparent that, in his own work, he draws on Berlin's use of empathy as a method, and on his rejection of violence as a criterion, in distinguishing between fundamental types of nationalism.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
