In the introduction to the archival publication of documents by Hans Kohn the editors point out that Ab Imperio had earlier engaged with the scholar’s legacy. Kohn’s lectures published in the journal were delivered in 1919 and 1943. The editors briefly discuss Kohn’s biography. Born in Prague, Kohn became involved in discussions of Zionism early in his life. He served in the Austro-Hungarian army and spent time in Russia (in southern Siberia) as a prisoner of war. The editors argue that his understanding of nationalism was shaped by his historical encounters. In particular, Kohn’s lifelong commitment to Zionism was a formative influence on his ideas about political community. Kohn’s early embrace of nationalism was connected to his hopes for Zionism and his search for a suitable political language for describing a national community. In 1943, Kohn, by then a professor of modern European history at Smith College, had behind him several years of life in Palestine, where he worked in Zionist organizations and studied the Arab world. He also carefully observed and reported on the rise of Nazism and Stalinism in Europe. Kohn’s lecture of 1943 reflects more distance from nationalism.
The aim of the research is empirical testing of the most prominent modernist theories of nationalism. These theories view nation-building and national identities as an outcome of transfer from traditional to modern societies and differ with regard to what spheres of modernity are considered the most relevant to nationalism. The study uses the integrated database of the third, fourth and fifth waves of the World Values Survey to test hypotheses derived from major modernist theories of nationalism. Results of country-level regression analysis show that nationalism is closer related to general value sets, such as tolerance of deviant behaviour than political attitudes. Regionally specific theories of nationalism are revealed to have the highest predictive power for a country average level of nationalism. Theories posing nationalism as challenged by local and cosmopolitan identities are rejected by empirical evidence of their positive interrelation. The results imply that contemporary nationalism is different from that of the early modernity reflected in modernist theories and suggests less strict choices and more hybridization of multiple identities. Keywords: nationalism, modernist theories of nationalism, modernity, modernization, national commitment, multiculturalism.
Several approaches to the concept of fatherhood present in Western sociological tradition are analyzed and compared: biological determinism, social constructivism and biosocial theory. The problematics of fatherhood and men’s parental practices is marginalized in modern Russian social research devoted to family and this fact makes the traditional inequality in family relations, when the father’s role is considered secondary compared to that of mother, even stronger. However, in Western critical men’s studies several stages can be outlined: the development of “sex roles” paradigm (biological determinism), the emergence of the hegemonic masculinity concept, inter-disciplinary stage (biosocial theory). According to the approach of biological determinism, the role of a father is that of the patriarch, he continues the family line and serves as a model for his ascendants. Social constructivism looks into man’s functions in the family from the point of view of masculine pressure and establishing hegemony over a woman and children. Biosocial theory aims to unite the biological determinacy of fatherhood with social, cultural and personal context. It is shown that these approaches are directly connected with the level of the society development, marriage and family perceptions, the level of egality of gender order.