Research suggests that interacting with women may encourage civic and prosocial attitudes, yet findings to date have been limited to democracies notable for their egalitarian norms. Using simulated contact experiments under controlled conditions, this article tests hypotheses for the first time in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, arguably “hard cases” given persistent norms of patriarchy and gender segregation. Yet, despite stronger contexts for male dominance, results suggest that interacting with women may indeed steer Saudi and Kuwaiti men toward more civic and other-regarding orientations, including aspects of tolerance, egalitarianism, openness, and community rule-following. These findings add much-needed comparative perspective to experimental research on mixed-gender dynamics and align with broader work highlighting the benefits of diverse interactions for groups and nations.

Although the Greek citizenship tradition has contained both ethnic and civic elements all along, up until recently, at least according to the existing literature, it has replicated the geographical logic of a European divide between the East (ethnic) and West (civic). Lately, this tradition has been in flux as it appears to be moving along and changing positions across a hypothetical citizenship axis running along the two constitutional poles of nationality: ethnic descent and civic community. This paper attempts to shed light on this tradition in transit by bringing to the fore contemporary tensions between ethnic and civic elements of citizenship. More specifically, these ongoing frictions have been mostly manifested in the ever-changing conditionality of the terms of acquisition of Greek citizenship by second- and “one-and-a-half” generation migrant children. Most importantly, these antagonisms between an ethnicized (ethnic) citizenship and a politicized (civic) nationality became discursively played out within the arena of migrant integration discourse. However, one question remains: What can the Greek case tell us about the broader politics of citizenship and belonging in Europe and beyond?

This paper examines the intellectual underpinnings of the nationalism articulated by the followers of Marshal Józef Piłsudski (Piłsudskiites), who ruled Poland between 1926 and 1939. Scholarly consensus holds that modern Polish nationalism was solely the domain of the National Democratic movement. Conversely, the Piłsudskiites' conception of the nation is generally seen as anachronistic, poorly articulated, self-contradictory, and lacking a deeper intellectual foundation. Focusing on the formative years of the Second Polish Republic (1918-1922), this paper draws a link between Piłsudskiite political thought and the philosophy of the heterodox Marxist theorist Stanislaw Brzozowski. Re-examining the early writings of Piłsudski's followers in light of Brzozowski's philosophy, the paper presents the argument that “Piłsudskiite nationalism” was in fact deeply constructivist, surprisingly sophisticated, and no less “modern” than the nationalist discourse articulated by the National Democrats. In the process, the article interrogates and problematizes the classic “ethnic” vs. “civic” typology of nationalist movements.