Defining Nationalism: Good Or Bad?
Pranav Misri
Mike Tribe
IB History 1, Period 2
29th August 2014
Word Count: 1996 words
What is Nationalism?
Historical and scholarly perspectives on nationalism are almost as numerous as the different strains of nationalism and other phenomena that are often confused with it. Some, like Richard Handler, a professor of Anthropology at the University of Virginia, declare it “as an ideology about individuated being, an ideology concerned with boundedness, continuity, and homogeneity encompassing diversity, or an ideology in which social reality, conceived in terms of nationhood, is endowed with the reality of natural things.”(pg. 6 Nationalism and the Politics of Culture in Quebec Handler). Others, like George Orwell in his ‘Notes on …show more content…
Nationalism’, describe it as a desire for power. “The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality” (pg.1 Orwell). Since both definitions place emphasis on the word ‘nation’, it seems only appropriate that we explain what constitutes a nation before understanding what nationalism really is.
Ernest Renan attempts to define a nation in his essay "What is a Nation?" Renan 's views on what establishes a nation are based on the uprisings led by nationalist leaders during the revolutions of 1848 in Europe. In order for a nation to convene and function properly, the inhabitants must look to common bonding experiences that do not stifle progress and unity because of differences in race, language, religion and geography. At the same time, similarities in the aforementioned can strengthen the nation. Renan is essentially declaring that a nation is an amalgam of people who share a common past and have formed a strong bond, with an agreement to stay together and be governed by mutual consent in the future. From Renan’s studies, we can understand a nation as a collective of people, unified by joy, grief, suffering, triumphs and struggles in the past. JS Mill states, “the strongest of all is identity of political antecedents; the possession of a national, and consequent community of recollections; collective pride and humiliation, pleasure and regret, connected with the same incidents in the past.”(Pg.1 JS Mill). Like Renan, Mill believes a common past to be the strongest integrator of a nation and its people. Miroslav Hroch attempts to define a nation “as a large social group integrated not by one but by a combination of several kinds of objective relationships (economic, political, linguistic, cultural, religious, geographical, historical), and their subjective reflection in collective consciousness. Many of these ties could be mutually substitutable - some playing a particularly important role in one nation-building process, and no more than a subsidiary part in others. But among them, three stand out as irreplaceable: (1) a 'memory ' of some common past, treated as a 'destiny ' of the group - or at least of its core constituents; (2) a density of linguistic or cultural ties enabling a higher degree of social communication within the group than beyond it; (3) a conception of the equality of all members of the group organized as a civil society."(pg. 79 From National Movement to the Fully-formed Nation: The Nation-building Process in Europe Hroch). One can discern from Hroch’s definition that there is no single characteristic that constitutes a nation but a combination of many factors that brings a people together. While Hroch includes the importance of the past, he places equal significance on cultural relationships and equality of all members of a nation.
Before exploring different forms of nationalism, we must examine the correlation between nationalism and its close relative, patriotism. Nationalism and patriotism both show the relationship of an individual towards his or her nation. The two are often confused and frequently believed to be identical. However, patriotism concerns love for a nation, with more importance on values and beliefs, while nationalism is more in the nature of a governing ideology. Orwell feels nationalism is a feeling that one’s country is superior to another in all respects, while patriotism is merely a feeling of admiration for a way of life. These concepts show that patriotism is passive by nature and nationalism is aggressive. In spite of Orwell’s critical opinion of nationalism, some still believe nationalism, like any political ideology, varies in intensity and fundamental nature from place to place and person to person.
The most extreme form of nationalism is fascism. While Orwell believes ‘bully’ to be an ideal synonym for fascist, fascism is commonly used to describe the events and actions that took place in Nazi Germany. Fascists seek to unify their nation through converting their unit into an authoritarian state that promotes the mass mobilization of communities and thus initiating revolutionary political movements aiming to reorganize the nation according to fascist ideology. JS Mill’s views on another country, supposedly more advanced, conquering a less developed nation are as follows, “If the smaller nationality, supposed to be the more advanced in improvement, is able to overcome the greater, as the Macedonians, reinforced by the Greeks, did Asia, and the English India, there is often a gain to civilisation” (pg.4 Mill). While JS Mill doesn’t directly address the idea of fascism his opinions on English India somewhat justify colonialism. Fascism views political violence, war and imperialism as necessary elements of nation building and believes in the idea that stronger nations have the right to expand their territory by displacing weaker nations. The most famous example of fascism is that of Benito Mussolini’s fascist Italy.
Another form of nationalism is romantic nationalism. Romantic nationalism or romanticism is the form of nationalism in which the state believes the unity of those it governs depends on the functioning and togetherness of political and civic bodies. This includes the language, race, culture, religion and customs of the ‘nation’ in its primal sense of those who were "born" within its culture and are therefore identified as a part of the ‘nation’. Romantic nationalism is commonly associated with French philosopher Rousseau, who, along with Johann Gottfried von Herder, introduced the idea of romantic nationalism. The latter found that geography formed the natural economy of a people, and shaped their customs and society. During the ‘Spring of Nations’, the intensity and belief of romantic nationalism increased greatly. Monarchies were beginning to crack under mass mobilizations of a united people who felt obligated to protect and sometimes publicize the beliefs and cultural values of their nation.
Cultural nationalism is a more passive form of nationalism. An intermediate between ethnic nationalism and liberal nationalism, cultural nationalism focuses on a national identity shaped by cultural traditions and by language, but not on the concepts of common ancestry or race. A more inert ideology, it is not known for inciting revolutions, but plays an important role within a larger spectrum of nationalism.
Another form of nationalism similar to cultural nationalism is ethnic nationalism, or ethnicism. Ethnicism defines the nation in terms of ethnicity. It is based on an element of descent from previous generations. Thus ideas of a culture shared between members of the group and with their ancestors determine national belonging and unity. The state focuses its identity around a particular ethnic group that can include language, religion, customs and traditions. Therefore, it feels compelled to protect the national group and facilitate its family and social life as a group. European ethnic nationalism is exemplified by Germany 's reaction to Napoleon’s invasion in 1806 and Germany 's "Romantic" reaction against the French ideal of the nation-state. This approach can have tragic consequences in modern nations where there is more than one stream of strongly felt ethnicity and civil society institutions are not strong enough to mitigate or accommodate inter-ethnic differences. A prime example of this is Sri Lanka with its history of contesting Sinhala Buddhist and Tamil nationalisms. A terrorist organization, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam was formed in order to create an independent state for Tamil people. This is a prime example of aggressive ethnic nationalism.
Probably the most liberal form of nationalism is civic nationalism. Michael Ignatieff, a
Canadian author, academic and former politician, believes civic nationalism is an ideology shared by people of common citizenship. Jean-Jacques Rousseau supposedly introduced the idea in his 1762 book, ‘The Social Contract’. A civic nation consists of all those who advocate its national and political principles. It rejects discrimination based on ethnicity or race, color, religion, gender, language. A civic nation is in principle a community of equal, rights-bearing citizens who share a set of political practices and values. A civic nation is ‘democratic’, treating all citizens as equals and creating a sense of sovereignty. Self-governing rights are provided to citizens for accountability. “Civic nationalism is demonstrated by the creation of the British state in the late 18th century consisting of the English, the Welsh, the Scots, and the Irish, united by a civic rather than an ethnic definition of belonging and by attachment to civic institutions like Parliament and the rule of law.”(https://www.msu.edu/user/hillrr/161lec16.htm?iframe=true). The same can be said about the United States. More recently, in the 20th century, the independence of India and its establishment as a constitutional democracy, despite being home to myriad potential nationalisms of every conceivable kind, should also be regarded as a triumph for civic nationalism.
