ABSTRACT
One problem with Jordan's analysis is that he does not distinguish state and nation. At no point does he define a nation. If a nation is defined as a politicized ethnic group, then citizenship carries different meanings depending on ethnic make-up. Multi-ethnic 'Anglo-Saxon' states resemble nations less and less as their core ethnic group declines in influence and relative numbers, while assimilationist states are in the process of continuously forging a nation. Citizenship in multicultural states can be stripped of any identity linking ethnic and state, while in nation-states, such identity is widespread and rooted in the history of the founding culture. ''''ithout a concept of nation it is little wonder that, as noted earlier, Jordan cannot explain the connection between public altruism as expressed in generous welfare, and 'kinship or fellow-feeling, or some other ground for favouring the claims of some and excluding others,.!11 He has some inkling that such a connection exists, but has no theory in which to embed this insight (as noted above, gained from Walzer). In partic.ular, his concepts for dealing with ethnicity and nationality are deficient, and he has no theory of altruism; surely a concept useful to the analysis of democratic redistribution. Indeed, the term is not indexed in his book. Without these concepts it is difficult to go beyond the initial observation to ask wI!)' kinship or fellowf('ding is needed to dicit altruism.
