ABSTRACT
Michael Hechter’s model of internal colonialism offers an attractive explanation for the development of nationalism. Although plausible in certain cases, this model is not a general explanation for the development of nationalist movements. One can save the hypothesis but, in doing so, it becomes a truism. The idea of internal colonialism is that, under some circumstances, a state divides into a core and a periphery. In general, peripheries will be less prosperous than cores but certain peripheries will have a relation to the core similar to that experienced by colonies. Peter Mathias describes a colonial relationship in the context of the British Empire: Associated with the intention of protecting home industry was another general aim of the regulatory system, the control of colonial economies. The attraction of Hechter’s initial model was that it tried to explain the rise of a social movement in an elegant fashion.
