• Steven Loyal
  • Stephen Quilley


In the last chapter, we have referred to media orchestrated moral panics and a ‘populist, exclusionary, nationalist discourse’. A critique cast in such terms is clearly referencing the taken-for-granted cosmopolitanism of a ‘liberal thought-style’ that is founded on an unequivocal commitment to the sanctity of all human individuals qua their humanity. This vision which is shared by liberals, social democrats, and indeed much of the conservative spectrum of Western democratic politics is the progressive legacy of the Enlightenment and ideas articulated by Locke, Rousseau, Paine, and above all by Kant. The frame of analysis that sociologists adopt also usually takes universal humanity as its point of reference (Elias 2012), though some sociologists remain embedded in a ‘methodological nationalism’. This contrasts markedly with ‘state thinking’ which as an organizational unit takes the bounded nation as its raison d’être.


  1. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice. Cambridge, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
  2. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Acts of Resistance: Against the Tyranny of the Market. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  3. Elias, N. (2007 [1987]). The Fishermen in the Maelstrom. In S. Quilley (Ed.), Involvement and Detachment, Collected Works of Norbert Elias (Vol. 8). Dublin: UCD Press.Google Scholar
  4. Elias, N. (2012 [1978]). What Is Sociology? Collected Works of Norbert Elias (Vol. 5). Dublin: UCD Press.Google Scholar
  5. Fraser, N., & Honneth, A. (2004). Redistribution or Recognition? London: Verso.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action (2 Vols.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  7. Scott, J. (1998). Seeing Like the State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Yale: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Scott, J. (2014). Two Cheers for Anarchism Six Easy Pieces on Autonomy, Dignity, and Meaningful Work and Play. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Torpey, J. (1998). Coming and Going: On the State Monopolization of the Legitimate “Means of Movement”. Theory and Society, 16(3), 239–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven Loyal
    • 1
  • Stephen Quilley
    • 2
  1. 1.University College DublinDublinIreland
  2. 2.University of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations