Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality http://books.google.com/books?id=OHz70fY8t2UC&lpg=PA12&pg=PA12#v=onepage&q&f=false (Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed. 2012), p. 12.
Nations and nationalism since 1780 programme, myth, reality (1992)
“The nation that refuses to behave nationalistically, when all the other nations are doing so, is fatally destined to die.”
“L'ora del nazionalismo” (“Nationalism's hour”), 1919 essay in Alfredo Rocco’s Scritti e discorsi politici, Milan: Giuffrè. Vol. 2, (1938) p. 507
Help us to complete the source, original and additional information
Alfredo Rocco 16
Italian politician and jurist 1875–1935Related quotes
Speech in London (16 December 1970); as quoted in The Times [London] (17 December 1970) and in Great Jewish Quotations (1996) by Alfred J. Kolatch, p. 115.
2010s, South Korea’s Nationalist-Left Front (April 2019)
Zareef, Adil Saturday, (January 28, 2006) The Demise of a Dream. The Daily Times https://archive.is/20130416144347/www.dailytimes.com.pk/print.asp?page=2006%5C01%5C28%5Cstory_28-1-2006_pg7_35
"Right of Nations to Self-Determination", (1904), The Lenin Anthology
1910s
1930s, Quarantine Speech (1937)
Source: Simone Weil : An Anthology (1986), The Power of Words (1937), p. 224
Context: What a country calls its vital economic interests are not the things which enable its citizens to live, but the things which enable it to make war; petrol is much more likely than wheat to be a cause of international conflict. Thus when war is waged it is for the purpose of safeguarding or increasing one's capacity to make war. International politics are wholly involved in this vicious cycle. What is called national prestige consists in behaving always in such a way as to demoralize other nations by giving them the impression that, if it comes to war, one would certainly defeat them. What is called national security is an imaginary state of affairs in which one would retain the capacity to make war while depriving all other countries of it. It amounts to this, that a self-respecting nation is ready for anything, including war, except for a renunciation of its option to make war. But why is it so essential to be able to make war? No one knows, any more than the Trojans knew why it was necessary for them to keep Helen. That is why the good intentions of peace-loving statesman are so ineffectual. If the countries were divided by a real opposition of interests, it would be possible to arrive at a satisfactory compromise. But when economic and political interests have no meaning apart from war, how can they be peacefully reconciled?
The Guardian (4 June 1979), quoted in Simon Heffer, Like the Roman: The Life of Enoch Powell (1998), p. 822
1970s