Anderson notes in a brief bibliography on the concept of the state in the Arab world, this approach of ungluing sovereignty from statehood is potentially disconcerting on normative grounds as sovereign power may be ‘reattached’ to monarchs, princely families or even firms.15 I do not go quite so far in my analysis. Instead, I argue that such an approach is necessary to understand the claims to power made by regimes and from this, the way in which political life is contested. Ultimately, focusing on sovereignty allows for exploration of political communities and their
”, “nation”, “state”, and “political community” interchangeably’. 6 In a discussion of state authority which is pertinent for considerations of community, Joseph Raz says ‘Throughout the discussion I refer interchangeably to the state, which is the political organization of a society, its government, the agent through which it acts, and the law, the vehicle through which much of its power is exercised’. 7 But
Walter Benjamin after, was acutely aware of the role of violence in constituting and sustaining forms of political community. On this view, there is an uneasy continuum between the polite deliberation and disagreement within forums, senates and parliaments, and the fighting and killing that bring these into being and sustain them internally against opposition and against rival communities and
meaningless if it is considered in isolation from the state, because the modern state shaped the nationalist agenda and provided it with an overarching objective – the possession of statehood.30 The closest Breuilly came to outlining an account of the emergence of a national ‘order of things’ was a brief discussion of the transfer of political power from monarchs to an enlarged political community. He suggested that the driving force behind this transfer was the need to defend the monarch’s territory against the rise of similar states, though this tautology is unconvincing
disaffection of Israeli Palestinians with the Israeli regime ( Amara, 2000 ). 20 So the Palestinian minority within Israel could become alienated from both political communities. Ethnic and religious tolerance National security does not require ethnic and religious homogeneity or cohesiveness. What it does require is that differentiated ethnic and religious groups avoid internecine
states’ (Haas 1958 : 16), then clearly it is difficult to conceive of CFSP as a process of integration. In CFSP, no central institutions have emerged which possess jurisdiction over member states’ foreign policies, nor has CFSP led to the emergence of a political community defined as ‘a condition in which specific groups and individuals show more loyalty to their central political institutions than to any other political
that he alone has any sense of good and evil, of just and unjust, and the like, and the association of living beings who have this sense makes a family and a state. 17 For Aristotle, only those with “the power of speech” to “set forth the just and unjust” can be party to a political relationship or members of a political community. Humans who lack this power, like other animals, may have
series of international treaty-based rules, while others prefer to speak of an incipient constitutional system driven by aspirations akin to those involved in traditional state-building. From an integration 4 Theory and reform in the European Union theory perspective, although the larger polity exceeds the Deutschian notion of a ‘pluralistic security-community’, it has failed to meet either the sociopsychological conditions of the older functionalist school or those related to the formation of a neofunctionalist-inspired European ‘political community’. Profoundly
political nature of Islam is not new, with a range of scholars suggesting that the religion was established alongside a political community led by the Prophet, which was inherently concerned with the ordering of people, not space. Moreover, such scholars also argue that the Quran offers guidance on all facets of life, which makes it political. Of course, these views are contested. Nazih Ayubi argues that this approach is Orientalist and that the Quran offers no explicit guidance on political life and community, albeit using a narrow definition of politics.2 This view
-out that Pearson had originally wanted did not happen. The impact of Suez did, however, help to ensure that interest in the Atlantic Community concept was maintained. The second phase of interest – during 1957 – followed on directly. 1957 saw the publication of the first significant academic contribution to the debate. This was Political Community and the North Atlantic Area – the results of a study by a group of scholars working