68 SOCIAL SCIENTIST There are two distinct paths of capitalist development and industrial revolution in the archetypal bourgeois nation-states. In one, capitalism develops on the basis of small units of industrial production and the abolition of rent as the predominant mode of extraction of the surplus from agriculture. As in England, Holland and Switzerland, there is only a minimal need for state intervention in the sphere of production; the state thus assumes an apparent position of neutrality in regard to all issues of conflict arising out of the development of capitalist relations of production. The second way of development followed by the later capitalist nations such as Germany or Japan proceeds on the basis of positive state initiative in production so as to carry the economy forward towards the path of industrial revolution. In the first way, the capture of state power by the bourgeoisie is followed by its attempt to extend its hegemony over all structures of society, including its ideological-cultural superstructure. It does this by separating the two realms of the state and civil society (ge'sellschaff) ^ It declares all distinctions of birth, rank, language, race or religion, to be non-political distinctions; it declares the state to be neutral with respect to such distinctions.2 At the same time. the bourgeoisie, through the various civil social institutions (family, cultural associations, communications media, and particularly the educational system which, in bourgeois society becomes the most influential part of the ideological state apparatus) seek? to diffuse its own individualistic world-view over the rest of society: an individualistic world-view which, again, seeks to de-emphasize cultural distinctions within society. In the second way of capitalism, because of direct participation of the state in the system of production, the bourgeoisie is unable to achieve this separation between the state and civil society. Driving Forces In either case, however, the bourgeoisie seeks to create a cultural homogeneity within the nation-state. In the first way, this is achieved by the diffusion and legitimization of the new "rationalist15 ideology of the liberal democratic state; in the second way, the bourgeoisie has necessarily to depend upon the older ideological structures of a cultural community historically developed since precapitalist times. This community (gemeinschafi), already possessing a distinct and common cultural identity in the precapitalist era, we will call a nationality. This cultural identity of a nationality contains elements such as a distinct language, a distinct literary and aesthetic tradition, perhaps a distinct material culture (reflected in, for instance, food habits, clothing and festivals) perhaps certain common religious practices at the level of folk culture. It is possible, but not strictly necessary, that in the course of development of such a nationality a unified feudal state or an organized religious tradition served to consolidate the culture of the community but once created, it is necessary that these cultural foundations be strong