Nationalism

Nationalism involves a strong identification of a group of individuals with a political entity defined in national terms, i.e. a nation. Often, it is the belief that an ethnic group has a right to statehood,^[1] or that citizenship in a state should be limited to one ethnic group, or that multinationality in a single state should necessarily comprise the right to express and exercise national identity even by minorities .^[2] It can also include the belief that the state is of primary importance, or the belief that one state is naturally superior to all other states.^[3][4] It is also used to describe a movement to establish or protect a homeland (usually an autonomous state) for an ethnic group. In some cases the identification of a national culture is combined with a negative view of other races or cultures.^[5] Conversely, nationalism might also be portrayed as collective identities towards imagined communities which are not naturally expressed in language, race or religion but rather socially constructed by the very individuals that belong to a given nation.^[6] Nationalism is sometimes reactionary, calling for a return to a national past, and sometimes for the expulsion of foreigners. Other forms of nationalism are revolutionary, calling for the establishment of an independent state as a homeland for an ethnic underclass.

Nationalism emphasizes collective identity - a 'people' must be autonomous, united, and express a single national culture.^[7] However, some nationalists stress individualism as an important part of their own national identity.^[8]

National flags, national anthems, and other symbols of national identity are often considered sacred, as if they were religious rather than political symbols. Deep emotions are aroused.^{[9][10][11][12]} Gellner and Breuilly, in Nations and Nationalism, contrast nationalism and patriotism. "If the nobler word 'patriotism' then replaced 'civic/Western nationalism', nationalism as a phenomenon had ceased to exist."^[13][14][15]

History

Before the development of nationalism, people were generally loyal to a city or to a particular leader rather than to their nation. Encyclopedia Britannica identifies the movement's genesis with the late-18th century American Revolution and French Revolution; other historians point specifically to the ultra-nationalist party in France during the French Revolution.^[16][17][18]

The term nationalism was coined by Johann Gottfried Herder (nationalismus) during the late 1770s.^[19] Precisely where and when nationalism emerged is difficult to determine, but its development is closely related to that of the modern state and the push for popular sovereignty that came to a head with the French Revolution and the American Revolution in the late 18th century.^[16] Since that time, nationalism has become one of the most significant political and social forces in history, perhaps most notably as a major influence or postulate of World War I and especially World War II. Fascism, is a form of authoritarian civic nationalism which stresses absolute loyalty and obedience to the state, whose purpose is to serve the interests of its nation alone.^{[20][21][22][23]}

Varieties

National purity

Liberty Leading the People (Eugène Delacroix, 1830) is a famous example of nationalist art

Some nationalists exclude certain groups. They view people who are, in fact, citizens of their country, as being not really citizens, in some sense, and therefore not protected by the rights afforded "real" citizens. Sometimes a mythic homeland is more important for the national identity than the actual territory occupied by the nation.^[24]

Civic nationalism

Civic nationalism defines the nation as an association of people with equal and shared political rights, and allegiance to similar political procedures.^[25] According to the principles of civic nationalism the nation is not based on common ethnic ancestry, but is a political entity, whose core is not ethnicity. This civic concept of nationalism is exemplified by Ernest Renan in his lecture in 1882 "What is a nation?", where he defined the nation as a "daily plebiscite dependent on the will of its people to continue living together".^[25]

Civic nationalism (or civil nationalism) is the form of nationalism in which the state derives political legitimacy from the active participation of its citizenry, from the degree to which it represents the "will of the people". It is often seen as originating with Jean-Jacques Rousseau and especially the social contract theories which take their name from his 1762 book The Social Contract. Civic nationalism lies within the traditions of rationalism and liberalism, but as a form of nationalism it is contrasted with ethnic nationalism. Membership of the civic nation is considered voluntary. Civic-national ideals influenced the development of representative democracy in countries such as the United States and France.

Ethnocentrism

Whereas nationalism does not necessarily imply a belief in the superiority of one ethnicity over others, some nationalists support ethnocentric protectionism or ethnocentric supremacy. Studies have yielded evidence that such behaviour may be derived from innate preferences in humans from infancy.^[26]

In the USA for example, non-indigenous ethnocentric nationalist movements exist for both black and white peoples. These forms of "nationalism" often promote or glorify foreign nations that they believe can serve as an example for their own nation, see Anglophilia or Afrocentrism.

Explicit biological race theory was influential from the end of the 19th century. Nationalist and Fascist movements in the first half of the 20th century often appealed to these theories. The National Socialist ideology was amongst the most comprehensively "racial" ideologies: the concept of "race" influenced aspects of policy in Nazi Germany. In the 21st century the term "race" is no longer regarded by many people as a meaningful term to describe the range of human phenotype clusters; the term ethnocentrism is a more accurate and meaningful term.^[27]

Ethnic cleansing is often seen as both a nationalist and ethnocentrist phenomenon. It is part of nationalist logic that the state is reserved for one nation, but not all nationalist nation-states expel their minorities.

