This article analyzes the historical dynamics of state-seeking nationalism from 1492 to 2013. By synthesizing Gramsci’s insights of hegemony with world-systems perspective and historical institutionalism, I introduce a new theoretical frame that gives crisis, uneven development, and the relationship between structure and agency, a central place in conceptualizing nationalist mobilization. I also introduce a new major database, that is, The State-Seeking Nationalist Movements (SSNM) database, which includes two unique datasets for historical analysis of nationalism. The first dataset includes articles reporting on state-seeking nationalist activities throughout the world from 1804 to 2013 using international news reports. The second dataset is compiled from secondary sources and it includes revolutionary situations and conflicts involving state-seeking movements from 1492 to 1829. Combining the two original datasets, the SSNM database is a rich new empirical resource for the sociological study of state-seeking nationalism from a long term and global perspective. Historical patterns and multivariate negative binomial regression analysis suggest that SSNM are more likely to take place during periods of financialization, economic crisis, interstate wars, colonial occupation, and intense social unrest. In addition to these structural factors, the findings also bring attention to the role of agency. Nationalist organizations increase the likelihood of state-seeking nationalism but they cannot produce nationalist mobilization as they please. They do it under structural conditions beyond their control that constrain or ease their mobilization. Although I find strong evidence for historical institutionalism, the theory and findings presented in this article suggest that the accumulation of non-hegemonic state power does not help rulers contain state-seeking nationalism. I find no evidence for primordialism, economic/political modernization theories, or globalization-breeds-nationalism arguments. I conclude by discussing how the new theory and new data introduced in this article advances our understanding of the dynamics of nationalism and global governance patterns in world history.

中文翻译：

---

长期存在的资本主义和民族主义：霸权、危机和寻求国家的民族主义动员，1492-2013

本文分析了 1492 年至 2013 年间寻求国家的民族主义的历史动态。通过将葛兰西的霸权见解与世界体系视角和历史制度主义相结合，我引入了一个新的理论框架，该框架给出了危机、不平衡发展以及结构与结构之间的关系。机构，是概念化民族主义动员的核心场所。我还介绍了一个新的主要数据库，即寻求国家的民族主义运动 (SSNM) 数据库，其中包括两个用于民族主义历史分析的独特数据集。第一个数据集包括使用国际新闻报道报道从 1804 年到 2013 年在世界各地寻求国家的民族主义活动的文章。第二个数据集由二手资料汇编而成，包括 1492 年至 1829 年间涉及寻求国家运动的革命局势和冲突。 结合两个原始数据集，SSNM 数据库是一个丰富的新经验资源，用于从长远和全球视野。历史模式和多元负二项式回归分析表明，SSNM 更有可能发生在金融化、经济危机、州际战争、殖民占领和激烈的社会动荡时期。除了这些结构性因素外，研究结果还引起人们对代理作用的关注。民族主义组织增加了寻求国家民族主义的可能性，但它们不能随心所欲地进行民族主义动员。他们在他们无法控制的结构性条件下这样做，从而限制或缓解了他们的动员。尽管我找到了历史制度主义的有力证据，但本文提出的理论和研究结果表明，非霸权国家权力的积累无助于统治者遏制寻求国家的民族主义。我找不到原始主义、经济/政治现代化理论或全球化滋生民族主义论点的证据。最后，我将讨论本文介绍的新理论和新数据如何促进我们对世界历史上民族主义和全球治理模式的动态的理解。本文提出的理论和研究结果表明，非霸权国家权力的积累无助于统治者遏制寻求国家的民族主义。我找不到原始主义、经济/政治现代化理论或全球化滋生民族主义论点的证据。最后，我将讨论本文介绍的新理论和新数据如何促进我们对世界历史上民族主义和全球治理模式的动态的理解。本文提出的理论和研究结果表明，非霸权国家权力的积累无助于统治者遏制寻求国家的民族主义。我找不到原始主义、经济/政治现代化理论或全球化滋生民族主义论点的证据。最后，我将讨论本文介绍的新理论和新数据如何促进我们对世界历史上民族主义和全球治理模式的动态的理解。