Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-c654p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-31T22:29:16.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Discussion of the Papers of Tonu Parming, Konstantyn Sawczuk, and Laszlo M. Tikos

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Andris Skreija*
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska

Extract

First, a comment on all three papers. The authors seem to confuse the terms dissent and dissenter with nationalism and nationalist. To me the two types of concepts are quite different. Nationalists are concerned with the establishment, exaltation, liberation or preservation of their own ethnic group–nation. Their intellectual position is basically amoral. I do not mean to imply that they have no morals, but that moral issues have little emphasis in their arguments and polemics. In contrast, the dissenters argue that some government action, law or policy is morally wrong and ought to be stopped or repealed. There may be similarities in the tactics adopted and issues espoused by these two groups. Still, scholars and especially behavioral scientists ought to keep the two types separate for analytical purposes. Of the three papers under discussion the one that “sins” the most in this respect is the one by Mr. Parming. And yet there the differentiation should have been the most explicit since the paper is trying to come to grips with the question from a theoretical point of view.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for the Study of Nationalities of Eastern Europe, 1973 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)