Expansionist nationalism

Expansionist nationalism promotes expansion into new territories, usually with the claim that the existing territory is too small or is not able to physically or economically sustain the nation's population. One example of this is Adolf Hitler's territorial demands.

Left-wing nationalism

Left-wing nationalism (occasionally known as socialist nationalism)^[28] refers to any political movement that combines left-wing politics with nationalism. Many nationalist movements are dedicated to national liberation, in the view that their nations are being persecuted by other nations and thus need to exercise self-determination by liberating themselves from the accused persecutors. Anti-revisionist Marxist-Leninism is closely tied with this ideology, and practical examples include Stalin's early work Marxism and the National Question and his Socialism in One Country edict, which declares that nationalism can be used in an internationalist context, fighting for national liberation without racial or religious divisions. Other examples of left-wing nationalism include Fidel Castro's 26th of July Movement that launched the Cuban Revolution ousting the American-backed Fulgencio Batista in 1959, Ireland's Sinn Féin, the Awami League in Bangladesh and the African National Congress in South Africa.

Territorial nationalism

Nationalist slogan "Brazil, love it or leave it", often used during the Brazilian military dictatorship.

Territorial nationalist assume that all inhabitants of a particular nation owe allegiance to their country of birth or adoption.^[29] A sacred quality is sought in the nation and in the popular memories it evokes.^[30] Citizenship is idealised by territorial nationalist^[30] A criterion of a territorial nationalism is the establishment of a mass, public culture based on common values and traditions of the population.^[30]

Ultra-nationalism

Ultra-nationalism often leads to conflict within a state, as well as between states, and in its extreme form leads to war, secession, or genocide.^[31][32]

Fascism is a form of authoritarian ultra-nationalism^{[20][21][22][33]} which promotes national revolution, national collectivism, a totalitarian state, and irredentism or expansionism to unify and allow the growth of a nation. Fascists often promote ethnic nationalism but have at times promoted cultural nationalism, including cultural assimilation of people outside a specific ethnic group. Fascism stresses the subservience of the individual to the state, and the need to absolute and unquestioned loyalty to a strong ruler.^[34]

Criticism

Critics of nationalism have argued that it is often unclear what constitutes a 'nation', or why a nation should be the only legitimate unit of political rule. A nation is a cultural entity, and not necessarily a political association, nor is it necessarily linked to a particular territorial area - although nationalists argue that the boundaries of a nation and a state should, as far as possible, coincide.^[35] Philosopher A.C. Grayling describes nations as artificial constructs, "their boundaries drawn in the blood of past wars". He argues that "there is no country on earth which is not home to more than one different but usually coexisting culture. Cultural heritage is not the same thing as national identity".^[36]

Nationalism is inherently divisive because it highlights differences between peoples, emphasizing an individual's identification with their own nation. The idea is also potentially oppressive because it submerges individual identity within a national whole, and gives elites or political leaders potential opportunities to manipulate or control the masses.^[37] Much of the early opposition to nationalism was related to its geopolitical ideal of a separate state for every nation. The classic nationalist movements of the 19th century rejected the very existence of the multi-ethnic empires in Europe. Even in that early stage, however, there was an ideological critique of nationalism. That has developed into several forms of anti-nationalism in the western world. The Islamic revival of the 20th century also produced an Islamic critique of the nation-state.

At the end of the 19th century, Marxists and other socialists (such as Rosa Luxemburg) produced political analysis that were critical of the nationalist movements then active in central and eastern Europe (though a variety of other contemporary socialists and communists, from Lenin (a communist) to Józef Piłsudski (a socialist), were more sympathetic to national self-determination).^[38] Most sociological theories of nationalism date from after the Second World War.

In the liberal political tradition there is widespread criticism of ‘nationalism’ as a dangerous force and a cause of conflict and war between nation-states. Nationalism has often been exploited to encourage citizens to partake in the nations' conflicts. Such examples include The Great War and World War Two, where nationalism was a key component of propaganda material. Liberals do not generally dispute the existence of the nation-states. The liberal critique also emphasizes individual freedom as opposed to national identity, which is by definition collective (see collectivism).

The pacifist critique of nationalism also concentrates on the violence of nationalist movements, the associated militarism, and on conflicts between nations inspired by jingoism or chauvinism. National symbols and patriotic assertiveness are in some countries discredited by their historical link with past wars, especially in Germany. Famous pacifist Bertrand Russell criticizes nationalism of diminishing individual's capacity to judge his or her fatherland's foreign policy.^[39] William Blum has said this in other words: "If love is blind, patriotism has lost all five senses."^[40] Albert Einstein stated that "Nationalism is an infantile disease... It is the measles of mankind." ^[41]

The anti-racist critique of nationalism concentrates on the attitudes to other nations, and especially on the doctrine that the nation-state exists for one national group to the exclusion of others. This view emphasizes the chauvinism and xenophobia that have often resulted from nationalist sentiment. Norman Naimark relates the rise of nationalism to ethnic cleansing and genocide, including the Armenian Genocide, the Nazi Holocaust, the deportation of Chechens and Crimean Tartars under Stalin, the expulsion of Germans from Poland and Czechoslovakia at the end of the Second World War, and the ethnic cleansing during the Yugoslav Wars in the 1990s.^[42]