An articulate and eloquent man, Orwell manages to convince many that nationalism only promotes violence and amplifies hypocrisy. He sets up an example supporting this claim using English intelligentsia. He declares while some intellectuals believe they have no predilections in international matters, when their nation or state is insulted in some manner, they will unknowingly, and rather crudely attempt to defend it. An established historian, Eric Hobsbawm looks more at how a nation realises a feeling of nationalism and the relationship between the two and before doing this, he looks at the composition of a nation. His primary advice however, when it comes to explaining what constitutes a nation, he says; “Neither objective nor subjective definitions are thus satisfactory, and both are misleading. In any case, agnosticism is the best initial posture of a student in this field” (pg.1 Hobsbawm). It wouldn’t be entirely wrong to take Mr. Hobsbawm’s advice when it comes to defining nationalism.
Karl Marx said that "...history repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce". Perhaps he was lamenting the failure of humans to learn from history and thereby being condemned to repeat it. Two contrasting yet not entirely dissimilar scenarios have attracted great attention in just the last few weeks and months. These are the vociferous campaigns for an independent Scotland, rent asunder from the United Kingdom, and for an independent Cataluña, separated from Spain. In both places, separatists have clothed themselves in nationalist colors. The referendum in Scotland, which produced a result against separation from the UK, has settled that debate, at least for the moment, but its intensity of the debate were eye-openers. Notice that it was the Scottish "Nationalist" Party that led the campaign for an independent Scotland, calling into question a 307-year-old union. The 45% yes vote for separation poses a serious question on what British nationalism really means and why so many Scots have wearied of it.
Similarly, in Cataluña, local parties want to recast their allegiances of nearly three centuries and set a new but narrow course based on "Catalan" nationalism. Which means what exactly? And what does it say for a Europe where the dominant political philosophy over the last quarter of a century has been "ever closer union"?
The following quote was used to define Australian Nationalism during colonial times in the 19th century. “The complex sentiment or ideology of belonging to and identifying with a nation, usually based on an awareness of some common racial, territorial, cultural, linguistic, and historical experiences, and often developed against other cultures or nations” (Ibid p. 257). In conclusion, I believe this definition truly exemplifies what nationalism is all about. Before it was just a feeling people felt unconsciously experienced, but now it’s an ideology entire nations rely on for a sense of unity and continued functionality.
Works Cited
"Analysis of What Is a Nation by Ernest Renan." HubPages. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
Bhattacharji, Preeti. "Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (aka Tamil Tigers) (Sri Lanka,
Separatists)." Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 20 May 2009. Web.
1, Sept. 2014.
"Difference Between Nationalism and Patriotism | Difference Between | Nationalism vs
Patriotism." Difference Between Nationalism and Patriotism | Difference Between |
Nationalism vs Patriotism. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
Handler, Richard.
"Defining Nationalism." The Nationalism Project. Eric G.E, Zuelow, n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2014. .
Hobsbawm, Eric. "“Internationalism: A Breviary”." (2002): n. pag. Web.
Mill, John Stuart. "16." Representative Government. Chicago: H. Regnery for the Great Foundation, 1949. N. pag. Print.
"Nationalism, Good or Bad?" Debate Issue:. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
"The Nationalism Project: "Banal Nationalism"" The Nationalism Project: "Banal Nationalism" N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
"The Nationalism Project: Benedict Anderson 's Definition of "nation."" The Nationalism Project: Benedict Anderson 's Definition of "nation." N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
"The Nationalism Project: What Is Nationalism?" The Nationalism Project: What Is Nationalism? N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
Orwell, George. "Notes On Nationalsim." The Complete Works of George Orwell(1936): n. pag. Web.
Renan, Ernst. "The Nationalism Project: Ernest Renan Defining the Nation." The Nationalism Project: Ernest Renan Defining the Nation. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014. Renan, Ernst. "What Is a Nation?" Nature 150.3801 (1942): 286. Web. 29 Aug. 2014.
Smith, Anthony D. "Nationalism and Modernism: A Critical Survey of Recent Theories of Nations and Nationalism." Read. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug.
