This thesis paper sets out to explore nationalism and national identity in East Asia, with a specific lens on China, Hong Kong and Taiwan as the comparative case-study. By examining the theoretical arguments and concepts of nationalism and national identity, the research questions to analyze in this paper are: (1) If individual actors and societies can define and construct their own national identity, simultaneously combat and resist the imposition of a nationalism ideology? and (2) If the rise of nationalism must result in a corresponding rise in the perception of one’s national identity in society? Despite the rising Chinese nationalism, both cases demonstrate a high peripheral and civic identity as Hongkongers and Taiwanese. Using both quantitative and qualitative content analysis, three hypotheses are process-traced and assessed to elucidate the phenomenon. The findings suggest that there exists a discrepancy of people’s perception of their national identity; individual actors can react differently and combat the imposition of a nationalism ideology, and the expansion of nationalism would not necessarily cause a parallel correlation in people’s national identity.

No description available.

This thesis argues for a reformulated concept of nationality in order to avoid the problem of multiple national identities, which Lior Erez has shown to constitute a severe problem for the theory of liberal nationalism. At first, the problem’s plausibility is through idékritik, finding aspects of self-determination at its core. Thereafter, through a process of reflective equilibrium, the thesis concludes that the inclusion of Margaret Moore’s criterion of political aspiration, together with Ludvig Beckman’s all-affected principle, would avoid the problem. The thesis thereby highlights nationalism’s relationship to questions of self-determination, -rule, and sovereignty, a domain of nationalism that seems to be hitherto undertheorized.

This study examines how The Times and The Irish Times framed the Anglo-Irish War from September to December 1920. The research question explores how the British and Irish press framed the Anglo-Irish War based on political and national affiliations. The purpose of the paper is to contribute to an understanding of how the newspapers chose to frame the war based on their own interests and perspectives. The military-historical interest lies in understanding the role of the media in war and how they influence the reader’s perceptions of the war and its participants. The source material used consists of 14 newspaper editions from The Times and 15 from The Irish Times between September 1st and December 31st, 1920. The sources are digitized primary materials obtained from the newspapers’ online archives. To analyse the material, the method of qualitative text analysis has been employed, involving careful reading to identify trends in the newspapers. Combined with the method, the framing theory has been applied to interpret frames in relation to the newspapers’ political stance and national identity. Previous research indicates that the newspapers were not objective observers of the war, but through their critical reporting, influenced public opinion and the outcome of the war. This study demonstrates that The Times and The Irish Times framed the war and its participants differently, thereby creating different versions of the reality of the war. The Times focused on British reprisals and emphasized the international reputation of the empire. The Irish Times focused on the IRA and the consequences of their actions for the Irish people. The results are considered relevant today to remind consumers of the media to be critical of sources and aware of media’s framing.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.