Political movements of the left have often been suspicious of nationalism, again without necessarily seeking the disappearance of the existing nation-states. Marxism has been ambiguous towards the nation-state, and in the late 19th century some Marxist theorists rejected it completely. For some Marxists the world revolution implied a global state (or global absence of state); for others it meant that each nation-state had its own revolution. A significant event in this context was the failure of the social-democratic and socialist movements in Europe to mobilize a cross-border workers' opposition to World War I. At present most, but certainly not all, left-wing groups accept the nation-state, and see it as the political arena for their activities.

Anarchism has developed a critique of nationalism that focuses on its role in justifying and consolidating state power and domination. Through its unifiying goal it strives for centralization both in specific terrotories and in a ruling elite of individuals while it prepares a population for capitalist exploitation. Within anarchism this subject has been treated extensively by Rudolf Rocker in Nationalism and Culture and by the works of Fredy Perlman such as Against His-Story, Against Leviathan and "The Continuing Appeal of Nationalism".

In the Western world, the most comprehensive current ideological alternative to nationalism is cosmopolitanism. Ethical cosmopolitanism rejects one of the basic ethical principles of nationalism: that humans owe more duties to a fellow member of the nation, than to a non-member. It rejects such important nationalist values as national identity and national loyalty. However, there is also a political cosmopolitanism, which has a geopolitical program to match that of nationalism: it seeks some form of world state, with a world government. Very few people openly and explicitly support the establishment of a global state, but political cosmopolitanism has influenced the development of international criminal law, and the erosion of the status of national sovereignty. In turn, nationalists are deeply suspicious of cosmopolitan attitudes, which they equate with eradication of diverse national cultures.

While internationalism in the cosmopolitan context by definition implies cooperation among nations and states, and therefore the existence of nations, proletarian internationalism is different, in that it calls for the international working class to follow its brethren in other countries irrespective of the activities or pressures of the national government of a particular sector of that class. Meanwhile, most (but not all) anarchists reject nation-states on the basis of self-determination of the majority social class, and thus reject nationalism. Instead of nations, anarchists usually advocate the creation of cooperative societies based on free association and mutual aid without regard to ethnicity or race.

See also

• Anti-nationalism
• Nation state
• Historiography and nationalism
• Left-wing nationalism
• Nationalism and sport
• Patriotism
• Jingoism
• Statism
• Neo-nationalism

Lists:

• List of active autonomist and secessionist movements
• List of historical autonomist and secessionist movements
• List of nationalist conflicts
• List of nationalist organizations
• List of prominent figures in nationalism

Notes

Further reading

General

• Breuilly, John. 1994. Nationalism and the State. 2nd ed. Chicago: Chicago University Press. ISBN 0-226-07414-5 .
• Brubaker, Rogers. 1996. Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-57224-X .
• Greenfeld, Liah. 1992. Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-60319-2
• Hobsbawm, Eric J. 1992. Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-43961-2 .
• Malesevic, Sinisa 2006. Identity as Ideology: Understanding Ethnicity and Nationalism. New York: Palgrave, ISBN 1-4039-8786-6.
• Ozkirimli, Umut 2010. Theories of Nationalism: A Critical Introduction. New York: Palgrave.

Reference works

• Delanty, Gerard; Kumar, Krishan, eds (2006). The Sage Handbook of Nations and Nationalism. London: Sage Publications. ISBN 9781412901017. http://www.sagepub.com/refbooksProdDesc.nav?currTree=Subjects&level1=J00&prodId=Book226687 
• Leoussi, Athena, ed (2001). Encyclopedia of Nationalism. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. ISBN 0765800020. http://books.google.com/?id=9_vuJusOJkMC 
• Motyl, Alexander, ed (2001). Encyclopedia of Nationalism. San Diego: Academic Press. ISBN 0122272307. http://books.elsevier.com/us//socsci/us/subindex.asp?maintarget=&isbn=0122272307&country=United+States&srccode=&ref=&subcode=&head=&pdf=&basiccode=&txtSearch=&SearchField=&operator=&order=&community=socsci 
• Snyder, Louis (1990). Encyclopedia of Nationalism. New York: Paragon House. ISBN 1557781672. http://books.google.com/?id=8ogYAAAAIAAJ 
• Spira, Thomas, ed (1999). Nationalism and Ethnicity Terminologies: An Encyclopedic Dictionary and Research Guide. Gulf Breeze, FL: Academic International Press. ISBN 0875692052. http://www.ai-press.com/NET.html 

External links

• Nationalism, its importance and sources
• The Nationalism Project
• Internet Modern History Sourcebook: Nationalism
• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Nationalism
• Nations & Nationalism: What is a Nation
• [2]