2014.
Mike Tribe
IB History 1, Period 2
29th August 2014
Word Count: 1996 words
What is Nationalism?
Historical and scholarly perspectives on nationalism are almost as numerous as the different strains of nationalism and other phenomena that are often confused with it. Some, like Richard Handler, a professor of Anthropology at the University of Virginia, declare it “as an ideology about individuated being, an ideology concerned with boundedness, continuity, and homogeneity encompassing diversity, or an ideology in which social reality, conceived in terms of nationhood, is endowed with the reality of natural things.”(pg. 6 Nationalism and the Politics of Culture in Quebec Handler). Others, like George Orwell in his ‘Notes on …show more content…
Nationalism’, describe it as a desire for power. “The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality” (pg.1 Orwell). Since both definitions place emphasis on the word ‘nation’, it seems only appropriate that we explain what constitutes a nation before understanding what nationalism really is.
Ernest Renan attempts to define a nation in his essay "What is a Nation?" Renan 's views on what establishes a nation are based on the uprisings led by nationalist leaders during the revolutions of 1848 in Europe. In order for a nation to convene and function properly, the inhabitants must look to common bonding experiences that do not stifle progress and unity because of differences in race, language, religion and geography. At the same time, similarities in the aforementioned can strengthen the nation. Renan is essentially declaring that a nation is an amalgam of people who share a common past and have formed a strong bond, with an agreement to stay together and be governed by mutual consent in the future. From Renan’s studies, we can understand a nation as a collective of people, unified by joy, grief, suffering, triumphs and struggles in the past. JS Mill states, “the strongest of all is identity of political antecedents; the possession of a national, and consequent community of recollections; collective pride and humiliation, pleasure and regret, connected with the same incidents in the past.”(Pg.1 JS Mill). Like Renan, Mill believes a common past to be the strongest integrator of a nation and its people. Miroslav Hroch attempts to define a nation “as a large social group integrated not by one but by a combination of several kinds of objective relationships (economic, political, linguistic, cultural, religious, geographical, historical), and their subjective reflection in collective consciousness. Many of these ties could be mutually substitutable - some playing a particularly important role in one nation-building process, and no more than a subsidiary part in others. But among them, three stand out as irreplaceable: (1) a 'memory ' of some common past, treated as a 'destiny ' of the group - or at least of its core constituents; (2) a density of linguistic or cultural ties enabling a higher degree of social communication within the group than beyond it; (3) a conception of the equality of all members of the group organized as a civil society."(pg. 79 From National Movement to the Fully-formed Nation: The Nation-building Process in Europe Hroch). One can discern from Hroch’s definition that there is no single characteristic that constitutes a nation but a combination of many factors that brings a people together. While Hroch includes the importance of the past, he places equal significance on cultural relationships and equality of all members of a nation.
Before exploring different forms of nationalism, we must examine the correlation between nationalism and its close relative, patriotism. Nationalism and patriotism both show the relationship of an individual towards his or her nation. The two are often confused and frequently believed to be identical. However, patriotism concerns love for a nation, with more importance on values and beliefs, while nationalism is more in the nature of a governing ideology. Orwell feels nationalism is a feeling that one’s country is superior to another in all respects, while patriotism is merely a feeling of admiration for a way of life. These concepts show that patriotism is passive by nature and nationalism is aggressive. In spite of Orwell’s critical opinion of nationalism, some still believe nationalism, like any political ideology, varies in intensity and fundamental nature from place to place and person to person.
