Your search

Following a similar study in the United States, 210 Canadian school children were asked their flag preferences. Both the Union Jack and the Red Ensign were rated high, with a slight preference for the Union Jack. Appreciation of the U. S. flag, although initially high in the lower grades, dropped off somewhat at the high school level. Results with the U. N. and Russian flags were very similar to those for American children: the U. N. showing steady growth in preference; the Soviet, persistent rejection.

This article argues that public schools play a key role in producing and transmitting American civil religion. Data from classroom observations, college-age informants, and the author's experiences reveal that civil religion in schools is manifested in daily rituals such as the pledge of allegiance; in holiday observances, with activities such as music and art; and in the social studies curriculum. Analysis of these data permits one to describe the beliefs, symbols, and rituals of American civil religion. The data further show that the practice of civil religion in schools plays a dual role: while it socializes American youth to a common set of understandings, it also sets off subgroups of Americans whose backgrounds or beliefs prevent them from participating fully in civil religious ceremonies.

When one examines current national anthems and flags, one finds a great deal of variety. What explains this variation? Possible factors include a nation's world-system position and its degree of modernization. Specifically, I analyze the ways in which world-system position and modernization affect the design or configuration—the syntactic structure—of the symbols national leaders adopt to convey their nation's identity. Findings reveal a link between a nation's world-system position and the structure of its symbols. Leaders of core nations adopt more basic anthems and flags than their semiperiphery and periphery counterparts. However, modernization has no such influence.

This paper is designed to provide a critical engagement with Michael Billig's seminal thesis of Banal Nationalism (1995), perhaps the most influential study of everyday forms of nationhood. With an increasing number now focusing on the (re) production, dissemination and negotiation of the national through routine texts and practices (cf Foster, 2002; Edensor, 2002; Madianou, 2005; Brubaker et al., 2006; Bratsis, 2006) and others employing the concept of banality in relation to non-national (Gorringe, 2006) and post-national identities (Aksoy and Robins, 2002; Szerszynski and Urry, 2002; Beck, 2006; Cram, 2001), it would seem like an opportune moment to assess Billig's contribution and also the limits of his approach.

This research examined the psychological underpinnings of concern for national symbols and ritualistic-ceremonial activities or "symbolic involvement." We propose and test a distinction between symbolic and "instrumental" involvement or concern for the functionality of national institutions and their capability to provide instrumental benefits to citizens. Items comprising the two constructs were found to be empirically distinct, evidenced by statistically reliable and orthogonal dimensions in exploratory factor analysis. Moreover, evidence based on divergent patterns of relations with various forms of national membership indicates that symbolic and instrumental involvement are rooted in distinct motivational concerns related to identity expression and object appraisal, respectively. These findings suggest that national symbolism evokes a psychological attachment to the nation as an abstracted social entity, but not as a concrete functional system.

It is believed that when exposed to the national anthem of their native country, people react with feelings of pride and patriotism and that the anthem has the power to unite people around similar associations. We examined these beliefs empirically. In Experiment 1, Israelis of various ages and subcultures listened to their anthem and to three other songs, and wrote down associations that came to mind. It was found that the anthem evoked more national associations than any other song and that this was a shared tendency despite the subcultural divergences. In Experiment 2, a marginal group in Israeli society participated in a similar task and appeared to regard the anthem more negatively than mainstream Israelis. In Experiment 3, associations relating to the anthem were compared to those relating to other national symbols (the flag and an emblem). The flag, but not the emblem, evoked similar association patterns. Results are discussed in light of social identity theory.

Michael Billig's book, Banal Nationalism, published in 1995, has a significant international reputation and is one of the books most commonly quoted in Anglophone studies on nationalism. This article follows on from the various books and articles that were published for the 20th anniversary of the book and underlines the way in which the posterity of this thesis is partly based on a misunderstanding, or a misappropriation. In a context in which the end of nations seemed imminent, Banal Nationalism aimed to demonstrate that, on the contrary, nationalism was indeed spread massively and invisibly throughout the world, and particularly in established Western democracies. Yet today this book is considered one of the founding texts of the bottom-up approach to national identity, which puts individuals at the heart of the fabrication of nations. This article discusses how this interpretation has come about.

Following E. D. Lawson's work (1963, 1965) on the flag preferences of lower and middle-class public school children in the U.S. and Canada, a similar study was carried out with elite private school children. As previously found, responses to the U.N., U.S., Russian, and Canadian flags were very similar for both national samples. In addition, the choice patterns of the elite children in the present study and the non-elites of previous studies were also very similar.

A classic article which examined American civil religion and triggered an academic discussion about civil religion in multiple countries. This is a reprint version of the article that appeared first in Daedalus, volume 96 #1 (Winter 1967), pp. 1-21.

This introduction considers the significance of Michael Billig's (1995) Banal Nationalism to geographers, and how this fits into broader trends of nationalism research in the social sciences. Through an analysis of Web of Science citation trends for the book, we illustrate its spatial and temporal reach in terms of the countries where it has been cited and how its impact has developed since 1995. We also briefly examine how political geographers have engaged the concept of banal nationalism in their research, and what sort of questions it has raised for those conducting research on nationalist discourses and territorial identity narratives more broadly. Considering how political geographers might creatively advance this scholarship, we introduce the individual papers included in this special issue and conclude with a brief gesture to future directions for research beyond Banal Nationalism.

Vexillology is defined by many organizations - including the lnternational Federation of Vexillological Associations and the North American Vexillological Association - as the "scientific study of flags." Exactly what that means is not clear to many. This article presents an overview history, exemplifying many of the issues involved in vexillologicalstudy and suggesting options for future development.

In his provocative think piece, “Flagging Enthusiasm,” Tony Burton muses on the eternal questions of vexillology: what is a flag and what does it do? While not avoiding the simple answers, he unfurls the flag as a symbolic and material object, allowing it to reveal itself as a complicated, challenging, and controversial creature.

Many Lutheran churches in America place the United States and Christian flags in the sanctuary, very frequently on the chancel. This article focuses on the current use of the United States flag in the sanctuary and examines the history of how it came to be introduced. Contrary to myth, the flag did not enter primarily as a symbol of loyalty among German immigrants during the First World War, but rather came in unheralded alongside the service flag, and stayed there through the Second World War and beyond. Sometimes it accompanied church construction or renovation. Such flag use—an apparent contravention of the separation of church and state—is explored through the concept of banal nationalism. These flags are “unwaved”; they remain static in the sanctuaries of many Lutheran churches today, which creates a unique type of civil religion in America.