Can Nationalism Ever Really Be Sacred?

Nationalism can be defined as the feeling of loyalty and devotion of an individual towards his or her nation above any other. However, this concept shares the same relationship to the nation as patriotism (Merriam-Webster Dictionary 2015). Both are usually confused and often is believed to have the same meaning, but there is an enormous difference between these two definitions. Patriotism emphasizes values and beliefs; is based on affection, respect, and tolerance, friendly relations with other countries and their inhabitants. In other words, they are passive and peaceful by nature. Nationalism gives more importance to cultural background, language and heritage; tends to be a little aggressive and is militant by nature. In 1945, the famous British writer George Orwell pointed in this regards, 'Nationalism is the worst
The latter concept has been being used by federal government according to the opinion of the writer and historian Marilyn Lake and collected in her book ‘What's Wrong With ANZAC’ and co-authored with Henry Reynolds; as a propagandistic tool that seeks to keep alive what is known as the ANZAC
Adam in his article Australian Anzac Day as religion: a bloody defeat can ever really be sacred ?, in which he makes harsh criticism of the of ANZAC rite; saying that politicians talk about the defeat in religious terms; referring to the sacrifice of our soldiers as sacred and that day was like a baptism of fire for federated nation. According to Brereton, the only religious analogy that could be done is the dreadful suffering experienced during First World War. The reporter also mentions that glorifying the ANZAC day is like officiate a human sacrifice (Brereton 2015). The development of this entire nationalist culture around the myth or legend of ANZAC and deepening in the collective memory perhaps has roots in the way the story has been