The most extreme form of nationalism is fascism. While Orwell believes ‘bully’ to be an ideal synonym for fascist, fascism is commonly used to describe the events and actions that took place in Nazi Germany. Fascists seek to unify their nation through converting their unit into an authoritarian state that promotes the mass mobilization of communities and thus initiating revolutionary political movements aiming to reorganize the nation according to fascist ideology. JS Mill’s views on another country, supposedly more advanced, conquering a less developed nation are as follows, “If the smaller nationality, supposed to be the more advanced in improvement, is able to overcome the greater, as the Macedonians, reinforced by the Greeks, did Asia, and the English India, there is often a gain to civilisation” (pg.4 Mill). While JS Mill doesn’t directly address the idea of fascism his opinions on English India somewhat justify colonialism. Fascism views political violence, war and imperialism as necessary elements of nation building and believes in the idea that stronger nations have the right to expand their territory by displacing weaker nations. The most famous example of fascism is that of Benito Mussolini’s fascist Italy.
Another form of nationalism is romantic nationalism. Romantic nationalism or romanticism is the form of nationalism in which the state believes the unity of those it governs depends on the functioning and togetherness of political and civic bodies. This includes the language, race, culture, religion and customs of the ‘nation’ in its primal sense of those who were "born" within its culture and are therefore identified as a part of the ‘nation’. Romantic nationalism is commonly associated with French philosopher Rousseau, who, along with Johann Gottfried von Herder, introduced the idea of romantic nationalism. The latter found that geography formed the natural economy of a people, and shaped their customs and society. During the ‘Spring of Nations’, the intensity and belief of romantic nationalism increased greatly. Monarchies were beginning to crack under mass mobilizations of a united people who felt obligated to protect and sometimes publicize the beliefs and cultural values of their nation.
Cultural nationalism is a more passive form of nationalism. An intermediate between ethnic nationalism and liberal nationalism, cultural nationalism focuses on a national identity shaped by cultural traditions and by language, but not on the concepts of common ancestry or race. A more inert ideology, it is not known for inciting revolutions, but plays an important role within a larger spectrum of nationalism.
Another form of nationalism similar to cultural nationalism is ethnic nationalism, or ethnicism. Ethnicism defines the nation in terms of ethnicity. It is based on an element of descent from previous generations. Thus ideas of a culture shared between members of the group and with their ancestors determine national belonging and unity. The state focuses its identity around a particular ethnic group that can include language, religion, customs and traditions. Therefore, it feels compelled to protect the national group and facilitate its family and social life as a group. European ethnic nationalism is exemplified by Germany 's reaction to Napoleon’s invasion in 1806 and Germany 's "Romantic" reaction against the French ideal of the nation-state. This approach can have tragic consequences in modern nations where there is more than one stream of strongly felt ethnicity and civil society institutions are not strong enough to mitigate or accommodate inter-ethnic differences. A prime example of this is Sri Lanka with its history of contesting Sinhala Buddhist and Tamil nationalisms. A terrorist organization, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam was formed in order to create an independent state for Tamil people. This is a prime example of aggressive ethnic nationalism.
Probably the most liberal form of nationalism is civic nationalism. Michael Ignatieff, a
Canadian author, academic and former politician, believes civic nationalism is an ideology shared by people of common citizenship. Jean-Jacques Rousseau supposedly introduced the idea in his 1762 book, ‘The Social Contract’. A civic nation consists of all those who advocate its national and political principles. It rejects discrimination based on ethnicity or race, color, religion, gender, language. A civic nation is in principle a community of equal, rights-bearing citizens who share a set of political practices and values. A civic nation is ‘democratic’, treating all citizens as equals and creating a sense of sovereignty. Self-governing rights are provided to citizens for accountability. “Civic nationalism is demonstrated by the creation of the British state in the late 18th century consisting of the English, the Welsh, the Scots, and the Irish, united by a civic rather than an ethnic definition of belonging and by attachment to civic institutions like Parliament and the rule of law.”(https://www.msu.edu/user/hillrr/161lec16.htm?iframe=true). The same can be said about the United States. More recently, in the 20th century, the independence of India and its establishment as a constitutional democracy, despite being home to myriad potential nationalisms of every conceivable kind, should also be regarded as a triumph for civic nationalism.
An articulate and eloquent man, Orwell manages to convince many that nationalism only promotes violence and amplifies hypocrisy. He sets up an example supporting this claim using English intelligentsia. He declares while some intellectuals believe they have no predilections in international matters, when their nation or state is insulted in some manner, they will unknowingly, and rather crudely attempt to defend it. An established historian, Eric Hobsbawm looks more at how a nation realises a feeling of nationalism and the relationship between the two and before doing this, he looks at the composition of a nation. His primary advice however, when it comes to explaining what constitutes a nation, he says; “Neither objective nor subjective definitions are thus satisfactory, and both are misleading. In any case, agnosticism is the best initial posture of a student in this field” (pg.1 Hobsbawm). It wouldn’t be entirely wrong to take Mr. Hobsbawm’s advice when it comes to defining nationalism.
Karl Marx said that "...history repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce". Perhaps he was lamenting the failure of humans to learn from history and thereby being condemned to repeat it. Two contrasting yet not entirely dissimilar scenarios have attracted great attention in just the last few weeks and months. These are the vociferous campaigns for an independent Scotland, rent asunder from the United Kingdom, and for an independent Cataluña, separated from Spain. In both places, separatists have clothed themselves in nationalist colors. The referendum in Scotland, which produced a result against separation from the UK, has settled that debate, at least for the moment, but its intensity of the debate were eye-openers. Notice that it was the Scottish "Nationalist" Party that led the campaign for an independent Scotland, calling into question a 307-year-old union. The 45% yes vote for separation poses a serious question on what British nationalism really means and why so many Scots have wearied of it.
Similarly, in Cataluña, local parties want to recast their allegiances of nearly three centuries and set a new but narrow course based on "Catalan" nationalism. Which means what exactly? And what does it say for a Europe where the dominant political philosophy over the last quarter of a century has been "ever closer union"?
The following quote was used to define Australian Nationalism during colonial times in the 19th century. “The complex sentiment or ideology of belonging to and identifying with a nation, usually based on an awareness of some common racial, territorial, cultural, linguistic, and historical experiences, and often developed against other cultures or nations” (Ibid p. 257). In conclusion, I believe this definition truly exemplifies what nationalism is all about. Before it was just a feeling people felt unconsciously experienced, but now it’s an ideology entire nations rely on for a sense of unity and continued functionality.
Works Cited
"Analysis of What Is a Nation by Ernest Renan." HubPages. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
Bhattacharji, Preeti. "Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (aka Tamil Tigers) (Sri Lanka,
Separatists)." Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 20 May 2009. Web.
1, Sept. 2014.
"Difference Between Nationalism and Patriotism | Difference Between | Nationalism vs
Patriotism." Difference Between Nationalism and Patriotism | Difference Between |
Nationalism vs Patriotism. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
Handler, Richard.
"Defining Nationalism." The Nationalism Project. Eric G.E, Zuelow, n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2014. .
Hobsbawm, Eric. "“Internationalism: A Breviary”." (2002): n. pag. Web.
Mill, John Stuart. "16." Representative Government. Chicago: H. Regnery for the Great Foundation, 1949. N. pag. Print.
"Nationalism, Good or Bad?" Debate Issue:. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
"The Nationalism Project: "Banal Nationalism"" The Nationalism Project: "Banal Nationalism" N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
"The Nationalism Project: Benedict Anderson 's Definition of "nation."" The Nationalism Project: Benedict Anderson 's Definition of "nation." N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
"The Nationalism Project: What Is Nationalism?" The Nationalism Project: What Is Nationalism? N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014.
Orwell, George. "Notes On Nationalsim." The Complete Works of George Orwell(1936): n. pag. Web.
Renan, Ernst. "The Nationalism Project: Ernest Renan Defining the Nation." The Nationalism Project: Ernest Renan Defining the Nation. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug. 2014. Renan, Ernst. "What Is a Nation?" Nature 150.3801 (1942): 286. Web. 29 Aug. 2014.
Smith, Anthony D. "Nationalism and Modernism: A Critical Survey of Recent Theories of Nations and Nationalism." Read. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Aug.
2014.